I'm not sure how to read Kerry's vote on this China trade amendment motion. If I read it correctly, the amendment requires the President to impose trade sanctions if China or other countries are found to be selling weapons of mass destruction. Both Kerry and Edwards voted to kill this amendment. Presumably, this is not a big deal, since if we were to discover that China was selling WMD, or maybe even WMD-RPA (that's the infamous "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities"), there would be enough uproar at that time that Congress and the President would be motivated to act to impose sanctions on China; thus, there would be no need to have any sort of "trigger" arrangement.
Kerry's done all the damage he's going to do on Vietnam. For people for whom this is important, their vote is already set. There's no need to hammer it home, and beating the drum more just looks mean-spirited. The real thing to go after here is Bush's unwillingness to open his record.
Bush still beats Kerry on "strong moral character". Highlighting the need to avoid taking PAC and lobbying money, and his personal views on abortion and their separation from politics, are probably the best way for Kerry to keep his moral character score high. It is quite a principled position to separate your personal beliefs from the way that you govern; it doesn't play well with all voters, but when you're a Democratic Catholic, it's not a bad way to play it.
Bush is only at -2 for "stands up to special interest groups"? Huh? Do people really think that the woefully underfunded Sierra Club and the AFL-CIO are "interest groups"? I guess so (I tend to think unions certainly are). Anyhow, not surprisingly, the public sees both politicians as beholden to interests. I think that just says more about the state of American politics than anything else. But Kerry only has a net rating of 12% here, and the upcoming attacks from the Bush campaign will probably hurt that number.
Bush has a wretched score for "clear plan for solving the country's problems", which is something Kerry should hammer on early and often. I know he's going to be working on his plan for the next 5 months, but it's got to be a plan, not a hodgepodge of ideas.
Kerry has a better net rating than Bush on "agrees with you on the issues", and I don't think there's any chance Bush's number is going to go up much. The question is, can Kerry keep his up as well?
The important takeaway is that these numbers are still likely to be very fluid, and just because Kerry has a big net rating on, say, honest and trustworthy, doesn't mean he can rest on his laurels. Reassuring the American public that you are who you say you are is a constant struggle. Especially when you're from the party of Slick Willie and Al 'Exaggerator extraordinare' Gore.
