Who do They Think They're Kidding?

For what it's worth, I think it is over and that this issue of forged documents was the nail in the coffin. Here is a short bit from the sidbar at the American Spectator website, which is back up now after having been slammed all day by those wanting to read their story on this subject.

Who are they trying to kid? This election is over. Only good manners and an unwillingness to jinx itself is keeping the smooth-running Bush campaign from stating the obvious. Kerry meanwhile is beyond disarray. Vietnam is no longer an issue he can touch. A half-dozen honchos are variously running what's left of his campaign. Has there ever been anything more pathetic than a candidate turning for his salvation to a political giant about to be felled by a quadruple bypass that will keep him out of serious commission past election day?

The clincher came last night, when America Online polled its users. Normally AOL's questions lean N.Y. Times left. But this time there was no beating around the bush. The replies from 322,440 plus respondents (at last count) couldn't have been blunter: 41% predicted Bush wins easily; 29% said "Bush wins tight race." By contrast, only 26% said "Kerry wins tight race," and a pitiful 4% noted "Kerry wins easily." Any way you look at it, that spells Bush over Kerry, by 70 to 30. Even more revealing was the response to the second question, in which 75% answered they're not surprised that President Bush has surged in recent polls; only 25% answered yes.

Word now is that Bush, as one could guess since at least Ken Mehlman's appearance on Meet the Press, is likely to agree to only two debates with Kerry and not three. That's what an incumbent does when he's plainly ahead. Actually, he's a war incumbent with better things to do than waste his time dodging Kerry cheap shots. He should insist on no debates at all this year, unless maybe Mr. Clinton wants to join in the fun. And for old times' sake, Michael Dukakis. Why not?