I've been thinking about what Chris Bowers wrote for a couple days now, and I've decided that I disagree. The Swift Boat ads have done serious and permanent damage to the Kerry campaign.
From Super Tuesday until about a week ago, whenever anyone asked me about the election, I always responded "Barring a major event like a terrorist attack, a massive economic rebound, or the capture of bin Laden, Kerry will almost definitely win."
Bush bounces in the polls didn't, and for that matter, still don't worry me. All through the Reagan public mourning process as Bush retook the lead from Kerry, I was unperturbed.
Why this time is different after the jump...
The Swift Boat affair is fundamentally different. It's not an event that will come and go like Reagan or a terror alert -- it's a change in the perception of Kerry, and it can be fanned and revived. From now on, what was Kerry's saving grace as a candidate and the guiding metaphor of his campaign has been neutralized, at best. At worse, Vietnam has become a ball and chain attached to the Kerry campaign, because the Swift Boat charges, false as they are, dovetail so neatly with the already familiar attacks on Kerry as a waffler and thus, to an extent, dishonest.
Every time from now until November that Vietnam returns as an issue to this campaign, it will be accompanied by Kerry having to defend his record. The famous story about LBJ wanting to accuse his opponent of being a pig-f**ker just so he would have to deny it seems an appropriate comparison. Of course the charges are false, but the fact that he has to defend himself makes them an issue.
From now on, Kerry may have to run without his Vietnam record to stand on. He would never have come this far that way -- he probably wouldn't even have made it to the Senate, much less the nomination -- and unless he improves a lot as a candidate, it may be difficult for him to get his numbers to match the "wrong track" numbers in polls without Vietnam to run on.
In fact, Kerry's famous performances as a good "closer" in campaigns come mostly from two moments in history. One was the 1996 campaign, when he told Bill Weld in a debate that he opposed the death penalty because "I know something about killing." That was probably Kerry's best performance in any debate of his career. The other moment was December 2003 and January 2004, when he called on his Vietnam persona -- the tough-guy shouting "Bring ... it ... on," the hero touring with his comrades-in-arms, etc.
Kerry needs a steady climb to a strong finish starting at the end of the GOP convention. Unfortunately, it seems he may be on the defensive if he ever tries to bring up what had been his most powerful argument.