| 1. G.W. Bush has a strong conviction about his own ideals and beliefs. He airs this, people like that.
2. Kerry had a very mixed message and he focussed on different things during the campaign, while Bush just kept repeating the same things over and over again. It never became exactly clear, for the majority of the people, what Kerry stood for.
3. Bush never admits mistakes. People dont want to hear about failure in leadership.
4. Bush has a very fanatical, rockfast followers (religious white, gun owners, suburban middle aged salary workers), while Kerry voters are more diverse, more focussed on the issues instead of the person, and generally not as loyal or convinced of their leader's character or person. They are also more likely to admire intelligence and nuance in a person, instead of warmth-of-character and christian morals like Bush voters.
5. Bush's campaign strategy works: he tells people what they want to hear: "it is going great!". Especially in a time of war and economic uncertainty, people do not want to hear doom and gloom stories, they want something to hope for. In such times people are more likely to want stability and continuation as opposed to change and nuance.
6. Negative campaigning. It is much easier to throw mud at a newcomer, since people don't know anything about him. They already have certain ideas about the current president, but the image of the challenger must be build. Bush correctly attacked that image before Kerry himself could really create his own profile.
Bush a genius? Genius implies that he has done something extraordinary. No, I do not think so. It has to do with the times, the party, the opposition, the people around Bush, and the people in America in general. |