Howard Kurtz has yet another roundup of Democratic handwringing over Kerry in The Washington Post.
You can tell this is in the Post and not The New York Times because the obligtory "Bafflingly, the pathetic Democratic weiner is still in the race" disclaimer appears in paragraph #2 rather than 7/8ths of the way through the article. Otherwise, it could have easily have borne the byline "Adam Nagourney."
A little perspective here, people: Ever since FDR beat Hoover in '32, sitting presidents have appeared on the November ballot twelve times. Of those twelve elections, they won nine: FDR ('36, '40, '44), Truman, Ike, LBJ, Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton. The only losers were Ford, Carter, and Bush the Elder. And most of those nine victories were blowouts. So the fact that Kerry has a chance at all this year is impressive in and of itself.
If Kerry were seventeen points down in every poll, it would still be inappropriate for Democrats to express their doubts every time a reporter calls -- there's no damn moral obligation to run your own party down in public; this is not corruption or torture, not covered by "the people's right to know." But Kerry has a reasonably good chance to win. Why the whining?