HMM: “Kerry blames election loss on Sept. 11 attacks,” according to The Raw Story.

I’m not sure what to make of that. Would Kerry have won in 2004 if there had been no 9/11 attacks? Possibly. On the other hand, if there had been no 9/11 attacks, Kerry might never have gotten the nomination — his war record, remember, was supposed to immunize him on national security issues, and that was his biggest attraction to many Democrats.

I’m no Harry Turtledove, but in my alt-history version, I think John Edwards or Howard Dean would have been more likely to have gotten the nomination. Of course, if that had happened, Kerry wouldn’t have lost the 2004 election, since he wouldn’t have been running, so I guess in a way he’s right!