John Kerry is looking weakest on the election battleground he chose

WHERE did John Kerry spend Christmas of 1968? Vietnam, it seems. Which is not what he has been saying for 25 years.

The Democratic contender for the White House has claimed repeatedly that on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day 1968 he took his swift boat into Cambodia on a covert and illegal mission. He said he got shot at by Vietnamese, Khmer Rouge and Cambodians or by “our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas”. The memory of this Cambodian Christmas, Kerry wrote in 1979, “is seared - seared into me.”

But it can’t be. Douglas Brinkley’s book, Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War, a book supportive of Kerry and written with his help, says he was on patrol 50 miles from the Cambodia border on Christmas Eve 1968 and he spent Christmas Day writing journal entries back at his base. All those still living who were higher up in Kerry’s chain of command deny that he was in Cambodia. Three of his boat crew deny it and two others have declined to comment.

Although the main American news organs have ignored this story for several weeks, the spotlight is now very definitely on Kerry’s Vietnam record - and the attempts of a group of Vietnam veterans to undermine it. Kerry may yet regret that moment when he ‘reported for duty’ at the Democratic Convention, placing his military record centre stage in his presidential bid.

His problem is, he’s been around too long. There are too many inconsistencies in his story. In a 1971 interview he insisted that he had given back “six, seven, eight, nine” of his medals in protest at the Vietnam war. But by 1984, times had changed, the anti-war movement was less popular, and Kerry wanted people to believe he had kept the medals and only thrown away the ribbons. Then, a decade later (presumably times had changed again), he told the Boston Globe that the only reason he didn’t get rid of the medals was that he didn’t have time to go home and get them. Finally last April he told the LA Times, “I never even implied that I threw away the medals.”

Kerry also wobbled on the issue of whether his fellow soldiers committed war crimes in Vietnam. Back then, he gave graphic accounts of civilians being shot and maimed. Now he describes those claims as ‘excessive’.

His biggest dilemma is how to square his rejection of the Vietnam War back in the 1970s with his attempt to piggyback on that war now.

In recent weeks, half the American electorate has heard of or seen television ads run by a group named Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, challenging Kerry’s war record and questioning his bravery in Vietnam. The Democrats have responded by pointing to links between these veterans and the Bush campaign, and highlighting contradictions in the veterans’ stories. Some, it seems, had paid tribute to Kerry’s courage in the past.

There shouldn’t be any doubt about it - the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are as much a part of the George W Bush re-election campaign as the president himself. Under the ‘soft money’ advertising rules, ‘independent’ organisations not controlled by the campaigning parties can run ads for or against a particular candidate on the basis of how he stands on their issues. And, of course, it suits the Bush campaign better if Kerry is criticised by perceived neutrals, or somewhat neutrals, since the President doesn’t have a glorious military record of his own.

Bush needs all the help he can get from the vets. Opinion polls show a close race between the candidates overall (the latest Zogby America Poll puts Kerry ahead nationally, 47-43), but it’s not about national vote share.

The American president is chosen by an electoral college, in which the big states have larger numbers of electors, but the smaller states have disproportionately high representation. Since it’s a winner-take-all system in most states (ie the candidate who wins a majority of the popular vote gets all the electoral college votes), it is possible to win the popular vote nationally but lose the electoral college. And vice versa.

In 2000, Al Gore romped home in states such as California and New York, for example, getting all those states’ electoral college votes with an (unnecessary) large majority of the popular vote as well. Nationally, he won half a million more votes than Bush. But Bush won the election, mainly by winning a lot of the smaller states and taking all of Florida’s electoral votes by a wafer-thin majority of the popular vote.

This time around, state-by-state opinion polls show Bush struggling. To win the presidency, a candidate needs 270 votes from the electoral college. Right now, a pro-Kerry website shows Kerry leading Bush 317 to 202. And a pro-Bush website calls it the same way - Kerry leading 327-211.

TIME will tell if the war over Kerry’s Vietnam record reverses all that. A couple of nights ago, the former Republican presidential candidate and WWII hero Bob Dole had a go at Kerry for using his three Purple Hearts for bravery as a ticket out of Vietnam. And Dole’s performance was unashamedly two-faced.

“And here’s a good guy, a good friend,” he began. “I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and [he] never bled that I know of. I mean, they’re all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you’re out.”

Negative campaigning it may be. But it has been the Democrats, not the Republicans, who have led the way on this so far.

At the Democratic Convention in July, genteel old Jimmy Carter delivered a speech which suggested that Bush was an extremist, a warmonger, a liar - even a quasi-deserter from the army. Carter took his seat beside another privileged guest, Michael Moore, the Democratic propagandist whose film Fahrenheit 9/11, while certainly entertaining, is highly manipulative and contradictory in its claims about the Bush administration.

Although Kerry is leading in the latest electoral college poll, his position is not as strong as it seems. He seems assured of winning states like New York, Illinois and California, which together would give him 107 out of the 270 electoral votes he needs. However, he only has slim leads in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida, which between them could deliver 68 votes.

In November, trust will be the deciding factor. The polls show that while Bush is the more trusted on the war against terror, he trails Kerry on other significant issues like foreign relations, jobs, the economy and healthcare. But the Republicans have an opportunity to portray Kerry as an Al Gore figure - someone who will say anything to get elected.

Hence the TV commercials attacking his war record and the focus on Kerry’s many contradictory statements.

Two weeks ago, the candidates were tied in their support among war veterans. Now Bush leads 55-37 among those voters. It pays to advertise.