I'm Puzzled. Kerry Question

[HFishbine]

How does Kerry attacking Dean help Kerry?

[Cha]

1. And who is giving him this advice or is it a

gut killer instinct that he has?

[UTUSN]

2. I'm Puzzled. Why Attack GORE, um, I Mean KERRY

Wish we had a killer instinct for our REAL enemy, the Repuke.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

3. How Dean attacking Bush help Dean?

It's politics. Duh.

[HFishbine]

5. Thanks for participating

But I'm looking for a serious answer. What straegic or tactical goal is Kerry pursuing by attacking Dean? What does he gain?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

9. He gains the same thing

any candidate does when he attacks another candidate.

I'm sorry you don't like the fact that I'm pointing out the utter banality of your question.

[HFishbine]

14. What is that "thing?"

Yes, perhaps I'm banal. But maybe you'd be so kind as to point out what that "thing" is he's gaining, because it sure as hell isn't votes. So, what is it?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

18. Your agenda is clear.

:eyes:

Obviously you mean this as a rhetorical question.

If you don't think attacking is a good strategy, what do you think Kerry should do? Contribute to the Dean campaign?

[HFishbine]

35. I'm glad you ask

Although, you'll pardon me if I don't choose one of your two limited choices. I think Kerry should talk about Kerry. He should fight the temptation to make his answers a comparrison to Dean. Hell, half the time he doesn't even answer the question he gets so obsessed with Dean.

Now honestly, your candidate is a great guy, wouldn't you rather see him talking about his record, his ideas, and his plans instead of Dean. This week he came out with a multi-point plan for his first 100 days in office. Did he mention that tonight? What a waste.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

37. Oh I see you are talking only about the debate.

He shouldn't have even done the debate. None of them should. They are just designed to hurt us. Still it's not surprising to me that on a day that Kerry is helping lead the fight against the Republican Medicare bill that he would press Dean on the issue.

But, I just think you are dead wrong. Anyway since when is it an 'attack' to try to get someone to answer a simple question? Kerry showed everybody watching that Dean does indeed plan to cut the medicare growth rate -- the very position Dean is trying so hard to obscure and deny. Dean stuck to the old Republican argument that a cut in the growth rate is not a cut -- but anyone who thinks about it realizes that Dean's plan does indeed mean that there will be less money going into Medicare. With the current gutting of Medicare happening right now, the last thing we need is a President who won't fight for it with conviction.


Dean's record is one of budget-cutting zeal, not commonweal.

(When Dean became governor) they (liberal Democrats) were all thinking, oh we got a Democrat back in the governor's office. And all of the sudden they find Howard Dean's worse on spending (than Snelling). The state was headed into a recession at the time. And Snelling before he died, he and Ralph Wright cut a deal on raising the income taxes and (inaud.) the deficit--a few years of austerity. Howard stuck with the plan. And as Dick McCormack (Democratic Senator from Windsor) will tell you of the meeting where he (Dean) met with the Democratic Caucus and told them then, and this might have been before, when he was still lieutenant governor, and told the Democratic Senators, you're never going to win because people don't trust you with their money. None of your great and lofty goals and plans and aspirations will ever be achieved because people don't trust Democrats with their money. We got to prove it to 'em. And that was key. I mean his political enemies for the first three terms were Democrats at the State House, not Republicans. Republicans loved his budgets.
--Peter Freyne, veteran Vermont political reporter
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/dean/dean0702/freyneint.html

[Karmadillo]

4. When one isn't the frontrunner, one attacks the frontrunner. When one is

the frontrunner, one feigns great offense at the very concept of Party members attacking one another. "Let's all focus on our opponent in the general election," he/she cries. "This infighting will destroy us all!" Caveat: Should the frontrunner fall from frontrunner status, all previous protests against attacking the frontrunner become inoperative.

[HFishbine]

7. Okay

That's a intersting observation, but it still deosn't answer the question. What is the payoff for Kerry?

[Karmadillo]

10. A greater share of the votes as voters become more familiar with

his opponent's record (eg, the minute difference between the IWR blank check and the Biden-Lugar blank check). That's the hoped for payoff anyway. Doesn't always work, but Kerry would be ill-advised to shut up and be nice.

[HFishbine]

17. Alright

Let's think that through. About a quarter to a third of voters don't have a preference yet. That's been steady for the past two months or so. However, over that period, Dean's support has risen while Kerry's has declined. Doesn't that, at the very least, suggest that attacking Dean is not working?

Nobody is suggesting that Kerry shut-up, but maybe he should consider using his precious minutes during nationally televised debates to talk about Kerry.

[Karmadillo]

22. Kerry does talk about Kerry. That doesn't preclude

pointing out differences with the opposition.

[HFishbine]

29. But he's obseesed

In a nationally televised debate where the candidates have a total of perhaps ten minutes of "talking" time, it's ludicrous for a candidate in decline to talk about the front runner. That would make sense in a one-on-one debate, but in a debate where most of the other candidates are talking mostly about their ideas, it makes Kerry stand out as a malcontent short on ideas. If it's such a great idea, why are Dean's poll numbers going up and Kerry's going down.

Kerry supporters should be asking this question for themselves. After all, YOUR guy is letting YOU down. Are you truely satisfied with the direction of his campaign?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

32. Why can't Dean answer a simple question with a straight answer?

Dean supporters should be asking this question for themselves. After all, YOUR guy is letting YOU down. Are you truely satisfied with the duplicity of his campaign?

[Hep]

44. It's a ridiculously oversimplified approach

to the issue. Kerry was trying to trap Dean into giving a sound bite for the next ad. As Brokaw pointed out in his question to Edwards, which never got answered, Medicare can't continue to grow exponentially and remain solvent. Everyone knows that. Dean will rely on medicare EXPANSION to fulfill his goal of providing healthcare to everyone.

Kerry is trying to imply that Dean wants to undermine medicare. That Dean doesn't have the needs of the people at heart. Clearly Dean does. That Kerry would approach his differences in this way is repulsive.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

45. What's clear is that Dean does want to undermine Medicare

otherwise he would have been able to answer the question.

[Hep]

46. That's messed up logic

You can't simultaneously expand and undermine medicare.

Feel free to explain exactly how Dean's plan will hurt medicare.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

48. Dean's record indicates someone who place budgets above people.

Obviously, you trust him. I don't understand why, but that's what it comes down to. You trust him to govern according to his rhetoric.

I guess in a way you could say I trust him too -- to govern according to his record.

[Hep]

49. YEah

practically everyone with healthcare, and he never lost an election in liberal Vermont.

Must be a bunch of idiots to not even know they were being screwed.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

50. What I said was that budget-cutting was Dean's priority.

Dean the Democrat continued to pursue much of the economic agenda established by his Republican predecessor, Richard Snelling In short, this meant a tepid pro-business policy under the guise of fiscal conservatism, often at the expense of social programs serving disadvantaged populations. "One of my most persistent activities during the early 1990s was trying to fend off the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party," said Glenn Gershaneck, Dean's press secretary for nearly four years and Snelling's spokesman for seven months before that.

Conservative Vermont business leaders praised Dean's record and his constant effort to balance the budget, even though Vermont is a state in which a balanced budget is not required. While other Democrats fought against Clinton's welfare reform, Dean gave it ardent support. His commitment to a balanced budget would spare the Pentagon from any cuts. So how would he reduce the deficit? During his Vermont tenure, he tried to cut benefits for the aged, blind and disabled, spearheaded a new workfare state law requiring labor from welfare recipients, and has talked about moving the retirement age upwards -- some indication on whose backs his budgets would be balanced.
http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs08292003.html

[Karmadillo]

43. Today's debate is a good example of why it's a good strategy.

The exchange with Dean on Medicare would make a good negative ad. And, to be honest, one could even argue Kerry waited too long to go negative. While Dean was positioning himself as the antiwar candidate and Kerry as the lackey of Bush, Kerry should have been pointing out reality was somewhat different by noting Dean's embrace of the Biden-Lugar blank check.

[poskonig]

6. It may get Dean's negatives up.

However, it may get Kerry's negatives up if his delivery is poor. One possibility is that Dean's negatives are a lot lower than Kerry's. If this is the case (I'd have to see the polling data), a negative campaign may work in Kerry's advantage, the idea being if they are both disliked, then Kerry will be the lesser of two evils.

I personally believe the Hannity-style stuff doesn't "score" Kerry a lot of points and is dissonant with the seasoned, experienced, professional product they are trying to sell.

[HFishbine]

12. Hmm

That, at least, is an answer to my question. Thanks. My first reaction is that it seems like a high risk manuver. Even if Kerry manages to increase Dean's negatives without increasing his own, there are seven other candidates to choose from. It seems like that strategy would be more beneficial in a one-on-one match up.

None the less, I looked at favorability ratings among democratic voters and compared their change from Sept. 26. (in parentasees) to Nov. 14


Kerry
-------
Favorable: 44% (52%)
Unfavorable: 11% (12%)
Don't know: 45% (36%)

Dean
-----
Favorable: 36% (41%)
Unfavorable: 10% (12%)
Don't know: 54% (48%)

So, Dean's favorability among democrats has fallen a bit (5 points vs. Kerry's 8 point decline). But neither candidate has suffered an increase in unfavorability. It seems as if favorabilty for both has moved to uncertainty.

Despite the drop in favorability for Dean, he has climbed from 13% or 14% in September to 17% or 18% in November in two different polls. Kerry on the other hand has dropped from 16% or 17% to 9%.

It just seems painfully clear to me that Kerry's tactics are not working. Maybe he's responsible for a small decline in Dean's favorability, but it's inconsequential and having no effect on voter preference. Kerry's decline in favorability however is greater than Dean's and Kerry's decline in voter preference had been evident.

If this amatuer pundint can see these things, what the hell is wrong with the Kerry campaign? Their strategy isn't working. Maybe it makes Kerry feel better to go after Dean, hell I'd be tempted too, but he's doing a real disservice to his supporters by not going after votes instead of Dean.

sources:

http://www.pollingreport.com/D-F.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/J-O.htm

http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr031114.asp

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

[mitchum]

15. Damn, looks like you got the answer you were looking for

imagine that that that that that

[HFishbine]

20. Do you have an answer

or would yours be one I was "looking" for too?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

33. Do you have a question

or are you just goint to keep repeating the same cheap rhetorical trick?

[sangh0]

52. You got your answer, but your interpretation is questionable

You make predictions based on the effects of past attacks. You make no consideration for the fact that these attacks take time to move an opponents numbers. It takes time to build a negative image of your opponent.

Also, Dean is now getting a lot more media attention. Prior attacks didn't get that much attention for the simple fact that the media and people weren't paying much attention. It's now a different story.

[sandnsea]

8. How does Dean attacking Gephardt help Dean?

How does Dean continuing to stir up controversy over the war vote and divert attention off of every other issue help Dean?

[KaraokeKarlton]

11. How does you attacking Dean help your candidate?

It doesn't. It doesn't change anyone's mind, it only turns them off to the guy you support. The vast majority of those who support Dean are fiercely loyal to him. They aren't going to jump off the ship poised to win the race to hop onto one destined to sink.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

13. Why does it bother you?

If Dean is this unstoppable force, who will win no matter what he says or does, why get all upset at people attacking him?

lol

[RevolutionStartsNow]

23. Because it's time consuming

In these debates, there is little time to talk, and Dean is constantly having to respond to these attacks.

But it only bothers me a little bit, because Dean responds well and never seems to be hurt by it. It seems to be hurting Kerry more.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

28. LOL

Right. It bothers because you believe it helps your candidate.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

34. What?

I do not appear anywhere in this thread complaining about Kerry's attacks, I just interjected my own opinion, which is that it bothers me a little because it takes up a lot of time in the debate. But overall it's not a big deal, because it doesn't seem to have an impact on Dean in the polls. It's hurting Kerry more.

You are the master of the condescending "LOL", though. I like doing it too, it can be very satisfying. LOL.

[sangh0]

51. That doesn't make sense

You say it "wastes time" even though it helps Dean, and that makes no sense. During a campaign, the candidate spends time doing the things that gets them votes, and denies votes to their opponents. Since these attacks do exactly that, how can it be a bad use of Dean's time?

If you're talking about your own time, then what are these attacks keeping Dean from talking about that you want to hear? I assume you know Dean's positions on the issues, so why would you want to hear that?

[HFishbine]

26. Good Question

I think it's because a majority of democrats prefer a candidate who opposed the war. It's an important issue on which Dean can draw a clear distinction. It's also a single issue. Dean isn't going after Gephardt on one issue after another, he's drawing a distinction on an issue where he and Gephardt differ and on which the majority of democrats agree with Dean.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=750

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

[Feanorcurufinwe]

31. What clear distinction? A vote that Dean didn't cast?

Dean:Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/02/20/dean/index2.html

Kerry: "If we go it alone without reason, we risk inflaming an entire region and breeding a new generation of terrorists, a new cadre of anti-American zealots - and we will be less secure, not more secure, at the end of the day, even with Saddam Hussein disarmed. Let there be no doubt or confusion as to where I stand: I will support a multilateral effort to disarm Iraq by force, if we have exhausted all other options. But I cannot - and will not - support a unilateral, US war against Iraq unless the threat is imminent and no multilateral effort is possible."
http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2002_1009.html


Dean:"In Iraq, I would be prepared to go ahead without further Security Council backing if it were clear the threat posed to us by Saddam Hussein was imminent, and could neither be contained nor deterred."
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/dean/dean021703sp.html

Kerry:"we should be particularly concerned that we do not go alone or essentially alone if we can avoid it, because the complications and costs of post-war Iraq would be far better managed and shared with United Nation's participation. And, while American security must never be ceded to any institution or to another institution's decision, I say to the President, show respect for the process of international diplomacy because it is not only right, it can make America stronger - and show the world some appropriate patience in building a genuine coalition. Mr. President, do not rush to war."
http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

Dean:"never been in doubt about the evil of Saddam Hussein or the necessity of removing his weapons of mass destruction."
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000395.html

[sandnsea]

40. 65% against Dean

And for Kerry, Gephardt, or Edwards in latest Iowa poll. Don't think this vote matters to anybody but Dean, who doesn't miss an opportunity to wedge it into the campaign.

[KittyWampus]

16. Kerry Should Attack Indirectly

Clark is actually pretty good at this. The few digs Clark has gotten in have been very subtle.

Kerry should just present us with his stellar credentials, lay out his plan and make anything to do with Dean an afterthought.

[Tatiana]

19. It doesn't.

It only helps the Republicans if Dean ends up being the nominee.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

21. Let me ask you this.

If you were in charge of Kerry's campaign, what would your advice be?

[Scott Lee]

25. Advice? To Kerry? "Drop out".

How's that?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

27. I wouldn't bother sending your resume along if that's the best you can do.

I guess that would be your advice to all the candidates except yours, right? :eyes:

[HFishbine]

36. I would

follow the advice cryingshame offered above (post #16). It's exactly right.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

38. Is that strategy working better for Clark?

[RevolutionStartsNow]

39. Yes, I think it is

while Clark isn't doing as well as Kerry in NH, that's understandable, because Clark started late and both Dean and Kerry are very well organized in that state.

Meanwhile Clark seems to be doing very well in other states, better than Kerry.

I think Clark is drawing people to his campaign partly because he refuses to go negative on the other candidates. He's running a good clean campaign, and he's certainly succeeding.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

41. Besides Arkansas in what state is he doing best?

[HFishbine]

42. California

[RevolutionStartsNow]

47. South Carolina

[cindyw]

24. The problem in these debates is the moderators questions.

Every question that the Brokaw asked was "so your fellow democrat said the following, I am reluctantly supporting the repubs, so candidate x do you think your fellow democrat is a traitor. It was all designed to get them to fight.

[bhunt70]

30. I don't think the attacks help at all.

In fact I think the Kerry-Dean debacle did nothing to help either person.

I think what people have to remember is the other side keeps track of this kinda stuff also.

Why give them cannon fodder. Run on the strength of your character, your ideas, and against your common enemy.

Let the chips fall where they may, atleast you will be strengthening the party as opposed to tearing it down.