|
Edited on Thu Nov-20-03 05:58 PM by Thomas Jefferson
This is probably not going to make me any friends but, the way I see it, the Democratic candidates all have to fix their campaigns if they want to win the Presidency. Whoever wins needs to be able to appeal to the broadest number of voters possible and each of the candidates has weaknesses. This is not meant as an attack on any candidate but as suggestions on how each can win. Sorry if anyone takes it otherwise.
John Kerry has a good shot at winning if he gets the nomination. His problem will be getting the nomination and then convincing the activist crowd to join him. Kerry’s first problem is that he blew three votes: USA-PATRIOT, the IWR and Homeland Security. His position on the war was almost identical to Dean’s but Dean has done a very convincing job of telling people otherwise. Kerry is a strong environmentalist but most environmentalists are mad at him because of his vote on the IWR. It’s the same group of people. Kerry should be able to pull California away from Dean by simply making an issue of Yucca Mountain, which Dean supported and Kerry, Gephardt, Kucinich and Lieberman opposed. Kerry needs to push the environmental issue and the fact that he opposed the $87 billion while Dean clearly said, in the CNN debate, that he would give this to Bush.
Kerry’s second problem is that he has no visible campaign in places like California, the state with the most delegates to the Democratic Convention. Art Torres and most of the local party leaders are supposedly supporting him but that support has been pretty invisible. Also, Kerry should check out the paid members of his staff. He might find that some are Dean loyalists.
Kerry’s third problem, one he shares with other candidates, is that Dean has become popular with people who have no idea what Dean’s position is and would oppose Dean if they knew. George Bush and the news media will make sure the truth comes out after, but only after, the primaries, thereby crushing any chance Dean and the Democrats have of winning the general election. The only way that Kerry or any of the other candidates can take the nomination is to educate the public. The Dean campaign will claim that stating Dean’s position and record is negative but reality is not negative. It just is. First, Kerry needs to run ads show the extent to which Dean raided public service funds to give breaks to corporations. Then he should run the piece of the CNN debate where Dean clearly stated his position on the $87 billion dollars. In California, he should run ads about the dangers of nuclear waste in the drinking water. In Texas, Kerry should run ads about Dean’s plans to send his toxic waste to a poor Hispanic community in that state. It is better if the people learn the truth before the primaries rather than after it.
Edwards may actually have the best chance of all the candidates. He had the same three bad votes as Kerry. Like Dean, Edwards also supported Yucca Mountain. To win California, Edwards will have to apologize for that vote and agree to actively oppose the project. Defending his vote will not work. The factors Edwards has going in his favor are his vote against the $87 billion dollars and his repeated expression of concern for those who are being detained without charges. He might realize that it’s okay to make mistakes and learn from them. He doesn’t need to defend his mistakes. Another factor Edwards has going for him is that he won in North Carolina at a time when Democrats were not doing so well in Congress. Despite the fact that he is relatively liberal, he has done very well in the South. His background is a plus as is his support of labor and his knowledge of law and his respect for the Constitution. Also, I think a lot of Republican women will vote for him.
He also has the problem of no visible campaign in California. He has the potential to win over the state if he tries. Like Kerry, he will also need to have an active campaign educating the public about Dean.
Like Dean, Clark has the advantage of not being in Congress when the IWR was voted on. Therefore Clark can say anything he wants about where he stood on the issue. The fact that he showed some opposition helps give him an anti-war appearance and he could spin any other comments as patriotic.
Clarks first problem is that people are uncertain about his past party affiliation. This might actually help in the general election. With all the declines to state and third party people who have left the Democratic Party and all the dissatisfaction within the Party itself, this might not be a major problem. He needs to just portray himself as a person of conscience.
Clark’s worst problem is that he was seen as bloodthirsty in Kosovo. Eisenhower, towards the end of his Presidency, expressed concern about the military industrial complex. So Americans have had an example of a general who learned. He could speak about how Kosovo was a learning experience. Since he is coming off as anti-war, this would flow. It would greatly help his cause if he came out against use of depleted uranium.
Lieberman has the same three bad votes as Kerry and Edwards and worse, he is seen as a hawk and he voted for the $87 billion. His best bet would be to run on his domestic record. He is a strong environmentalist and, in most ways, is much more liberal than Dean.
Sharpton’s main problem is his lack of government experience. But at least he can argue he didn’t have any bad votes and that he didn’t give concealed weapons to sixteen year olds or cut their education funding. His main asset is that he is currently the best speaker of all the candidates.
If the nomination goes to Kucinich, the Democrats will be guaranteed the Presidency. Dennis has nothing to hide and the best record on the issues of all the candidates. He has the best track record of all the candidates when it comes to getting the Republicans to back him against Republican incumbents. His problem is getting the nomination. The media, which wants to give the nomination to Dean, refuses to cover even major events with thousands of people that involve Kucinich. The vast majority of Americans have no idea who he is. So, unless a miracle happens, he’ll be the candidate most people, after the nomination, will wish they had known about in time to vote for the right guy. However, if he does win the nomination, the public will find out who he is and where he stands and that’s all he needs to win the general election.
Kucinich’s problems are in part due to a campaign of lies from the Dean campaign. But the problem is more serious than that. There is a widening gap between his volunteers and his official staff. Over the last month, many active volunteers have decided to sit back feeling a complete lack of respect and support from the official staff. Those volunteers still remain loyal to Kucinich. Many volunteers feel the staff has thrown away major endorsements and doesn’t seem to realize the importance of maintaining support among the groups that Kucinich has helped over the years. One official staff member has made comments indicating that the goal is not the presidency. However, anyone seeing Kucinich is fully aware that his goal IS to WIN the Presidency. If he is to win, he needs to fix the way his campaign is being run. This is something he can do.
Carol Moseley-Braun needs to work on her presentation. Whenever she speaks, what I get is that I should vote for her because she’s a black woman. I need a stronger reason to support a candidate. Also, from the way she’s speaking, it sounds like she supports the occupation. Most of those who might consider voting for her do not support the occupation and so she may need to re-think that position.
Howard Dean could easily get the nomination. Conceivably the way the delegates work, he could get the most delegates without being the most popular candidate. All he needs to do to get the nomination is make sure no one knows his record. He’s already sealed his governor’s records and that will help him. The news media has already picked him as their nominee. So unless some surprises come up, he very well could be the nominee.
Dean’s real problem is the general election. Many of those Democrats who are not supporting him now will not support him in the general election.. While a few African-Americans may try to bridge the gap, the majority of the African-American community will probably not forgive him for the flag comment. Like 2002, they will stay home in 2004. Those concerned about due process will probably not be among his supporter either. To gain their support, he would probably have to agree to make Miranda v. Arizona, Mapp v. Ohio and Gideon v. Wainwright litmus tests for court appointments. He would also need to agree to equal funding for prosecution and defense in federal cases. Because of his under-funding of programs for the disabled, he would probably need to work out a deal to get their support. The middle class won’t vote for him if he intends to raise their taxes. So he has a lot to iron out with the Democrats he would need to pick up in order to win the general election.
The other problem he has is that he has been so inconsistent. The Republicans own the news media and would probably portray him as the worst liar in history. By the time they are through with him, lying would be synonymous with his name. He will have to come up with an approach and a probably very costly ad campaign to combat this.
Gephardt voted against Homeland Security and against Yucca. However, he has three bad votes since he voted for the $87 billion. I simply think Gephardt is badly informed on the issues. I had a conversation with his office a while back and could not believe the misconceptions about Iraq his people had. Gephardt does have name recognition and this may help him. There was nothing he could have done about the SEIU and AFSCME endorsements. Those were behind-closed-door deals. If Andy Stern had thought Steve Burd would be popular among Democrats, the two groups would have endorsed the head of Vons.
|