I love this advice from Rudepundit to Kerry (hope he's paying attention)

[T Roosevelt]

7/19/2004
Advice to John Kerry:
It's nearly convention time, Johnny K. It's time to start a fire, burn this trail up all the way to the election. It's time to pull up a stool at the bar next to the Rude Pundit, whose father took him to auto races and professional wrestling, who lived in a trailer in the South, who has traveled nearly everywhere in this America, and listen.

First, it's time to change the subject: Here’s the thing that will drive everyone nuts -- stop talking about Bush. He is done. You are falling into a well-worn trap, Johnny K. You are answering everything that is thrown at you. You are playing defense too much. It reduces you; it demeans you. Here's the deal: we know what a son of a bitch George Bush is. We know about his unmitigated desire for power. We know about his failures. We're livin' in them, man. We know what Bush is like. And we know we don't like him. We want to know why we should like you, as you, not as the anti-Bush. Leave the D to someone like Mary Beth Cahill, your campaign manager, whose response to GOP requests for the Whoopi Goldberg video is witheringly brutal and perfect.

The Vision Thing: Now, pay attention. And if the Center for American Progress is reading, check this shit out -- here’s how Kerry wins and how the Left becomes relevant again:

Homeland security is about making the homeland more secure, right? How do you make the country more secure? It's obvious that it's not by going to war in Iraq. You do it by giving people hope here, in America. How do you do that? Through strong public education, health care, environmental, and jobs programs (including support for unions). Take those traditional liberal ideas -- and they are liberal, you know -- and put them under the label of "homeland security." Steal that Orwellian label back from Bush. Make it mean something different. Make it mean more than "our borders are secure." Make it mean our homes are secure. The domestic front needs its care, you know? That’s what’ll make the people in those homes more secure. It is almost Zen simplicity, you know? Take the meat and potatoes issues that the Left has been pushing for decades and do what Bush does with every attempt to devastate the country: it's for security. Steal the language and make it mean something new.

This is a huge leap in rhetoric, but if you get people agreeing with you, then you've achieved an ideological shift. If someone, say a certain Vice-President, disagrees with you, then you can simply imply that the critic doesn't want a safer nation. Again, it's a stark, implicit contrast: you can vote for the man who thinks that children having health care makes the country stronger or you can vote for the man who thinks sending kids to war is the only way to make the country stronger. You can vote for the man who believes a billion dollars spent at home is more valuable than a billion dollars given to Halliburton in a no-bid contract. Remember: Bush no longer has the Republican cover of "fiscal responsibility." The money's gettin' spent, baby. It's a question of where.

See, you’ve already got the mojo going on these issues. Your healthcare policies kick major ass. When you talk about raising taxes on the wealthiest, be straight: tell audiences how much more you and Theresa will have to pay. Tell them that you don’t mind paying it because you can afford it. Tell them that you don’t mind paying it because you feel it is your duty to make people more secure in their lives. Don’t run from being rich. Theresa’s got the right idea: it's silly to be blanket prejudiced against the rich. The prejudice in this country isn’t against the rich, per se. It’s against the idle rich, the ones who don’t contribute to society, the ones who see government as only a chance for them to get richer.

You don’t need to worry that much about Iraq. Everyone knows that Bush has fucked it up. All you need to do is offer a way to bring the troops back home. You can make it clear that we have to clean up our own mess in Iraq. As for terrorism, how could Bush do any worse? When we hear that the terror warnings are at their highest since 9/11, all we can think is, "Goddamn, what the fuck have we been doing for the last three years?" (And the implication there is "We’ve been jackin’ off in Iraq when we should have been spending $100 billion at home.")

Look, really, most of America ain't gonna make up its mind until the debates, when, unless the press treats Bush like a baby with a shit-filled diaper again, you will crush the President. It's like sports: sure, some people go to a bunch of games and know all the stats. But most of us just sit at home, watch a couple of games, and wait for the playoffs. Until then, you need to project the air of a winner.

Tomorrow: How to answer pesky media perceptions.



// posted by Rude One @ 8:56 AM

[JI7]

1. great advice, i think he is partly leading in this direction

at least from what i have seen so far.

[Cocoa]

2. the premise of "change the subject" is faulty

Kerry is NOT playing defense, and he's NOT bashing Bush.

This writer is living on the same planet the other pundits are, and it's not the same one I'm on. In my world, the Kerry campaign has been exceedingly positive, and so far mostly engaged in introducing Kerry to the voters.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. .......