Truth Must be Told re John Kerry's Campaign. Flame away.

[WiseMen]

John Kerry is the best candidate for the presidency the Democrats have had in the last half-century.

But, it is now clear that the Kerry campaign has wasted much of the $200 million it has spent to date, given that a quick $200k Ad buy, by the SwiftVets, could so quickly hobble Kerry's march to victory.

Let’s briefly look at the misapprehensions of the campaign:

1. It’s about Character NOT Issues. The entire Bush campaign has focused from the beginning on making John Kerry unacceptable as President and Commander In Chief. Regardless of the “issue” at hand, the principal theme of the Bush campaign is that John Kerry is a shamelessly unprincipled self-promoter who has no strength of character or purpose. The Swift Smears and the RNC insult-fest merely brought this theme to its ecstatic and logical climax.

The Kerry campaign and the progressive 527s simply failed to effectively counter this theme and continue to feature a variety of pet issues, deluding themselves that these issues have relevance even without an effective vindication of the Candidate's honor and integrity against the relentless smears. BUT, THEY DO NOT.

2. It’s National Security, stupid. We may want to pretend otherwise, but an incumbent President can usually determine the debate. In a post-9/11 world with bombs dropping in Iraq, it is impossible to deny Bush his chosen field of battle. The campaign must be fought and won on the field of war on terror and the terror of war, or it will be lost. The failure of the campaign to confront the President head-on 9-11 and Iraq and recent attempts to say “we are moving on to jobs and health-care” is fundamentally misguided.

3. It is the Negative NOT the Positive that counts. Unless the 2004 election is made a referendum on the Bush regime, on its deceit, on its malevolence, on its incompetence, the Democrats will not win. The failure of the sitting President is the only reasonable justification for a midstream change of government. The challenger must, of necessity, run a primarily “negative” campaign, which rips the façade of success off the regime in power. The Kerry campaign has self-defeatingly carried the rules of the primary over into the general election, without either the full recognition of the ruthlessness of the foe they are up against nor clear commitment to show the great evil and harm done the nation by the man in power. The undecided are undecided because they don’t pay attention. It is usually bad news that gets the attention of these good folk.

The campaign clearly lacked the strategic brain needed to keep pace with Mr. Rove. The “no problem” crowd has been wrong. Yet, regardless of what happens with the Kerry campaign reorganization and strategy, progressive forces must rally and stand in the gap, to do whatever it takes to win back our country from the barbarians in power, for the sake of ourselves, our children and our children’s children.

[jaysunb]

1. Good Post !!

n/t

[Malva Zebrina]

2. I agree with all you have said

it is one thing to make speeches over and over aobut the economy, jobs and the failure of the Bush administration to do right, but it is another thing to have Bush NOT respond at all to those things as he ignores it, takes the initiative with lies and smears against Kerry, and goes on and on with the propaganda of the war on terror etc.

Kerry and Edwards keep stressing those issue features, but it is getting to sound like "campaigning" where the other party makes up stuff about the other party and I believe most people could be shrugging it off as "campaign" rhetoric.

Bush on the other hand is sticking to his lies and they are not being refuted. They shouldhave been long ago. Because they have not, he has free reign to continue the propaganda. He is not talking about "issues" and whoever is his advisor seems to understand that the people could care less about the issues. The important thing is the perception of leadership, whether he lies or not. It is obvious that people do not care if he lies--it is only important that they have a bully who will stand in the face of anyone and not back down. He has successfully broadcast that image without a single challenge.

It is a real tragedy that Bush's military service has not been revealed for the sham it is. It should have been done a long time ago.

[Burma Jones]

3. I agree wholeheartedly

We need to start sliming back and the sliming has to come from folks like John Glenn. If we sit on our asses and let this shit happen, then we may as well juat ALL join the fucking Republican party and make the wackos go start a right wing loonie party.

The same loser attitude that lost us the 2000 election is at work again.

[mzmolly]

4. Right on!!! I agree.

Send this to the campaign! :toast:

[ochazuke]

5. Ditto

Bushco are fear mongers: be afraid of Kerry, be afraid of the terrorists. Only Bushco can keep us safe.

Kerry must take aim at that dead-on. Trying to talk about the economy as a come-back seems like a weak strategy. First hit back on the phony fear mongering, then follow up with incompetance on Iraq, economy, etc.

I hope your message reaches the highest levels of the Kerry campaign. I think JK himself would be sympathetic. I have seen him bristle over the Republican attacks when he thought he was off-camera a couple of times. He's a fighter at heart.

[nyhuskyfan]

6. Idealism vs. Realism

Ideally, our candidates would try to be positive, discuss where they stand on the issues, offer some insights, and, yes, once in awhile, criticize the other person for their policies and their plans. Realistically, though, the vast majority of the American people completely tune out on matters of economic policy as soon as they hear the words "economic policy". They need simple smears -- and a platform that can fit on a bumper sticker "More Bombs, Less Taxes". Our party, for all its strengths, can't simplify everything it stands for.

The challenge of trying to enlighten and raise the consciousness of 50 million people by staying above the fray is nearly impossible, but noble. It is less noble to get in the gutter, but in this culture, its more effective. The candidate who comes along one day who can just simply run on ideas and charisma and an honest, optimistic platform without the attacks and smears will be a revolutionary. I hope I see him in my lifetime. I don't want to put too much pressure on Barack Obama just yet, but he has that spark about him -- that's why the GOP sent a hatchet man to run against him to start chopping away now and weakening him for later. So far, it hasn't worked.

The problem we run into is that the Republicans are experts at gutter politics. It's like the old saying -- never wrestle with a pig, you both just get dirty and the pig likes it. I was hoping that Kerry would be able to win by taking the high road most of the time, but it may take some trips to the gutter. I wish it wasn't that way, but it is -- and that's too bad.

[WiseMen]

9. Truth and Character are on Kerry's Side. Kerry will win, with a lot of

help from gutter-fighters standing in the breach.

[lancdem]

7. Very good analysis

We are currently losing the character battle.

[creeksneakers2]

8. I'm with you guys on almost all of this

But I see some sense in talking about the economy for a week. I knew that the Bush attack was about to come last month because Kerry had peaked. The best time to attack is when your opponent is peaking, because when he inevitably drops a few points it looks like the attack is working and the opponent is put on defense. Bush is peaking right about now.

Now isn't the time to make wild charges though. If Kerry gets too bold right away the story is going to be that he's lashing out wildly because he's desperate.

If Kerry talks the economy for a week the race is bound to tighten up a bit. They'll say Kerry is making progress. Kerry can say he has Bush on the defensive about the economy, and get back to the war on terror. The momentum will be behind Kerry.

After all this, I'm hoping Kerry can pull it back to even and we can kick ass on turn out on election day.

[Rabelais]

10. Truth doesn't have to be "negative"

All Kerry has to do is tell the truth with passion a la Byrd and we win.

[WiseMen]

11. Sadly, the truth about W is pretty nasty.

[sangh0]

16. The truth doesn't have to be negative

You don't seem to know what "going negative" means. I believe that Bush*'s character record, and lies will be debated this campaign, but that we will not have to mimic the repukes behavior to make this happen. We have already gotten 80% of the population to believe that Bush* did not tell the truth about Iraq, and they are about to turn their attention to the upcoming election.

You also seem under the misperception that Kerry's campaign is hurting. Bush* and Kerry are tied, and it's right after their convention. Also, due to CFR, they now have equal amounts of money to spend for the rest of the campaign.

You also speak of all the money the Kerry campaign has spent as if it's been wasted. You ignore the millions spent by Bush* and the 527's to smear Kerry, the sum effect of which was to see Kerry's #'s rise during those months, while Bush*'s fell.

[The King]

12. You are right Kerry just needs to prove his case better

and this will be a cake walk.

The Swiftvets can be refuted by the actual documents from Kerry's military service. All Kerry needs to do is release all the documents and it will be the ultimate sandbag. The Repugs have been saying that all of the documents released have been hand-picked and some of the details omitted. Well since the truth is on our side all Kerry needs to do is release them all and prove his case.

This will not only increase Kerry's stature but will show the Repugs as the liars they are. Why in the world would Kerry continue to sit on his proof when it will make him President?

Do it now before it is too late and we are stuck with another 4 years of Chimpy and *.

[sangh0]

18. Yes, a cakewalk

and now that people are hearing about this, it's the perfect time to produce the documentation, so the public can once again hear about Kerry heroic conduct under fire.

This will not only increase Kerry's stature but will show the Repugs as the liars they are. Why in the world would Kerry continue to sit on his proof when it will make him President?

So that people pay attention to it. The media isn't going to toot Kerry's horn, but if the repukes want to drum up a phony, easily refuted scandal, why put a pin in it before people know about it? We want people to hear the pop!

[scarletwoman]

13. You are (sadly) absolutely correct.

This is going to be the dirtiest, nastiest campaign in U.S. history. We are up against a ruthless criminal syndicate who will stop at NOTHING to stay in power.

They can NOT be dealt with as though they are merely other politicians, they are NOT. They are truly evil, soulless, conscienceless warlords intent on total control of our government for their own ends. If our republic is going to survive, they MUST be revealed for who and what they really are!

Will the Kerry campaign take on the task of saving our nation by ripping the masks off these criminals? We're not going to win this with policy statements, this is a battle to the death!

sw

[Leilani]

14. Excellent Post!!!

You have summed up the situation beautifully. I would hire you, if I was part of the Kerry Campaign, because they still don t get it.

The Prez sets the agenda, not the challenger. The Dems have deluded themselves into believing they can run on issues, like the economy, etc.

I will allow myself the first: I told you so! of the campaign.
You do not go to war with a trial lawyer, you take a General.

If Kerry had chosen Wes Clark as Veep, they could have countered the War, Terror issue more effectively.

Of course, Wes Clark would have been attacked & smeared, but his credentials would have propped up Kerry more effectively.

I find it telling, that John Edwards has not been attacked in this campaign, telling me that the Bush/Cheney team does not see him as a threat.

The Kerry Campaign & many here, wanted to run a hopeful, optimistic campaign, appealing to people s better instincts. Some of us saw that the Bush campaign would never allow this to happen.

Karl Rove strategy: go after your opponents strength. Kerry fought in Vietnam; Bush went AWOL.

The only thing left at this point is slash & burn. Is Kerry tough enough & ruthless enough to fight Bush with Rovian tactics?

Time will tell. If they want to win this thing, they better get moving, because time is running out.

[rocktivity]

59. Clark would have put too much military hardware on the ticket

underscoring Bush's accusation that Kerry's military record is negligible and that he can't stand on his own as commander in chief. I think picking Edwards is the one thing Kerry did do right. Maybe they haven't attacked Edwards yet because all he'd have to say in response is "Halliburton."

:headbang:
rocknation

[Mick Knox]

15. Damn good post

I'm suprised you are not getting flamed by the "There are no tanks near baghdad" crowd - but it is the best I have seen on this subject. Great job.

[Blue_Roses]

17. You can't have it both ways

You're saying this:

"It’s National Security, stupid. We may want to pretend otherwise, but an incumbent President can usually determine the debate. In a post-9/11 world with bombs dropping in Iraq, it is impossible to deny Bush his chosen field of battle. The campaign must be fought and won on the field of war on terror and the terror of war, or it will be lost. The failure of the campaign to confront the President head-on 9-11 and Iraq and recent attempts to say “we are moving on to jobs and health-care” is fundamentally misguided."

and then we have a totally different story:

"The focus on security was calculated to erase Mr. Bush's advantage on the issue. But Democratic leaders said the Kerry campaign had become ensnared in a debate that played to Mr. Bush's strength, and diverted him from challenging Mr. Bush on his domestic record.

"He needs to define this election," Mr. Bayh said of Mr. Kerry. "So much of the convention was focused on national security - if that's where the election is, I don't think he can win."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/05/politics/campaign/05campaign.html?pagewanted=2


They are too many damn people trying to tell him what to do because they have gotten freaked out by this convention:eyes:

Kerry needs to get a SELECT GROUP OF ADVISORS and let them advise and to hell with everybody else. We are gonna lose running around looking like a chicken with our head cut off.:argh:

[DemBones DemBones]

21. I think Bayh is full of it. Kerry CAN win votes on security -- only

dittohead RWers think a former cheerleader who likes to dress up in military clothes but has never seen combat is "tougher" than a guy who served in combat and was decorated for heroism.

Only dittohead RWers think a chief executive who ignored the warnings of a major Al Qaeda attack, has since royally pissed off Muslims everywhere by invading two Muslim nations, and has failed to secure our own borders or ports is "better" on security issues.

Kerry must talk about the things Bush* has done that make our country LESS secure and how he would correct those mistakes.

[Leilani]

34. After the Dem Convention

Kerry HAD bested Bush on national security, etc.

It was the Swiftboat smears that hurt Kerry.

We had a month of vicious smears & lies that were not IMMEDIATELY debunked.

[WiseMen]

61. Agreed: No choice but to over-come the Security hurdle first. No point

in asking Bush to play on our turf.

[DemBones DemBones]

19. I hope someone in the Kerry campaign reads DU this week

because they need to "get it" and get ON it. I read that Kerry wanted to address the SmearVet lies right away but his people advised against it. Bad advice! As Clinton told Jon Stewart just a week or two ago, you have to answer/ hit back on every attack. The worst of Lee Atwater's spirit lives on in Karl Rove and his minions, evil men all.

[Snellius]

20. If truth be told too, responsibility is also with the Party as a whole

The Al From/Shrum/DLC crowd has still not learned the lesson of the midterm elections. They are the past. And it's obvious to everyone at this point that McAuliffe has got to go. Except for a few unknown Kerry aides, I haven't seen a recognizable Democratic face on the cable stations for a month. Daschle is still using Bush in his ads and the fighting face of the party seems to be low-key Tom Vilsack. They abandonned Gore when he needed them and I've lost confidence they'll stand behind Kerry if they think he's doomed in the polls. What Kerry is up against is massive -- an incumbent president, media, money, dirty tricks, religious fanaticism, and mass hysteria -- and he can not be blamed too harshly if can't stand up to it alone.

[DemBones DemBones]

22. Yes, if the Dems can't get their act together this time,

I just don't know if it's even worth voting in the future.

[Sensitivity]

23. Absolutely! The party fails Kerry even as Kerry's campaign org limps on

Kerry is the best. The party has been resting on his laurels.

[candy331]

27. Right on post ,I agree wholeheartedly and your words below are what

the Dems don't get.
The failure of the sitting President is the only reasonable justification for a midstream change of government. The challenger must, of necessity, run a primarily “negative” campaign.

Bush has to be shown as a failure, just as his pappy was shown to be!

[Toots]

24. This is a sad post..because it is soo true....

If only we lived in a nicer era..

[sangh0]

25. Perhaps Bush* is the one who is in political danger

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x748271

[Armstead]

26. I agree -- but it needn't be either/or

IMO Kerry has to represent all of those who are angry and concerned about the Bush administration and the GOP.

That means going for the jugular, in terms of stating flat out the problem -- Bush is irresponsible and foolish and arrogent, and he and his crowd are making the world MORE dangerous, not less. And that they are selling out the average people and the poor of this nation to the highest bidders.

However he also needs to present a positive alternative that includes both the economy and national security.

He's got to conatsntly reinforce what ws said at the convention -- that strength and wisdom are both important.

[BootinUp]

28. 100% correct

1. Kerry needs to talk to the American people about his record in the Senate and why his votes were important to him, so they can get to know him and trust him.

2. Pull out all the stops and attack Bush with everything we got.

3. Clear up any confusion on the IWR vote and Iraq. Stop worrying about parsing and just spit it out. Get the surrogates out there with the same exact message.

[bigtree]

29. For most Americans it's the economy, since the security issue is hype

or health care, or education, or the environment.

Don't try to tie us down to this narrow, groundless agenda. That is the course that Bush wants us to take. He would rather we spent all of our time talking about sleaze and slime rather than actually addressing the issues and concerns that most affect Americans.

[WiseMen]

53. I understand. Security is a "necessary" hurdle, but not sufficient.

But remember 2002 mid-term elections. Fear of death trumps fear of
hunger.

[WiseMen]

30. Caveat: The Post-Convention Gap should close naturally.

1. The Glow will fade. Reality from Iraq will raise its ugly head and
"good feeling" about our "President" will be forgoten.

2. Over time the SwiftSmear will become more accepted as SwiftLies.

3. The sheer energy and mass of Kerry's campaign rallies will draw
back many of the undecideds.

4. The cultural force of the upcomming Kerry movies, anti-Bush books
and Vote for Change concerts will help mobilize the progressive
grassroots in a way that will not be matched by Rove.

But we Dems be damned if we keep depending on Kerry's strengths
rather than going after Bush with all the strength and anger
we can muster.

Ask not what Kerry can do for you, but what you can do for Kerry.

[mzmolly]

31. Have you sent this to the campaign?

:hi:

[John_H]

32. When can we move on?

The Kerry campaign says its changed its approach (see Thursday's "inside baseball" stories) and so far it looks like these are more than cosmetic changes to appease the big donors and rank and file dems pissed by the judo chess approach.

Go ahead and bask in the warm glow of being right, if that's what's important to you. But i think we owe it to our candidate to take the talk of a new, more forceful strategy at face value. And we should watch carefully.

[markses]

41. Never: WiseMen will have SIX posts a day about kerry incompetence til NOV

Fucking count on it.

[sangh0]

42. The search button is your freind

.

[markses]

43. Point being?

[quaker bill]

46. But WiseMen was a huge Kerry supporter during the primaries.

I have been largely gone for a while. Apparently I missed something.

[markses]

47. Apparently you did

n/t

[WiseMen]

50. Thanks for those with a memory. Thank You, Thank You.

[homelandpunk]

33. Mary Beth will get a job on Fox with Susan Estrich after coup 2004.

We need a multi-headed campaign chair cormprised of a group of REAL THUGS running this campaign. It's a fucking shame Kerry feels he has to follow tradition and rely on ONE PERSON to tell him what strategies to use...and that ONE PERSON is Mary Beth...nice Mary Beth. This is about winning a position that determines the course of the entire fucking globe.......and we are victims to the tyranny of a worthless tradition of using ONE unelected individual to tell our candidate when and how to fight? G-ZOZ!!
How truly pathetic.

[Sensitivity]

36. Have you seen Mary Beth on CNN? No job on Fox for her, I don't think

Seems very strong, but not very articulate. Or maybe she was just
stumped by oncoming reality.

[Democat]

35. These are three things have disappointed me so far in this campaign

1. I wanted to believe that the media couldn't get away with being more right wing biased than they were in 2000, but they've been a lot worse and now they don't even try to hide it. High profile Democrats have not made much noise about this, they just seem to accept it. The Republicans never accepted it when they thought the media was too liberal - they shouted about it every day and they still do.

2. I was hoping the Republicans wouldn't dare try being even more dirty and lying than they were in 2000, and they've already proven they are far worse today than in the past. This is partially the Democrats fault, because we have not made them pay for any of their dirty tricks, at least not since Clinton left office.

3. I hoped that the Democratic strategists could not possibly still be as weak and seemingly clueless as they were in the last two elections, but they have so far seemed at least as bad. Maybe Kerry will close strong and win, I sure hope so, but waiting until the last two months to start a decent fight seems like a dangerous strategy. The Republicans fought from the first day of the campaign and they will keep fighting all the way through. Someday we will have to learn how to fight with strategy or we really will be irrelevant.

It's disheartening.

#2 on your original list is very important - remember what happened in 2002?

We tried to talk about the economy instead of security and we got destroyed.

[Leilani]

37. As to your point #2

I think Bush/Rove underestimated Al Gore. They were running around California late in the campaign telling people they would win.

If they had known how close it would be, they would have been dirtier.

In this campaign, they knew Bush did not have good numbers, so they had to drive Kerry s down It was the only way they could win.

I was not surprised...I saw them in 1999 lose New Hampshire to McCain in a huge upset.

I agree with you about the media...I wish the Dems would go after them more aggressively.

And the strategists? Forget it. With the exception of Clinton s campaigns, the Repubs have out strategized the Dems for a long time.

[West Coast Democrat]

38. Do us all a favor, and turn off cable news for a while....

watch CBS News or something. You'll feel better about Kerry's campaign.

[unkachuck]

39. yes....

If we can't set the political debate and agenda during this campaign, then the Democratic Party has been betrayed from within or is a political party of the highest incompetance. George Bush is a failed president and we seem to be unable to convey this to the undecided electorate....

Security: Who was president on 9/11? 3000 people and hundreds of billions of dollars have been lost because George W. Bush failed to do his job. On security, Bush has ALREADY been a failure....why can't we say this loud and repeat it endlessly?....

Abortion: You can be anti-abortion and still be pro-choice....the question should be, 'who's going to decide?'....the government or the doctor and people involved? I see abortion as little different than loved-ones sitting and discussing pulling-the-plug on a dying relatives' treatment, 'who's going to decide?'.....the government or the doctor and people involved?....why can't we say this loud and repeat it endlessly?.....

Bush: The Bush familys' history and the neo-cons' agenda for US and the world should be brought forward into the campaign.....why can't we say this loud and repeat it endlessly?....

Lies: Catalog every major Bush administration lie and bring them forth in an organized way.....say it loud and repeat it endlessly....

....now continue on, with economy, social programs, the military, etc...

[markses]

40. Any chance of consolidating all your posts on this

It seems like it's one after another after another after another.

You are a busy beaver, when it comes to anti-Kerry thread. :eyes:

[WiseMen]

49. As Requested: Small Sample of my "Anti-Kerry" Threads since January.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=53070

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=102010

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=116295

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=116385

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=130707

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=157026

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=187736

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=238293

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=328887

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=304177

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=333172

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=394436

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=592522

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=689040

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=712673

[Zen Democrat]

44. You're not comparing apples and apples

Kerry and Bush have both spent MILLIONS on their campaign ads and remained virtually tied in the polls. The Swiftboat Liars campaign was a 527. And the Democrats have the lions share of the 527 money and we'll see what MoveOn and other Dem 527s do with it.

Maybe you should be saying our 527's haven't had ads as effective as the Swiftboaters. But do you know what they have in the can?

We've learned that a relatively cheap ad buy can mushroom in free media airplay. The more negative and ridiculous the better. All you need is for people to stand up and be willing to say whatever it is.

What if we got a bunch of people from the Alabama National Guard on an ad where they all show their faces and say "I served in the Alabama National Guard and I never saw George W. Bush."

Or 9/11 family members to say "I'm not supporting George W. Bush because he had to be forced to appoint a commission to investigate 9/ll and then refused to give open testimony in front of the victims' families."

Or how about some veterans who are out of the service and will say "I'm not supporting George W. Bush because he sent me to Iraq without body armor or a post-invasion plan and I saw fellow soldiers die for his mistakes."

Or injured servicemen to say "I'm not voting for George W. Bush because I was with the National Guard and we received sub-standard medical treatment and don't have VA benefits."

[roseBudd]

65. MoveOn's fatal flaw is that their focus group was us

they ran ads that worked for us, not ads that pushed the right buttons for them

We need guerilla and viral marketing at this point. We need to create buzz like Swift liars did.

We the people can create an issue that brings the media to us using viral and guerilla marketing techniques. Guerilla marketing means we disseminate our message using non-traditional delivery systems. Viral marketing means that the message creates buzz and it propagates exponentially. The computer ushered in the age of print and web based media accessibility to the masses. We are paying a lot of attention to online media and ignoring the most far reaching: PRINT media.
An example of an effective print piece highlighting Bush's failure and most importantly MOCKING him in the process:


high resolution version for printing here:
http://somnamblst.tripod.com /

Put them on car windshields. Hand them out on street corners. Drop them on driveways in the suburbs where the frightened inhabitants are sure to contact the authorities.

We don't need TV buys to get some attention on this issue. We have to undermine Bush's perceived strength. We all are potential disseminators of printed media. We do not need a newspapers permission or lots of money for TV commercials. We all have access to printers, photocopiers and paper. Many of us are very talented users of PhotoShop or Freehand. We all can create print ads like the one above. If we the people can create a buzz with massive distribution of printed ads we will get media coverage. The possibilities are endless regarding this type of grass roots guerilla marketing. Kerry is our product, Bush is the product we must crush.

The Bush administration's complete INCOMPETENCE is key to undermining his strength.

[quaker bill]

45. The "best" candidate is not defined by resume.

The "best" candidate is a live test that requires running an effective campaign to win the office as it's chief measure. Spending 200 million in an ineffective manner does not earn a passing grade.

You are correct however, Kerry cannot concede on the national security front. He needs to go on the offensive there.

However, we should not step aside from the other issues. Many people will vote on their feelings about security, but some will vote on other issues. We will need them all to win.

[gulfcoastliberal]

56. New ad buy will feature medicare premium hike vs * speech

and talks about the "wrong track". I'm all for appealing to seniors (vast majority of whom are reliable dem voters) - I hope this is the right thing. I'm not a rah-raher. When the boat takes on water, it must be pumped out - and a different course plotted.

"A new campaign ad that starts airing Tuesday shows Bush promising in his convention speech to protect seniors, and then points to the Medicare increase announced a day later. "The wrong direction for the country," the narrator says."

http://tinyurl.com/4ldak

[Bread and Circus]

48. They should hire you, and fire some of the idiots they have...

running the Kerry campaign.

Frankly, point for point...this is the most intelligent post I've seen on DU in months.

This "rah..rah" crap on DU has to end. It's disingenuous.

Kerry needs to turn it around and you have hit the nail on the head on all points.

It's also out there in select respectable articles in the press.

Bush is so bad it should be easy to beat him. Trailing in the polls is bad news.

But I don't just blame Kerry, I blame all the Democratic "play it safe leaders" who have failed to get their asses on TV and verbally beat up the GOP/Bush/and the RW GOP propaganda machine.

If Kerry loses, we need to clean house, starting w/ McAuliffe. Get that pretty boy the fuck out of Dodge.

[bvar22]

54. McAuliffe and the DLC should have been...

....shitcanned after 2000. Certainly after 2002.
OTOH: The Democratic Party HAS collected more money than ever. Maybe winning elections doesn't matter to them.


I knew Professional Boxing was dead the first time the LOSER made over a MILLION DOLLARS.

[Bread and Circus]

55. I credit George bush for the record breaking money collection...

not JK or TM

[no name no slogan]

64. Remember Bush/Dukakis 1988? It's Deja Vu in many ways...

This whole summer/fall has me reliving 1988, when I was strongly committed to the Dukakis campaign, starting with the primaries. Sadly, I'm getting the same kind of vibe from this year's Kerry campaign.

By almost any measure, Bush 43 has had one of the WORST presidencies EVER. We've lost more jobs, we're fighting not one, but TWO unwinnable wars, we've alienated the entire planet, and our actions have created a climate that breeds MORE terrorism.

And yet, we're in a statistical tie with the most incompetant president of the last 100 years. Unbelievable.

It reminds me of the SNL sketch from '88, where Dukakis and Bush are debating each other. Bush 41 (played by Dana Carvey) gives his short 20-second "stay the course" speech, which is completely phony to everybody watching. A flabbergasted Dukakis (played by John Lovits) is left to remark, "can you believe I'm LOSING to this guy?", followed by a solid 30 seconds of laughter.

Kerry should me mopping the floor with this assclown, "liberal" media or not. Instead of getting the surrogates out there, hammering away at BushCo's negatives (WHERE THE HELL IS JOHN EDWARDS?!?!?!), they're playing a touchy-feely game of "MINE'S BIGGER" over a pointless, costly and unwinnable war-- a war which over HALF the people in this country do NOT support.

And that RW-tool Nader is at 5% in the polls, STILL! :wtf:

If Kerry's campaign wants to WIN decisively (none of that Clinton plurality BS, I'm talking 50% + 1 here), they need to come out STRONGLY against pointless wars, the fleecing of working people (not just the "middle class"-- not EVERYbody who votes is "middle class"), the HUGE deficit, the anti-worker NAFTA & WTO, and the corrupt medical-governmental-industrial complex that keeps insurance prices sky high, and care quality in the crapper.

You want to be "strong", fellas? How about standing up for issues that affect MAIN STREET, not just Wall Street. What about corporate control of our economy, our lives, our airwaves, our government? People are FED UP with it, and want a change. Not just a different face, but a whole new APPROACH. Yes, the "vision thing".

John Kerry is a fantastic candidate. He should be mopping the floor with the asshat-in-chief. Instead, he's continually fighting these measly rear-guard actions against each little pissant 527/"interest group"/SBVTs, instead of driving at their main line: the utter failure and incompetence of Dubya & co., and the looting of the Federal treasury by the biggest gang of crooks since Nixon.

These are BIG issues, the ones that make voters THINK. Take them on, FEARLESSLY, and watch the support come in.

[I_Hug_Trees]

68. What should Kerry do then

to wipe the floor with him? Should he mention his AWOL status again?

I am sick an tired of Kerry not slapping back, but I dont know what he should do.

[gulfcoastliberal]

51. Main meme I hear among interviews w/ undecideds on NPR

Is "changing commander in chief at a time of war".

Iraq is so critical and has frankly been bungled by the campaign. Kerry needs to wake up on this and as you say, rip the facade off.

All last year everyone predicted this would be possibly the most brutal, nasty presidential campaign in history. In that kind of climate, nice guys finish last!!!

[dave123williams]

52. YES. Hit them low, hit them hard, hit them early.

[OneBlueSky]

57. when the other team is playing Ty Cobb style hardball . . .

you have to counter with some nasty hardballers of your own . . . Kerry needs Carville and Begala at the helm . . . they know how to play the game, particularly the media . . .

[mellowinman]

58. Oops.

Misread your thread.

You're wrong, dude.

[Sensitivity]

60. LOL! My sentiments exactly!

[WiseMen]

62. Battle is not yet won re Campaign management. Keep alert, your input is

good for Kerry.

[unfrigginreal]

63. Agree with everything except your first sentence

If the reports are correct we're getting ready to run the 2002 campaign again. Let's hope that's just planted crap to lull the pukes into a slumber. If not, paraphrasing Yogi, it's deja vu all over again and again and again.

[Kahuna]

66. I agree. As I always said, voters do not replace a war time president..

without a very good reason. The Kerry campaign has not given voters a reason to replace bush as our wartime president. <sic> Especially when he states at the Grand Canyon that knowing what he knows now he would still have voted...... Didn't he know that bush would use that statement to say, aha! My opponenet agrees with me!! :puke: For that statement, Kerry is solely responsible. His campaign does share the responsibility for the other items you listed.

[WiseMen]

67. Hard to say that Kerry answering that trick hypothetical was not a BLUNDER