winterbadger (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
winterbadger) wrote2004-03-09 02:08 pm
winterbadger) wrote2004-03-09 02:08 pm
and people wonder why Republicans are often looked upon with hatred by sensible people
My sister in law sent me this link on Dick Morris's strategy for the president.
"[Bush's] paid media must attack Kerry’s voting record to define him as an ultraliberal. There are likely those in the White House who are urging Bush to run positive ads. That won’t work. Even if positive ads produce a small, short-term bounce for Bush, events soon will come to dominate, and the impact of those ads likely will evaporate.
But if Bush uses the next eight months to educate voters on Kerry’s opposition to the death penalty, his vote against the 1991 Iraq war, his poor attendance record in the past year and his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act, he could put this election away by defining Kerry right now."
Eight months of negative ads openly paid for by the Bush campaign? Yes, let's hope the Repubs are that stupid. And I love how even Morris assumes that any events that take place in the next eight months will be bad news for the president.
"Kerry has not been tested. He was nominated by running in the shadow of Howard Dean. Throughout the fall, all eyes were on the former Vermont governor. When he crashed and burned in late January, Kerry, as the liberal heir apparent, inherited his disappointed voters." Morris seems to forget that Dean crashed *because* Kerry drubbed him severely.
"He needs to elevate the sense of threat so that his advantage as a war president begins to count." That too is monumentally bad advice, as it's just what all of Bush's critics accuse him of already. If he does it now, it will certainly look like politics. Again, let's hope he's this stupid.
"Voters recognize that Bush is right when he says that this is a war against nation-states that sponsor terror, not a hunt for criminal bands in the mountains." Is Morris secretly working for the DNC? I think what we've seen so far is that the American people have only lost faith in the president when he *stopped* making the war or terror about chasing guerillas in the mountians and tried, unsuccessfully, to make it about states. Leaving aside, of course, the detail that fighting terrorism in the 21st century *is* about fighting non-state actors.
"Some of those who have Bush’s ear may urge him to speak more about the economy and less about terror. This would be a big mistake."
Just about the only accurate thing Morris says. Talking more about the economy and trying to act as if he's done anything but run it into the ground would be a bad move for Bush.
"Finally, Bush must begin to pull American troops out of Iraq after the handover in June. He should leave a sufficient number there, in safe, secluded bases, to intervene if the bad guys try to come back in power. But the daily drip of casualties must end.
President Johnson kept the troops in Vietnam and lost. President Nixon was withdrawing them, and he won. "
This makes me want to string Morris up from the nearest lamppost; by all means, let's throw the entire world, starting with Iraq, into the toilet so a lying, stupid, crook can have another four years of lining the nests of his corporate sponsors.
"[Bush's] paid media must attack Kerry’s voting record to define him as an ultraliberal. There are likely those in the White House who are urging Bush to run positive ads. That won’t work. Even if positive ads produce a small, short-term bounce for Bush, events soon will come to dominate, and the impact of those ads likely will evaporate.
But if Bush uses the next eight months to educate voters on Kerry’s opposition to the death penalty, his vote against the 1991 Iraq war, his poor attendance record in the past year and his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act, he could put this election away by defining Kerry right now."
Eight months of negative ads openly paid for by the Bush campaign? Yes, let's hope the Repubs are that stupid. And I love how even Morris assumes that any events that take place in the next eight months will be bad news for the president.
"Kerry has not been tested. He was nominated by running in the shadow of Howard Dean. Throughout the fall, all eyes were on the former Vermont governor. When he crashed and burned in late January, Kerry, as the liberal heir apparent, inherited his disappointed voters." Morris seems to forget that Dean crashed *because* Kerry drubbed him severely.
"He needs to elevate the sense of threat so that his advantage as a war president begins to count." That too is monumentally bad advice, as it's just what all of Bush's critics accuse him of already. If he does it now, it will certainly look like politics. Again, let's hope he's this stupid.
"Voters recognize that Bush is right when he says that this is a war against nation-states that sponsor terror, not a hunt for criminal bands in the mountains." Is Morris secretly working for the DNC? I think what we've seen so far is that the American people have only lost faith in the president when he *stopped* making the war or terror about chasing guerillas in the mountians and tried, unsuccessfully, to make it about states. Leaving aside, of course, the detail that fighting terrorism in the 21st century *is* about fighting non-state actors.
"Some of those who have Bush’s ear may urge him to speak more about the economy and less about terror. This would be a big mistake."
Just about the only accurate thing Morris says. Talking more about the economy and trying to act as if he's done anything but run it into the ground would be a bad move for Bush.
"Finally, Bush must begin to pull American troops out of Iraq after the handover in June. He should leave a sufficient number there, in safe, secluded bases, to intervene if the bad guys try to come back in power. But the daily drip of casualties must end.
President Johnson kept the troops in Vietnam and lost. President Nixon was withdrawing them, and he won. "
This makes me want to string Morris up from the nearest lamppost; by all means, let's throw the entire world, starting with Iraq, into the toilet so a lying, stupid, crook can have another four years of lining the nests of his corporate sponsors.
no subject
My SIL is thinking October Surprise too, but IMO it would have simply been impossible to capture someone like OBL and *not* have it leak out by now. Having dealt with all different parts of the federal government, I'm very skeptical that the sort of totally secret conspiracies that both the conservative and liberal extremes fear could actually be carried out.
no subject
BTW, I tend to like Robert Kuttner (http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/03/10/mud_tossed_at_kerry_might_stick_to_bush/)'s column in the Boston Globe and the American Prospect.
no subject
I quite agree with Kuttner, which is why I think Morris's advice is so stupid. If Bush is going to attack Kerry, he has to do it (as he did against McCain) in secret, with anonymous or even false-flag whispered smear campaigns by telephone, rather than in broadcast or print ads with the "Bush for President" name on them.
Unfortunately, I don't think ther's much chance Karl Rove is as dumb as Dick Morris. Always assuming he isn't in jail for leaking the identity of covert intelligence officers, Rove will probably run a very effective, very nasty campaign.