How to Beat Bush by Donna Brazile

[papau]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5851875/site/newsweek/
How to Beat Bush by Donna Brazile
<snip>Message Matters
During the final months of the 2000 presidential campaign, we struggled to create a strong, compelling message on how Gore could stand up and fight for ordinary people and build on the Clinton-Gore record of prosperity. Kerry’s positive convention message of “America can do better” must remain consistent from now until Election Day. A race against an incumbent is a referendum on the direction of the country. Kerry can make the arguments much easier for voters if he’s making a compelling case—either based on a vision for the country (see: ‘Putting People First’) or something about his leadership style (‘A President You Can Trust’).

There is also room for negative message. The Kerry-Edwards ticket needs to find the one, overarching negative message about Bush that you want voters to hear time and time again. Why not say, “President Bush can't be trusted, is too extreme, etc.”? Team Kerry must get up every day and put in place events, developments, news, surrogates that drive the negative message. The campaign should recognize that you are either on offense scoring points and moving the ball downfield or on defense being scored upon. Thus, the Kerry-Edwards campaign must divide each week up like it as an inning and try to score some points.

Minimize Mistakes
In an election this close, the candidate who wins may be the one who makes the fewest mistakes. In the fall, a one-day July story becomes a one-week October story when more voters are paying close attention. Back in 2000, we made some significant errors in the final weeks that either slowed our momentum or placed us on the defense.

Use Candidate Time Wisely
Recognize that nothing makes up for quality candidate appearances and events. Kerry must get to know those voters and what they care about in the so-called battleground states. The local events should highlight Kerry’s national message and tailored to the markets he’s trying to carry on Election Day.

Debates
Don't approach these crucial presidential debates like they are a Harvard-Yale Society debate. This will serve as Kerry’s chance to show voters who he is as a person. They will want to be comfortable with him. Kerry must come across like a next-door neighbor who is respected on the block. Smile. Lots of smiles and absolutely no narrowing of the eyes, sighs or glancing at his watch.

The bottom line is Kerry should feel, look and act like a winner. Voters respond to confidence, just look at Bush and why the race is still narrowly tied. All the traditional political indicators continue to point to a Kerry win in November—the percentage of registered voters who say they will re-elect the president is still low, the right track-wrong track number favors Kerry. And there is one simple truth no one will dispute: Democrats fiercely want to send George W. Bush back to Crawford, Texas.

[kstewart33]

1. This piece was written before the RNC

Important to keep in mind.

[Racenut20]

2. I think we need Carville's opinion, not hers

[realFedUp]

3. We can't afford four more years

and go from there...

America can do better is nice but doesn't sell it.

Kerry does better traveling around, having voters
meet him in person. Edwards does well on tv.

Bush is the biggest flip-flop liar probably in
history and this campaign should have got right
back into their faces with short, crisp facts
about what Bush really is.

Forget the long speeches. Americans just remember
commercials.

[Gloria]

4. Here's what Carville said....

(and Ann Richards, too)....

I wrote this damned thing exactly 1 YEAR AGO.....

http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical/DemMessage91103.htm




A Media Watch Special Report......... September 11, 2003

THE DEMOCRATIC MESSAGE IN 2004: LOOKING BACK TO FIND THE FUTURE

by Gloria R. Lalumia



On August 11, 2003, Former Texas Governor Ann Richards paid a visit to Larry King; a caller asked the following question:



CALLER: We all know that Democratic candidates are reduced to basically soundbytes and ridicule in the media. How can Democrats force attention back to the fact that whether it's the problems with the economy, national security, utility and industrial deregulation are the products of failed regressive Republican Party policies…



RICHARDS: Once our nominee is chosen, the opportunity for getting the message out there is going to be much easier than it is now. Because there's so many candidates it just kind of becomes a clutter. But once that nominee is chosen the biggest problem the Democrats are going to have is choosing a single message and not being all over the place. Because of the Bush record on the economy, on medical care, on education, we have such a wealth of stuff that we can use, that I'm afraid that we're going to get too splayed out and there isn't going to be a concise message. Do you understand? KING: You would make it a one-issue campaign?

RICHARDS: Well, no, you don't do that, but you try to select an issue so that it can encompass more than one or two things and consistently drive that message home

(http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0308/11/lkl.00.html).




SNIP


In the March 11, 2002 Salon Interview with Joan Walsh, Carville was already commenting on what he saw as strong currents in the Democratic party and the nation and the type of candidate he favored:



Carville: “And I think there's a real hunger in the party, and in the country, for someone who's gonna stand up for them, stand up and fight for something.”

Walsh: Who might that be? Do you have a candidate for 2004?

Carville: You know what? I'm for the person who can stand up and articulate where this party ought to go, who can do it in a tough way, who's not saying something one day and apologizing the next. I'll be for that person. (“Carville on His Candidate: The Salon Interview: James Carville”

(http://www.salon.com/people/feature/2002/03/11/carville/index_np.html?x intro only

http://www.angelfire.com/indie/pearly/htmls/carville-salon.html full text).



Within the last few months Carville has talked in more specific terms about the message such a candidate should deliver. In a July 23, 2003 interview with TomPaine.com, Carville argues that Democrats need a “big issue” in 2004:



‘"If it comes to who is going to get a break, people who make $1 million today or young kids who will make the country tomorrow, you don't even have to look."

And that lead to what Carville said was the big issue for Democrats in '04, what he called the Bush administration's reversal of "the generational promise of America – each time we do what we can do to make the next generation better."

"That promise, today like no other time in our lifetime, is under attack," he said. "The idea that we are a society beyond our own self-interest is under attack. We are told America is best when people are interested in ourselves. We know America is better when we're based on a common interest.

"We have a president that is no longer interested in what happens to the next generation. We have a president that is no longer interested in what happens to the promise of America.”’ (“James Carville's Rx For Democrats,” Steven Rosenfeld, TomPaine.com, July 23, 2003 http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8430).



In 1992, “Putting People First” carried with it the idea of reversing years of “losing ground” that many Americans had experienced under Reagan/Bush; Carville’s new twist on “generations” takes the 1992 mantra and connects it to the theme of what the people of this country can expect to leave for their children’s futures. (In my view, Clinton’s signature theme song, “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow” by Fleetwood Mac was used to rev up anticipation for a Clinton presidency rather than the idea of “generations.”) A message of “the generational promise” seeks to reconnect Americans to a sense of “the greater good” and a positive sense of unity as a nation; it takes the “Putting People First” mantra to a higher level and gives Americans the opportunity to consider a broader purpose when they vote.

MORE





PS----Carol Mosely Braun was the ONLY candidate to even come close to this theme.....

[papau]

5. I like Ann and Carville- but Donna also seems to be on track - the "don't

hit back because focus groups get unhappy with negatives" seems to be proven wrong.

But I am sure there is a limit on how mean you can become.

But I do not see the Dems having enough guts in the next 60 days to get within a country mile of that limit.

But they had better get quite close - it will be a new game for Dems - trying to play as down and dirty as the GOP family values crowd.

[hansolsen]

7. Here is one negative message that needs repeating:

George Bush misled the country into war. He lied about the evidence of WMD in Iraq. He approved torture in Iraq and elsewhere. He smeared good men know the smears were lies.

Here is the line I would use every day from now to election day:

George Bush is the least Christian man who ever served in the Oval Office.

We need to make this elcetion about George Bush's character, not his competance. His character is evil, and we must dare to say so. I say so.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

6. "room for negative message"...no shit sherlock...

...weve been seeing that, thats for sure...

[Miss Authoritiva]

8. It's time to Rove Bush.

I don't think it's possible to Rove Bush from the left and the center. We need psyops to Rove Bush from the right and far-right.

And it would have to be dirty as sh*t. Otherwise, Kerry is just playing the Adlai Stevenson of the 21st century.

[thomas_a]

9. Really

Kerry is up against the most ruthless political family in American history; people who make the Sopranos look like the Brady Bunch. He needs to fight as dirty as they do. The future of the country depends on it.


I am getting very discouraged by the Kerry campaign. His deer in the headlights look after the swift boat charges left me wondering if Kerry really wants to be president. When Bush attacks Kerry goes windsurfing.

Instead, Kerry should be out working to minimize the impact of the probabable pre-election capture of bin Laden. This should be part of his standard stump speach. Everytime Kerry speaks he should say "bin Laden will eventually be captured and the President will crow in triumph but don't forget that bin Laden has been free, active and dangerous for the past three years because the President did not devote enough resources to his capture."

[Stuckinthebush]

10. Donna Brazile???

Didn't she run Gore's campaign?

He lost, didn't he? (Well, it was stolen from him actually)

While I agree with a lot of what Donna says here, her most recent job as a campaign guru had a bad result.