Frank-ly speaking - Kerry blew election by not going negative

[liberalpragmatist]

By Andrew Miga
Friday, November 26, 2004

WASHINGTON - One of Sen. John F. Kerry's staunchest campaign supporters, U.S. Rep. Barney Frank , said Kerry crippled his presidential bid by refusing to go negative against President Bush beginning at the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

"George Bush ran a better campaign than John Kerry ," Frank said in a Herald interview.

"I think Kerry made a mistake. I think they should have attacked Bush more at the convention, raised the issues more,"
added Frank (D-Newton). "I think they underestimated the power of the negative this year."

Frank, stressing he was speaking in hindsight, said the Bay State senator "wasted" a golden opportunity to expose Bush's weaknesses during the DNC with a national audience tuned in. Kerry instead focused on his Vietnam War record at the convention.

http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=55974

[MichiganVote]

1. It's over. Time to hear some steps toward reformation of the Dem's

[illflem]

7. Kerry blew the campaign

by assuming most people had more intelligence than they really do and not explaining himself at a 4th grade level. Big example is the "First I voted against it, then I voted for it" line that bush was attacking on right till the end. It would have been so easy for Kerry to explain there were two bills, one that was fiscally responsible and the other deficit producing but he never explained in simple terms like that at all.

[MichiganVote]

19. Perhaps, but shall we rely on one candidate as the scapegoat?

Kerry did explain there were two bills. The media, the GOP, did not.

The election is over. What do you want to see happen between now and 2006 or 2008? Those are the only questions that matter now.

[Ardee]

2. Barney is one of my favorite politicos

But it certainly was a negative campaign. Frank is saying Kerry should have gone negative sooner than did Bush, what a freakin world!

[ClassWarrior]

3. Cept Kerry didn't blow anything. He ran a masterful campaign and won.

Bush**, on the other hand, blew Rove.

NGU.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

6. Would you think me forward if............

.......I said I love you?

[ClassWarrior]

9. Ya know, I've grown kinda fond of you too, OLL...

:loveya:

NGU.

[struggle4progress]

4. Usually gotta love Barney! But the issue really isn't whether ...

... Kerry "should have attacked Bush more at the convention" or refused to go negative: the issue is whether the Democrats will start (now, immediately, and today!) standing up against * and will work tirelessly with the grassroots to ensure constant coverage of Democratic opposition to Bushista extremism and to push for public awareness of the alternatives offered by the Democrats.

[emulatorloo]

5. Funny, much polling I saw said people thought Kerry was too negative

and more negative than Bush. . .

here is an example from Pew Research. . .you will find other examples if you look for them.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=879

[dave502d]

8. The voting system won not B*,On paper Kerry would have Won. n/t.

[saracat]

10. Have you ever met Barney?

He is a self rightous conceited jackass. I thought I was going to love him. Boy what a disappointment. And how typical that he would jump on the DLC bandwagon.The only true thing he ever said was that the only time he ever voted for an honest and uncorrupted politician was when he voted for himself the first time he ran. He hasn't voted for one since.

[BlueEyedSon]

11. Kerry did not blow the campaign, They won the propaganda war

because they own the media.

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October.

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html

[dreadneck]

12. Don't underestimate the power of the human a$$hole

Just look at the influence Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have over millions of voters. They've pulled political discourse right into the toilet. The turds.

[Lefty48197]

13. We need an absolute fireball for a candidate next time

Take no prisoners. Pull no punches. There's just too much at stake to go the way of Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. All great guys, but none really seemed to have any fire in their belly. We need somebody with gumption.

[BlueCaliDem]

14. We Did! But The Iowa Blew Him Off In The Primaries.

Howard Dean. One big human fireball that told it like it was, and an enjoyment to watch, when a Republican plant heckled him at one of his stops, and he lashed right back out at him!

The media went totally negative on Dean for "showing that temper" (forget the pass they gave Dick "Foul-Mouth" Cheney on the Senate Floor!), and showed that piece at least a ga-zillion times on television with their creative "tsk-tsking", and faces that looked as if they'd been sucking lemons all day!

I truly couldn't see anything wrong in what Dean did. He spoke the truth, and at least didn't have the heckler "resolutely" escorted out, as the RWers did the hecklers that had gotten in to see Bush speak (posing as RWers).

One mother had gotten in this way, as Laura Bush was speaking, and while the Faux First Lady was saying, that the Iraq war was a good war to fight, this lady (I forget her name), shouted out: "If this is such a good war, why not send YOUR daughters to Iraq?!"

The woman wasn't only escorted out--she was arrested!

[mazzarro]

16. Before the Iowa caucus blew him off, the DLC went into overtime

to undermine Howard Dean - and in the process denied us of a true leader!

[BlueCaliDem]

23. I'm with you on that, Mazzarro...

...Dean would've been the perfect candidate against this administration; the "yin" to Bush's "yang".

He wasn't part of the "Washington Establishment"; therefore, wasn't prone to be easily bought, IF he ever could be bought, and wasn't part of the DNC, nor the DLC which both refused to back him.

His twelve years as governor of Vermont shows a strong track record; he was no elitist, and he would've lashed out just as hard at any RW attack machine if they dared lash out at him.

Yes. America was denied a truly good leader, when our own party turned their backs on him.

[Lefty48197]

17. I didn't see the fire in Dean in 2004

His supporters had a lot of passion, and I think that helped carry Deal to the success that he did attain. His supporters kept telling me that he was going to inspire me, but it didn't happen. We need a Harry Truman type. One that tells it like it is. Let the chips fall where they may. Even Dean seems too reserved for what I'm now seeking.

[BlueCaliDem]

22. Not Seeing the Fire in Howard Dean in 2004...

...is a matter of perspective, I guess, but I believe you're wrong in saying, that it was the passion of Deaniacs that helped Dean gain the success that he did.

It was Dean the anti-Iraqi war presidential candidate and his own no-nonsense fiery passion; his unapologetic open stance against the war in Iraq; his telling-it-like-it-is with a "to hell with subtleties" attitude, that inspired us Deaniacs.

He wasn't afraid. He stood up for what he believed, and didn't dodge any questions that came his way, no matter how hard. He was the first to claim that he didn't believe that finding, and capturing Hussein days after Saddam was captured, would make America, nor the world safer and didn't care that a statement like that was "politically correct", and although not one other presidential candidate dare do that on national television, Dean boldly did, and Dean is now vindicated.

How is that not telling it like it is?

Howard Dean was the Democratic "equivalent" of Bush--only with MORE brain power, and mercurial wit.

I guess Bill Maher was right, when he said on his now-axed show, Politically Incorrect, that the American people don't want a President who tells the truth. They want to be lied to.

Watching Howard Dean go down in the Democratic Primaries (some at the 911truth.org speculate that the DNC and the RNC had made a deal to take down any Democratic candidate strong enough to win from Bush so Bush would get another four years, and secure the cover-up of what really happened on 9/11/2001--and Dean was a formidable opponent; most likely the most formidable from the 9--ask the college students that came out in droves and with passion for him the moment he arrived on campuses across the nation ), I'm beginning to believe Maher was right.

Apparently, American people 30 and up years, don't want a candidate who tells them the truth.
Apparently, American people 30 and up years, can't handle the truth.

[bobweaver]

15. Ds should have done it the same way as Rs

The Rs shrewdly used 527 groups like "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" to trash Kerry while Bush himself stayed above it until around the time of the 2nd debate, then he started attacking Kerry directly himself. The Ds should have used 527 groups to attack Bush much earlier and much harder, without Kerry himself appearing in the ads. And the entire DNC was an informercial for Kerry while they hardly mentioned Bush at all... all speakers should have attacked Bush a little in their speeches, with everyone making the same point - in the style of the Rs.
As far as firebrands, the only ones I've seen that the Ds have going are Jesse Jackson, Howard Dean and Jim Hightower.

[Eric J in MN]

18. Why wasn't MoveOn able to do that? NT

NT

[BringEmOn]

20. Kerry asked them to remove their ad.

[newyawker99]

21. Hi bobweaver!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[sans qualia]

24. Negativity is something that idiot knows a lot about

Ugh... Barney Frank.

[Done]

25. Stop moving to the middle

The democrats need to define and defend liberalism and stop letting the republicans define it for them.

Done