A Future Guide of what Democrats can expect from GOP

[FrenchieCat]

I have witnessed so many attacks on Democratic candidates on this board....until I want everyone to remember that we must keep our eyes on the Prize....

As experienced in the past, we can be easily used and confused, it appears.

So just so that we remember history...rather than being bound to repeat it.

If the past is any guide, Democrats should expect that:

-- The attacks will be personal, not issue-based. Personality quirks or flaws will be used to "define" the Democrats so these traits can be easily transformed into laugh lines for the pundit programs and the late-night comedy shows.

-- The attacks will be thematic, rather than specific. For instance, the Democratic challenger will be described as "Clintonian" -- or in Edwards's case an "ambulance chasing trial lawyer" -- rather than someone who supported or opposed a specific policy initiative.

-- The attack machine will be relentless. Every utterance by the eventual Democratic nominee will be examined to see if it fits one of the thematic patterns that have been chosen as effective attack lines.

-- Statements or issues that fit a "theme" will be repeated again and again in every media venue, from Web sites to radio to TV pundit shows to newspaper columns. Every right-wing pundit – and many mainstream commentators – will use nearly identical language until the "theme" becomes "conventional wisdom."

-- The mainstream press will incorporate the attack lines into regular news stories by using the objective-sounding criticism that the Democrat has failed to counter the attack and committed the political sin of letting his enemy define him.

-- Most importantly, it will not matter who the Democratic nominee is. No one is immune. The attack machine will find a thematic pattern for each potential nominee and will pound the Democratic candidate into the ground with it.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/010603a.html

[Democat]

1. I agree, but one question

What is the difference between a "right-wing pundit" and a "mainstream commentator" - aren't the two exactly the same these days?

[RuB]

2. Even so even with all that Al Gore proved a Democrat can still win,

The only thing he did wrong in 2000 was be too nice a guy. I think if he had been a pit bull in the Florida fiasco he would have backed down the Republican liars and thieves even in the Supreme Court. A Democrat who is not afraid to call Bush a liar to his face will win. And a Democrat who asks George a 2 or 3 part question in the debates (or will it be one debate?) will win too. George Bush is an asshole with a temper and Al Gore thought sigh's would reveal that fact. Somehow it must be revealed to America. What fun that would be eh? Dean has the ability to win, if not Dean then Clark. I'll take either one or both!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

3. "Personality quirks or flaws"

That seems to span a wider range. Quirks don't sound like things that would be relevant to being President but certainly there are some personality flaws that might disqualify you for the job. Like let's say you were a lying, phoney:



Isn't that something WE are gonna want to point out?

[mhr]

4. There is No Escape - 200 Million Dollars Buys Mega TV Brainwashing

Don't kid yourself!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. We must all work together

once the nominee has been decided, to talk to as many people as we can. We need to encourage new voters to register, and we need to talk to undecideds. In letters to the editor, we need to refute the lies of the GOP by hitting hard on the issues that matter to folks around us (I have yet to have any repuke rebut my claims about the shoddy way the GOP is treating veterans, for example). I live in a rural area, and work in a nearby small town. Letters to the editor are read by everyone who reads the paper. People still listen to people. I know this will work for rural areas. You folks who live in big cities, give your advice on how best to inform the public.

And whatever happens, don't give up!

[hang a left]

6. Let us not forget black box voting, please.

They can steal the country again, with the media and computer voting, remember California?

[MarianJack]

7. They did this to Clinton in '92!

The Clinton campaign's policy of letting NO negative charge go unanswered for more than 12 hours seems like it was pretty successful!

We have to remember Ted Rall's admonition and be willing to be as nasty as they are AND we have to point out the unfairness of the media.