Prediction: Kerry's unfavorables are going to go through the roof.

[stickdog]

When will Democrats learn that they can't get away with attacking other Democrats with Karl Rove's talking points?

When Lieberman went on TV and basically announced that he loves Republicans and hates Democrats, his unfavorables jumped up about 15% and his national numbers are now rapidly descending into the mid single digits.

So what does Kerry do? He mounts a slightly more subtle Rovian attack on Dean in his typical hyper-nuanced politician's politician manner.

Who in hell is advising this man? Does anyone here really think this strategy will help anyone other that George aWol Bush?

[poskonig]

1. When Tucker is quoting Kerry to attack us, there is a problem.

And Kerry voted against the stupid tax cut and (supposedly) believes the war is crap. What's he thinking?

[vi5]

2. Oh come on.....

Honestly. I'm a Dean supporter but I didn't see anything so out of line as far as Kerry taking Russerts bait on MTP (assuming this is what you are talking about here) with regard to attacking Dean. He didn't say anything that was any worse than what Dean said about Kerry and the entire rest of the democratic field when he was on MTP. It's primary politics and nothing more.

Calling another Dem candidate Roveian because he dares to say something negative about one of his opponnents is just as ridiculous as calling someone unpatriotic because they don't support the president.

[XanaDUer]

5. You took the words right out of my mouth, vi5

Thanks. :)

[stickdog]

6. One big difference. Dean: attacks Dems for being Bush-lite.

Kerry: attacks Dean for not being Bush-lite.

"... and that has made all the difference."

[liberalhistorian]

8. Exactly!

And that's why I'm so tired of the repuke-lite walking-on-eggshells-for-fear-of-upsetting-repukes Dems like Kerry and Lieberman and, to some extent, Gephardt. I wish they would all just go away, especially Lieberman!

[vi5]

12. Attacks are attacks are attacks are attacks...

Honestly I don't give a rats ass what someone is attacking their opponent for it's part of the game. The attitude that when Dean attacks Kerry or anyone else that it's some sort of noble thing but when Kerry or anyone else does it to Dean that it's hitting below the belt is just flat out asinine.

If I'm supporting Dean I'm supporting him because I think he can win and beat Bush and run a good campaign. The only thing I don't like about the other candidates is that they are running piss poor primary campaigns so I can't trust that they will run good general election campaigns. That's it.

The idea that Dean's attacks are more noble and righteous is totally naive. He saw a niche and he captured it. ANd part of the tactic for capturing that was taking the first shots against other candidates. Good marketing, good planning, and good campaigning. And like it or not that is the name of the game at this point. He's proven to me with his campaigning and his organization that he can do some good work. But if you expect me to believe that poor wittle Howard Dean is just standing there minding his own business and keeps getting attacked unrprovoked by other dems than you must take me for a fool.

[stickdog]

13. What are you talking about?

I don't see Republicans using Dean's attacks against Kerry (that he was too complicit with Bush) against Kerry.

But today, here's Tucker on Crossfire scoring points for Bush against a high profile Dem candidate using Kerry's own words.

If you don't see a fundamental difference here, you're as blind as the highly paid idiots who advised Kerry to shoot himself in the foot like this.

[Cheswick2.0]

14. stickdog

does that mean that when Tucker uses Dean's attack against Kerry, it will then be wrong for Dean to have made it?

[stickdog]

17. What is means is that you don't criticize Dems with Repuke ammunition

if you are trying to win the Democratic primary.

Hasn't Lieberman's crash and burn made that clear to everyone?

What do you think undecided partisan Dems who are blindingly angry with Bush thought when they heard Tucker using Kerry's words to score points for Bush against Howard Dean today?

[vi5]

19. I'm sure that

A)Less than half a million people were watching that show.
B)Most who were have already decided their opinion
and
C)The ones that were watching and undecided aren't going to care.

Not sure how many primary campaign seasons you've been through but I've seen all of this crap before every single time and the shit that is going on now is no different and no more heated than it was back then. The only difference is because of the internet everyone has a forum and everyone has an opinion and everyone can make a big deal out of whatever they want.

[stickdog]

25. No, The only difference now is that the Dem base is royally pissed at

both Bush and the Dems who won't stand up to him.

Once again, Kerry's advisers have misread the audience. But this time the audience isn't just going to yawn; it's going to turn on him.

Here's another example. Yesterday Kerry said, "Presidential races aren't won in the summer."

But his advisors are wrong on this. Dem activists have boundless energy to work on ousting Bush RIGHT NOW. And to get the most out of highly motivated small donors, you need to start your fundraising early because one can only afford to give so much at a time when one is living paycheck to paycheck.

[KC21304]

28. As I said before, thank you for your concern, but I think Kerry

can take care of himself. Talk to you in a few weeks.

[Cheswick2.0]

23. I don't think any of them should be attacking each other

I know what you mean about the repug talking points.... however I am not to found of the attacks Dean has leveled at other democrats. He is also part of the problem.

[stickdog]

27. This I can agree with. However, the Dem Party needed a kick in the pants

after the 2002 DNC/DLC "say nothing" debacle.

[vi5]

15. They've staked out different sides of the aisle.....

Plain and simple. I don't agree with Kerry's side but the fact is that this is primary politics and nothing more.

This is no different than the media using Bradley's words against Gore in the general election back in 2000.

None of this would be an issue if Dean didn't take the approach that he did and made his name attacking the other candidates. I have no problem with him having done that (obviously since he won my support) because I think it was smart politics. BUt I sure as hell am not going to whine and cry when the other candidates fight back and I'm not going to blame them when someone else use's their words without their permission or knowledge.

[stickdog]

18. When did Bradley attack Gore with Republican talking points?

Just before his campaign shipwrecked, right?

[vi5]

20. Bradley's entire campaign was based...

On Gore being too republican like or too wooden and most importantly he repeated the republican party line that Al Gore was dishonest. And he honed that message of dishonesty for the entire primary campaign and then the repukes took the message back and used Bradley's own words against Gore.

[stickdog]

22. Right. Repukes used one of Bradley's two attacks against Gore, namely

Gore's supposed dishonesty.

This attack was made and then amplified out of pure desperation.

And it doomed Bradley's primary campaign in the eyes of the faithful.

[Pepperbelly]

35. You guys seem to think that you can say whatever you want about others

but when they criticize your boy, you whine like babies.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

[stickdog]

39. Yeah, it's all just one big whine from a bunch of whining babies.

Thank God you posted that. But where's the picture of the whining baby?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KC21304]

4. So nice of you to be concerned, but I think I will wait and see

for myself what unfolds.

Please delete.

[Egnever]

7. I Agree with your assesment completely

Till yesterdays performance on MTP i held John as a strong #2 or #3.
After it I would just as soon have lieberman as Kerry in office.

Its not that he went after dean after much proding to do so its the way he did it.

My taxes are rollbacks deans are tax hikes!

I dont regret MY war vote.

Well let me explain.......

Sry politician through and through I have had more than i can stand of the tiptoe arround and try not to offend anyone politicians. After yesterdays performance if he or lieberman get the nod I walk away from the democratic party forever

[maggrwaggr]

9. I'm with you

It's pandering, not leading. You don't say what people want to hear, you say what needs to be said.

If the candidates other than Dean don't get that, well, then to hell with them.

[KC21304]

33. What happened in the last 3 hours ?

You said in another thread at 2:18 pm today that if Kerry got the nomination you would hold your nose and vote for him. Now you say you will walk away from the Democratic party forever. Whew !!!!

[stickdog]

36. Tucker used Kerry's (Rove's) words to attack another Dem on

Crossfire.

That pisses off the angry Democratic political junkies who make up about half of Crossfire's audience.

But I suppose you and Kerry would just tell us to "get over it," right?

[comradebillyboy]

10. kerry's criticism of dean was hardly over the top

it was pretty civil as a matter of fact. dean is my guy, but why should he be on a pedistal. the pukes certainly will attack with everything they got. i think a good competative primary where there is a thorough debate of the issues is a good thing for all. it gives who ever wins the experience in debating his positions needed in the general election.

all in all the dem candidates have been mostly positive with regard to the inter party debate. leiberman is the only one who praises bush.

[stickdog]

11. Dude, he could have been attacking Moseley-Braun for all I care.

You don't attack a Dem candidate with Republican talking points if you want to make points in the primary season.

[gulliver]

16. Kerry's MTP was fairly awful.

Kerry needs to attack Bush and DeLay, not Dean. Success in attacking Bush is what matters most in a Dem candidate, IMO.

Kerry hit Dean on foreign policy experience, comparing Dean to Bush in that regard. Then Kerry characterized Dean's proposals as causing tax hikes on the middle class.

Both Tucker Carlson and Judy Wooodruff hammered Dean with Kerry's words today. If these two guys need to compete, they should compete by showing which of them can do the most damage to Bush. Both of them need to shut up when it comes to the other.

[stickdog]

21. Both of Kerry's attacks were pure, unalterated Rove vs. any Dem nominee

Regardless of who wins, Rove's themes one and two will be:

1) "we're stronger on defense"

and

2) "they're going to raise your taxes"

Even assuming Kerry wins, these are the exact attacks he himself will face.

So why is KERRY HIMSELF giving these bullshit Republican talking points credence on national television?

[KC21304]

29. I am confident that Kerry will be able to handle Karl Rove

and anything Karl Rove throws at him. Just tell your guy Dean to get himself ready for Kerry and not worry about what Kerry will do once he gets the nomination.

[stickdog]

32. Tell your guy Kerry that his campaign will be stillborn

if he keeps attacking other Democratic candidates by giving credence to the exact same attacks Rove will mount against any Democratic candidate, including him.

When Kerry's unfavorables jump up ~10% in the next NH poll, remember where you heard it first and how you reacted like a typical elitist Kerry insider to my insightful prediction.

[KC21304]

37. Talk about GOP talking points !! Their favorite name for Dems

is elitist. Hmmmmm.

[stickdog]

40. Really? Are you sure that's not unique

to your neighborhood?

[virtualobserver]

31. Why, because Bob Shrum is an idiot.

and Kerry listens to him.

[GalleryGod]

24. Prediction: If Holier Howard Does Not Get the Nod-All the Deano's WALK

Just like McCarthy's kids and the McGovernites.,before them.

Glad that DU will archive these threads for NEXT year's Archeological
"dig".

[stickdog]

26. And the Democrats will lose big. And the status quo will have been saved

by Democratic insiders once again!!!

Huzzah!!!

[Karmadillo]

42. How will Dean undermine the status quo?

I enjoy your posts, Stickdog, but I have to admit I'm a little baffled at the intensity of those who support Dean as something out of the ordinary (Kucinich supporters would seem to have a much better case). I'm not even sure Dean is to the left of Kerry. While Kerry can certainly be excoriated for his vote on Gulf War II, he does have a liberal record that matches and possibly betters that of Dean.

Here's why I'm not so sure Dean is going to upset the status quo as much as you seem to hope:

1. Dean apparently has no intention of touching the defense budget. He has pointed out he's not a dove. He supported the first Gulf War, he supported the war in Afghanistan, and he apparently was OK with US unilateral action in Gulf War II if the UN failed to enforce its own resolutions (what I've read here at DU on this last issue is contradictory, so maybe his position was more nuanced).

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/universalhealing/message/9463

<edit>

Even as Joe Lieberman (news - web sites) berates Dean for pulling the
Democratic Party too far left, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich attacks him
from the left, as nothing more than another Clinton--a Democrat in name only.
"If someone wants to be a fiscal conservative, a good place to start is the
Pentagon (news - web sites) budget and he's already taken it off the table,"
rages Kucinich. (Dean on the military: "I don't think you can cut the defense
budget.") "How in the world can you be for peace when you won't touch a
Pentagon budget that needs war to expand, that needs war in order to justify
itself?"

more...

2. His health plan is far from Kucinich's single payer plan and isn't qualitatively all that different from Kerry's (as far as I can tell and if I'm wrong I apologize in advance).

3. He wants to rollback the entire Bush tax cut, even those cuts and credits tossed as a sop to the middle and lower classes. Maybe the status quo would be better upset by Kerry's proposal to soak the rich by raising their taxes and creating greater progressivity in the tax code by letting the middle and lower classes keep what they've been given.

4. Here's an excerpt from a recent Norman Solomon piece that paints Dean as a Rockefeller Republican. If it's accurate, Dean and the status quo are pretty much one and the same. If Solomon is wrong, please explain where (and I'm not being flip--if Dean if more of a liberal than he appears to be, I'd be happy to know it).

http://www.progress.org/2003/sol125.htm

<edit>

Plenty of evidence backs up that comment by the former Vermont governor to the New York Times Magazine a few months ago. The self-comparison with Clinton is apt. "During his five two-year terms as governor," the magazine noted, "Dean was proud to be known as a pragmatic New Democrat, in the Clinton mold, boasting that neither the far right nor the far left had much use for him."

Of course, what a mainstream publication is apt to call "the far left" often includes large progressive constituencies. In the battle for the '04 Democratic presidential nomination, Dean clearly finds grassroots progressives to be quite useful for his purposes. But is he truly useful for ours?

This summer, many news stories have identified Howard Dean with the left. But Dean's actual record verifies this assessment from University of Vermont political science professor Garrison Nelson: "He's really a classic Rockefeller Republican -- a fiscal conservative and social liberal." After seven years as governor, the Associated Press described Dean as "a clear conservative on fiscal issues" and added: "This is, after all, the governor who has at times tried to cut benefits for the aged, blind and disabled, whose No. 1 priority is a balanced budget."

Economic justice has been a much lower priority. During the early 1990s, Dean spearheaded a new "workfare" state law requiring labor from welfare recipients. The Vermont program later won praise as more humane "welfare reform" than what occurred in most other states. But in the summer of 1996, Dean put his weight behind the final push for President Clinton's national "welfare reform" law -- a draconian measure, slashing at an already shabby safety-net while forcing impoverished mothers to work low-wage jobs.

While some other Democrats angrily opposed Clinton's welfare reform, it won avid support from Dean. "Liberals like Marian Wright Edelman are wrong," he insisted. "The bill is strong on work, time limits assistance and provides adequate protection for children." Dean co-signed a letter to Clinton calling the measure "a real step forward."

Gov. Dean did not mind polarizing with poor people, but he got along better with the corporate sector. "Conservative Vermont business leaders praise Dean's record and his unceasing efforts to balance the budget, even though Vermont is the only state where a balanced budget is not constitutionally required," Business Week reported in its August 11 (2003) edition. "Moreover, they argue that the two most liberal policies adopted during Dean's tenure -- the 'civil unions' law and a radical revamping of public school financing -- were instigated by Vermont's ultraliberal Supreme Court rather than Dean." The magazine added: "Business leaders were especially impressed with the way Dean went to bat for them if they got snarled in the state's stringent environmental regulations."

According to Business Week, "those who know him best believe Dean is moving to the left to boost his chances of winning the nomination." A longtime Dean backer named Bill Stenger, a Vermont Republican who's president of Jay Peak Resort, predicted: "If he gets the nomination, he'll run back to the center and be more mainstream."

more...

[stickdog]

49. Look at the big picture which is HOW Dean's doing it.

The Democrats need what Howard Dean has got if they want to revitalize the Party. Unless you are protective of the status quo, you have to come to terms with at least this much. And if you are further left than Dean, you should be particularly thrilled about his use of "direct action" people-powered ideas and small donation political fund raising to get his message out. Even if a Dean Presidency fails to live up to the aspirations of those who supported him, it will be worth its weight in gold to future progressive moments because of its groundbreaking strategies in grassroots' empowerment.

So, unless you are intent on protecting the rich-get-richer status quo in this country for the foreseeable future, stop trying to throw a monkeywrench in Dean's grassroots explosion out of petty jealousy that he, and not your guy, happened to be the one who was saying the right things at the right time with the right tone.

We need to take back our country RIGHT NOW, and then never let it get away from us again. We put Dean where he is today, and if we just nuture the power we've unleashed with a modicum of care, we'll be able to replace him with someone even better in 2012 (or even 2008, if Dean somehow manages to forget who made him).

Every committed progressive should see at least this much hope in Dean's campaign.

Remember when you were a young activist and thought "maybe it has to get worse before people wake up"? Well, I've got a newsflash for you. That day is here. It has gotten a HELL OF A LOT WORSE IN JUST THE LAST 2 1/2 YEARS. And many of us are so fucking awake now that we hear every backroom whisper like it was a train going by. And we're starting to make so much noise ourselves that a few more Americans are stretching, wiping their eyes and then joining our little festival of human alarm clocks every single day.

Dean facilitated us by saying what we desperately wanted to hear and acting like a true public servant rather than a corporate shill, a mobster, a handled "product" or an inside "player." But WE are the ones using OUR power again, and that transcends Dean, all of the other candidates and even the entire Clinton era. And it's not going to be easy to put this genie back in the bottle. This -- and not Dean per se -- is why our current corporate masters are already shitting bricks about Dean's excellent adventure.

[Eloriel]

53. BRAVO! BRAVO!

Excellent. Magnificently said.

Only one thing I'd take exception to:

The Democrats need what Howard Dean has got if they want to revitalize the Party.

Far as I can tell, the Dems haven't wanted to revitalize their party for quite some time. However, they are currently in a position to see what's happening AROUND them, without their involvement or permission and beyond their grasp, and they're either going to "get it" or be OVER as a party. The corporatist love-fest days are nearly over. The PEOPLE are speaking, loud and clear. And it will be politics like it was intended to be, NOT the sorry-assed excuse for it that we've had for too many decades now. And if we're very lucky, and keep making our voices heard, it will be GOVERNANCE like it was intended to be too. My oh my what a revolution that will be.

You're right -- progressive should be dancing in the streets. What are a few policy differences when you've got someone who (1) can GET elected (no offense meant to Kucinich) and (2) gives us our party and our country back, to a degree we've never seen in our lifetime?

(That was the whole point of my thread from the other day: It's not about policies anymore.)

Eloriel

[DemBones DemBones]

45. Are you saying you'll only vote for the Dem nominee if it's Dean?

After a number of threads asking everyone else to pledge their loyalty to voting for Dean if he's the nominee, shouldn't the Dean supporters pledge to vote for the nominee?

It seems that the Dean supporters have heat tolerance problems already and it's only Labor Day.

[stickdog]

48. Like Dean, I am a pragmatist.

I'm more concerned about the DLC supporting Dean if he wins the nomination. I still haven't heard that pledge.

The vast majority of Dean supporters will do anything necessary to smush Bush.

[Upfront]

30. Dear God

your right. I walked away from Kerry as my 2nd choice. How could I have been so dumb? Kerrys performance on MTP played right into Roves hands.

[Forkboy]

43. Thats funny

but when they were polled here on DU the overwhelming second choice of Dean supporters was Kerry.

[Khephra]

46. Sorry! BUZZ! You're wrong on that one

We've had polls here and post after post from Dean supporters who have said they'll back whoever wins the primary. Sure, some won't, but stop it with the false stereotypical paintbrush plays.

[quinnox]

34. Reminds me of the "prediction" that Kerry will drop out at the

end of September. Betting that aliens land on the white house lawn would have better odds.

[stickdog]

38. Care to give me 20 to 1 odds that Kerry's NH unfavorables will

jump up 10%+ as result of his MTP performance in the next round of polls?

I've got a $50 donation to Kerry vs. your $1000 donation to Dean ready and waiting.

Unless you think aliens are landing soon, this is just money in the bank for Kerry, as far as you are concerned. Right?

[quinnox]

41. We'll see

No money bet though, I don't contribute to political campaigns.

[Cocoa]

44. it would help to know what you're talking about

what were the attacks, and how were they Rovian?

[stickdog]

47. Here ya go

http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=260452#260858

[Cocoa]

50. might as well paste them again

makes it easier to discuss, you know?

21. Both of Kerry's attacks were pure, unalterated Rove vs. any Dem nominee

Regardless of who wins, Rove's themes one and two will be:

1) "we're stronger on defense"

and

2) "they're going to raise your taxes"

Even assuming Kerry wins, these are the exact attacks he himself will face.

So why is KERRY HIMSELF giving these bullshit Republican talking points credence on national television?



My comments:

1)Kerry's argument was perfectly valid, and in fact Rove CANNOT make it against Dean. He said that governors without foreign policy experience will not be prepared to face the challenges we will face. He used Bush as an example! Rove cannot say this, because that would mean that Bush was unfit when he took office. It's true about Bush, but Rove won't campaign on that.

Note that I don't necessarily think this is true about Dean. Clinton was very competent in my opinion in foreign policy, and he was just a governor with no foreign policy experience.

2)Kerry's tax position is sound, and any differences between the dems on taxes won't matter anyway. All the dems propose reversing at least some of the tax cuts. Rove will scream "they're going to raise your taxes" at Dean, Kerry, Lieberman, whoever wins the nomination.

[stickdog]

51. You are missing my point.

Kerry gave these arguments his stamp of approval, even going so far as to use the 4000% middle class tax increase bullshit the White House came up with for Dean's first MTP appearance.

So what happens when Rove pulls the same crap on Kerry? I'm sure there is a single individual somewhere whose taxes will go up "150%" or some such under Kerry's plan.

And how does reinforcing the meme that Democrats are weak on defense help Kerry? He needs to point out his strength vs. Bush on this. He needs to say. "Well, of course, no Dem could do worse than Bush and all have good ideas but I'm the one with the knowledge, experience and policies that will keep America safest."

We all know Dean or Kerry would be far better than Bush. So by comparing Dean to Bush, he lets Bush off the hook for his horrid foreign policy decisions.

[Cocoa]

52. this whole kind of argument is way too contorted

The candidates that are effective in getting their message across are the ones that take their positions firmly, and defend their positions from both sides.

Kerry's difference with Dean on the tax cuts is an actual difference. They are simply proposing different policies. If Kerry refused to challenge Dean on this REAL difference, for the very amorphous reason that it would help Bush later, he'd come across as incoherent.

I want the candidates to be crystal clear on as much as possible. I don't want to sit here wondering what the hell they are all talking about. It's the way I feel about a certain unannounced candidate that shall remain nameless, and it's not a favorable feeling.

Regarding the "meme" that Democrats are weak on defense, that's not Kerry's argument at all. He's not saying the Dems are weak on defense, he's saying Dean and Bush are. Since he mentions Bush, this means that he doesn't even suggest that it has anything to do with the stance on Iraq. He's saying that an unqualified hawk is just as dangerous as an unqualified dove.

That's a very important message, that security does not depend on eagerness to go to war.

[stickdog]

55. And the 4000% White House bs? And the Dean = Bush in foreign policy

comparison?

Devoted Dems hate Bush for hundreds of great reasons. The candidate who will win this thing is the candidate who can make Bush look the worst in comparison. Is that clear?

But Kerry propped up Bush to get at Dean. There is nothing convoluted about this. He attacked Dean with Rove's talking points #1 and #2.

It was a bad strategy, and it will backfire.

[Eloriel]

54. Stickdog

Sigh.

You have the patience of a saint. I just wanted to tell you that there ARE people reading this (I'm one) who not only "get it" what you're trying to say, but know you are absolutely spot on.

As for the others. . . . What can I say? Dense? Stupid? Obstinate? Simply unwilling to hear? Take your pick.

I for one deeply resent it when I hear RNC/DLC talking points coming out of ANY Dem's mouth, no matter who it is. For it to be a Presidential candidate is beyond the pale. With this clever little move, Kerry has put himself in as the same league as Lieberman on that score.

Eloriel