Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: How Bush can destroy Kerry fast

  1. #1
    Frontline Voice of Reason
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    BigBadBrian's Avatar
    Member No
    51
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    02-09-2013 @ 06:23 AM
    Location
    Lighted Streets on Quiet Nights
    Posts
    10,620
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    276
    Thanked 193 Times in 163 Posts


    Rep Power
    33

    Arrow How Bush can destroy Kerry fast

    How Bush can destroy Kerry fast
    by Dick Morris


    The Democratic Party chose a nominee Tuesday who probably cannot win the White House in November.

    In opting for Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and turning down Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, Democrats have broken from the pragmatism and moderation that dominated their party’s profile under Bill Clinton and Al Gore in the 1990s.

    Their party has now moved back to the liberal extremism of Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis that characterized the 1980s — with the same predictable result.

    It is now up to President Bush to take advantage of this by implementing a three-part strategy in the coming campaign.

    First, his 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.

    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.

    Meanwhile, Edwards never got the money or the momentum to run a decent race against Kerry because Gen. Wesley Clark — remember him? — crowded the field. By the time Edwards got Kerry one on one, the number of primary states stretched his resources to the point where he could not afford it.

    But now, Kerry is a fair and inviting target. Bush has to zero in on him and push him to the left right now. Whether Kerry ever consorted with Jane Fonda is beside the point, but Kerry’s voting record is not.

    Second, while his anti-Kerry ads are running, the president himself needs to make Americans understand that the war on terror is still atop our national agenda. He needs to elevate the sense of threat so that his advantage as a war president begins to count.

    Kerry has also made a big mistake in backing the criminal-justice approach to terrorism, seeking to transform the war on terror into a series of DEA-style busts. 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.

    Pundits say that Kerry’s admirable war record makes national security irrelevant as a campaign issue. They couldn’t be more wrong. His efforts to defund the CIA and his opposition to the funding of the Iraq war are all key targets for Bush.

    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. Bush must use his profile as president to make Americans understand how crucial staying the course in the war on terror is to our safety. Bush has lost a lot of support among women with the war in Iraq. But he can restore that support by stressing the need to make America safe from terror attacks and to stress how important it is to stick to this task.

    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.

    If Bush’s ads and surrogates savage Kerry while the president raises the profile of the war on terror and his foreign-policy team brings the troops home, this race could be over long before either Bush or Kerry is officially designated as the standard bearers of his respective party.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  2. #2
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:06 AM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,679
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,285 Times in 4,714 Posts


    Rep Power
    143
    Toe Sucker spreading shit as usual. As everyone knows, I'm no fan of Judas. But Junior simply cannot distance himself from the fact that he started a war, based on lies, and now 540 Americans (and thousands of Iraqi civilians) are dead as a result.

    Junior is "LBJ", not "Nixon". He doesn't even have the option of being "Nixon" (aside from the criminal nature of his administration) because his credibility on the war is ZERO. Kerry could have been the "Nixon" here and planned troop withdrawals, but he's already talked about committing 40,000 additional troops, which would make him "LBJ" as well.

    Now if both of them would only play that LBJ role a little further and drop out of the fucking campaign, we could get somewhere
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  3. #3
    Wayne L.
    Guest
    Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry can destroy himself politically faster than President Bush can with his TV ads.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  4. #4
    Ford's Daddy
    Veteran
    John Ashcroft's Avatar
    Member No
    56
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    02-01-2012 @ 08:41 PM
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Age
    53
    Posts
    2,127
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts


    Rep Power
    23
    I for one am glad Saddam's gone. Why does that make you so angry Ford? I remember a time when the liberal's considered themselves human rights proponents, is that period over?
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Bush Wants To Destroy Civil Liberties
    By Nickdfresh in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 03-19-2008, 11:04 AM
  2. bush or kerry
    By frenchie in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-28-2004, 06:46 PM
  3. Bush to Kerry...Over
    By Big Train in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-25-2004, 04:53 PM
  4. Bush or Kerry
    By Ally_Kat in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-27-2004, 06:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •