Bush Strategy: Lead with your Chin? (VANITY-ish)

My febrile mind | February 3, 2004 | Daniel J. Phillips (BibChr)

[BibChr]

So the Bush campaign puts out some great ads. Then what absorbs every news outlet for the entire news cycle?

Anchors, talking heads, grieving families of 9/11 victims, firefighters, all shaking their heads and lamenting about how terrible, unfortunate, cynical, and generally awful it is for President Bush to (sing it with me) "exploit this tragedy to score political points."

Polls are run, numbers mount against the President, and this is the story that is sold to America from shore to shore.

Now, please, a show of hands:

How many of you could have seen this coming?

Okay, so... all of you. Me, too.

Here's my question: what was the Bush strategy? Didn't they know what was going to happen? How did they allow themselves to be (as usual) put on the defensive?

Why didn't they have firefighters, victims, soldiers, citizens and others lined up and positioned all over to give supportive messages?

Who are the conservative James Carvilles, George Snufflupaguses, and Paul Begalas to be all over the media, boldly and unapologetically keeping the President's perspective front, center, and dominant?

Instead, we here at this conservative forum all agree how nutty the Dims are. Conservative talk radio shows say the same. Bush's campaign manager appears briefly on conservative Hugh Hewitt to agree, yes, it's a valid topic to discuss.

But conservatives aren't the ones to be won, primarily.

My point: again and again, Republican campaigns put out a timid thought or two, are jumped all over, appear totally unprepared and blindsided, and end up either apologizing or looking darned apologetic. The point, however valid it might have been, is lost in the roar and thunder of the left.

Is that about to happen again?

Sure hope not.

/c8

[Loyal Buckeye]

Who, other than the RATs and the liberal-RAT-media, is complaining about the ads? The more they complain, the more the ads are viewed, and the better it will be. GWB is receiving great play on the ads for the $$$'s expended.

A gentle reminder of 9/11 is not bad. The country needs it and the RATs have no answer except for a bunch of bitching.

[Owen]

First of all, buddy, they were focus group tested. They target who they need to target. That they enrage the Left is GOOD. They are airing in the BattleGround States and they focus group tested well there. That they don't test well in liberal states is, again, GOOD.

The right response from the GOP to this is to tell them more are coming. And all you viewers, you can see them on cable news. So tune in there.

Say that and watch how quickly ABC and CBS stop talking about them.

[BibChr]

Who? ABC, CBS, NBC, AP, Reuters, New York Post... and on and on.

I hope you're right. But if every time it's aired, it's framed with agonized-looking mourners, dabbing at the corners of their eyes, shaking their heads, moaning about how terrible and low this is of the President -- won't that pair the GOOD message with the BAD spin?

Dan

[Dog]

Stop writing doom and gloom vanities and watch the reaction of the media.....they are screaming for Bush to pull the ads....IT HIT A NERVE!

[LS]

Dan, you need to realize that

1) No one watches the talking heads shows. No one. Their numbers are slightly higher than a couple of women's soccer matches.

2) The ads are wonderful. If you're not a die-hard Dem union thug, these ads will be very effective.

3) Bush doesn't need to be heavy-handed. Quite the contrary, I think a bunch of pre-arranged 9/11 people would have indeed made it look political. Now, once again, the Dems look like little whining babies.

4) Get ready for a heavy dose of these types of ads while W spends Kerry into the Massachusetts mud.

[07055]

And the media never tells us that these weepers are professional victims---and Democratic partisans.

[illiac]

Actually, when you look at the chief complaintent that has been quoted by all the news sources today...no one did a background check.....and the complaintent is a very anit-Bush person (from previous posts).

[BibChr]

Oh, I totally agree they're great ads. Utterly legitimate.

I'm just talking about follow-through. If you are walking a perfectly-grilled New York steak past someone you know will spit on it before you get it to your guest... isn't it smart to PREpare for that, be proactive? Isn't it pretty well a GOP distinctive always to be on the defensive, never (as Clinton was) follow up an offensive with another offensive?

Dan

[BibChr]

"Stop writing doom and gloom vanities"?

List my last three.

Dan

[Dog]

Dan look at all the free air time .....the ads are getting ....the media is doing Bush a favor whining about them.

Free air time...is a good thing.

[Dog Gone]

I really didn't expect this hand-wringing from you.

[BibChr]

Good points. Thanks. Hope you're right.

Aren't you a little concerned, though, about the legendary GOP glass jaw?

Dan

[Dog]

You know what I meant.

[Williams]

All agreed but this caveat: The ad i saw showed the trade centers for an instant and it was a partial image that barely conveyed what happened. the president needs to put his story out there without reservation. Loud and clear. And you have to have your people ready to go with a very strong reaction to the predictable left wing rants.

When you've done great things, don't ever be ashamed to say it out loud. And treat the critics with the outrage they deserve. IF Bush stopped bringing up 9-11, I might almost not vote for him. He is defending ME and my family, not just his reelection.

[BobS]

Rove is doing the same as Mel Gibson. When you create a fuss, you create interest:) There is no such thing as BAD publicity! The RATs are acting like spoiled little girls.

[Question King]

Unfortunately, I think the Bush admin underestimated the negative response. The firefighters and police have always been more pro-conservative and Bush, now, he's ranckled their chains. I think the best approach is for Bush to distance himself from Perle and Wolfowitz. the PNAC is getting bad press. Bush can still maintain his foreign policy objectives without these guys. Believe me, it will win votes with Conservatives who don't like the ideological group PNAC

[woodyinscc]

Bush should play these ads over and over. The dims are upset because they know these ads are powerful. There is no "throw me out of the Brier patch" strategy in the dim's attack on these ads, they are trying to neutralize them.

[beebuster2000]

If you think thats bad- the other lead story on CBS news was the rise in gas prices. But was the price rise the main point of the story? No way- the main point reported was that this "derails Bush argument that the economy is recovering". At the end- a snotty one liner from the CBS reporter that The White House doesn't seem to be DOING ANYTHING about the prices.
A total slam piece.
Look for every story to be spun bush bash way. The Libs will clearly counterstrike every move.
Whats got me worried is that the so called money advantage of Bush may be more than offset by the free publicity of the main media Bush bashing.
Hang on folks- it's gonna get a little bumpy !!!

[LS]

Hehehe. Always. Honestly, Dan, what concerns me more than Bush right now (I see no state that he won in 2000 that he loses right now, and 3-4 that he lost in 2000 that he wins) is the SENATE.

Nighthorse Campbell was a totally unexpected blow coming on top of Nichols. That makes for two vulnerable seats to go along with Murkowski and Fitzgerald. We have rotten candidates in NV and AR, and while Jones is the best we can hope for in CA, he won't beat Boxer without big help. Likewise, I don't see Patty Murray losing. It's conceivable that Bush could win with 300-330 EVs and we LOSE THE SENATE!