Posted on 09/21/2004 1:12:43 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
By Dick Morris
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
John Kerry's recent shakeup of his campaign illustrates his larger problem: He is playing a simple game of checkers, while President Bush is playing a subtle game of chess.
Edging aside Bob Shrum and promoting former Clinton spokesmen Mike McCurry and Joe Lockhart to key positions in the campaign replaces a flawed strategist – Shrum – with two able, but limited, tacticians. Both McCurry and Lockhart are good at handling evolving crises and keeping the media well fed and happy. But two press secretaries do not equal one strategist.
Kerry's basic problem is that he has no overview of how he's going to win. His consultants and staff confuse a pile of ammunition with a strategy.
Their basic idea is to hit Bush with everything and anything they can find. But throwing negatives at a sitting president is like punching a pillow. It feels good and keeps the base happy – but it doesn't help to win the election. By the time a man has served four years as president, negatives that pre-existed his tenure are largely irrelevant.
People are keenly interested in the character strengths and flaws of a challenger; they want keys to how he'd do in the top job. But once they've had a chance to observe how a person actually functions as chief executive, what he did in his youth matters not at all.
And it is particularly true that after a person has been commander in chief, we could care less if he disobeyed an order to have a physical when he was a kid.
With their eye on the cheering section, not on the playing field, Kerry's people are throwing negatives because they enjoy it. An anonymous aide even said that it makes their candidate look good to be fighting back. But it accomplishes no political purpose and doesn't close the gap in the polls. For that, you need a strategy.
But beyond the basic question of whether to run a positive or a negative campaign, Kerry has not solved the core conundrum that has haunted him from the day he won the nomination: whether to run as a hawk or a dove.
His failure to resolve this crucial issue stems from the inherent contradictions of his own candidacy. He is a liberal running in a time of war, a posture that forces him first to tack left and then right to keep both sides of his base in line.
Bush, playing chess, has co-opted the winning turf, vowing toughness on terror and staying the course in Iraq. Half of Kerry's supporters, according to the Fox News poll, want to pull out of Iraq, but one-third agree with Bush on the war, so Kerry is sunk whichever position he takes.
He's trying to straddle the issue just like Richard Nixon did on Vietnam during the 1968 election. But he won't be able to get away with it – not through three face-to-face debates (which Nixon avoided in 1968). In the words of Joe Louis, Kerry will be able to run, but he can't hide.
Others, supposedly including Bill Clinton, have urged Kerry to stress domestic issues and raise their saliency so he can exploit the innate Democratic edge on these topics. But here, too, Bush has Kerry in check. The issues the Democrat wants to use are being solved even as he speaks about them. Each month brings better economic news. Bush's prescription-drug program is just beginning to kick in, reducing the viability of the health-care issue. And even as Kerry talks about education, Bush's historic education reform is upgrading schools across the country.
Lockhart and McCurry face the same problem that Shrum encountered before them: They have a candidate who can't figure out why he's running. Kerry doesn't have a strategy because he doesn't have an agenda or even clear issue positions.
Bush has no such problem. His voters all agree with his clearly laid-out positions and his opinions about Iraq and terror tap into a broad swath of the American electorate – including many now voting for Kerry. All the president has to do is to articulate his positions clearly and compellingly and he will likely prevail.
Meanwhile, Kerry has to figure out who he is and why he's running. By late September, you'd better be playing chess, not checkers, if you want to win.
Anyone have an idea who Morris wants elected President?
Hillary?
LOL. Good one.
Bottomline = It sure SUCKS to be a RAT these days. McGovern had more of a chance than this Communist POS weasel Cut'n'Runner kerry.
I'm no longer giving him a capital letter. He's a CAPITAL OFFENDER...
This is a good point he's making and this really needs to be trumpeted with every speech. There have been recent front page articles in the Chicago Tribune and Detroit News, (both left wing rags) that give credit to the 'No Child Left Behind' Act. This act has increased learning skills across the board for mainly inner city children. Whenever I'm asked what Bush has done for minorities, I pull these two articles out of my briefcase.
Pretty good analogy, but I liked (Peggy Noonan's?) better
I often enjoy Morris. He sure loves attention!
Dick Morris is a complete weirdo. However, he is incredibly astute politically. I view him as kind of an Idiot Savant political advisor. I need to get his book and read it. I read a few chapters, and it was very interesting and funny. However, I cannot discern how true any of it is, but it is entertaining. He is in a tough spot...a brilliant political analyst who nobody on either side will touch with a ten foot pole officially, but will go to his house at 2 AM for political advice (figuratively speaking). Many view him as a clock that is right twice a day. He is often on the Hannity Show, and is very entertaining and informative. I can only say I think it is Bush he is rooting for.
Bottomline = It sure SUCKS to be a RAT these days. McGovern had more of a chance than this Communist POS weasel Cut'n'Runner kerry.
I'm no longer giving him a capital letter. He's a CAPITAL OFFENDER
Hey AFE, I'm impressed at your nuance!
Kerry isn't even playing checkers. He's playing "Candyland" or "Chutes and Ladders".
Morris has said that he is going to vote for Bush.
I heard Morris saying he is voting for Bush.
Nope. Poker. Remember the Startrek when the Enterprise was surrounded, and Spock says they are checkmated? And Kirk says, not chess, poker, and bluffs his way out of disaster?
Bush is a poker player, and in one study his friends said he plays dumb, and lets his opponent think Bush is a patsy, so the opponent overbets and then Bush plays the winning hand.
FOr a year, we have watched the media spin against the war, against Bush, etc. etc. Now it's time to call the bets...and guess who is winning? The "dumb" guy...
Good to see a little humor thrown in.
"Bottomline = It sure SUCKS to be a RAT these days. McGovern had more of a chance than this Communist POS weasel Cut'n'Runner kerry."
You can tell Kerry is a cut and run guy. Explains why he didn't give up his Senate seat.
Otherwise, there is no correlation between spending and quality of schooling, at least in government schools.
Is phonics really out of the curriculum? I can remember my entire pre-school through 4th grade experience revolving around phonics. We're talking 1989-1995 here. Am I that out of touch already?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.