Posted on 10/11/2004 5:28:22 AM PDT by crushkerry
Surely most of the news today will rightfully be on John Kerry's telling "terrorism=nuisance" statement. And well it should, as nothing else offers us more of a window into the worldview of John Kerry as that one statement. Well, unless of course you count his January, 2002 statement that the "terror threat is exaggerated." Of course that little nugget was great for us, in that it launched our virgin web ad Exaggeration. Further, in March, 2004, after his "terrorism is primarily a law enforcement" statement, we raised the question "Who Would Osama Vote For?"
So this latest comment is rather old news to us, and anyone else whose been paying attention to this campaign from the beginning. So we're going to look ahead a bit to this weeks third and final Presidential debate, and examine where the potential opportunities and pitfalls may be for the President. Given that he in all the polls released after the 2nd debate he has a lead - in the Washington Post/ABC poll by 5 points; in the Rasmussen Poll by 4 points; and the bipartisan "Battleground" poll by by 3 points -and that was taken before the 2nd debate, which Bush won- the President need not try Hail Mary's to get back in the race.
However, we feel that despite the media spin that this debate will be on issues beneficial to Kerry, it presents the President with an opportunity to put Senator Nuisance in his rear view mirror. A big "if" here is whether of not lefty moderator Bob Schieffer decides to play it down the middle and hit the right issues.
First of all we're not going to go in-depth on issues that will certainly be raised on Wednesday. For example, on taxes we know the President wants to cut them, and John Kerry doesn't. How do we know? His 20 year record. Further, on health care, we know the President wants to give tax credits to small business and expand Health Savings Accounts, while John Kerry wants to give "tax credits" and have state government take over more healthcare. On the deficit, both (and sadly our guy fits in here) really don't care.
Not that we think the deficit is a big an issue as say, Tim Russert and other simpletons who think a deficit at 4.5% of national GDP is a problem, but because the President has shown he's not big on lowering non-defense discretionary spending.
So with that being said, there are some "sleeper" issues out there that the President can take full advantage of in order to solidify and expand his lead. As we predicted in our analysis of the second debate Kerry fumbled badly on various cultural issues that are especially important to the "Reagan Democrats" as well as church-going Catholics and evangelicals (although many in the latter group weren't going to support him anyway).
1. Abortion There will almost have to be a follow up question or two here based on Senator Kerry's pedantic, confused, and ignorant explanation of his position. The reason that he wasn't clear on his answer was because he holds 3 views that are way out of the mainstream with the American public, including many of those who are uncomfortably "pro-choice" (or as we say "pro-abortion").
First, he opposes outlawing the infanticide known as partial birth abortion, despite the fact that a recent Gallup Poll indicated that over 70 % of Americans support the ban, he opposes parental notification, which is supported by 83% of the population and opposied the "Connor Peterson Law", which grants legal protection to unborn children against violence, a law supported by 84% of the population according to a Newsweek poll.
Kerry's conundrum is that he has to keep the baby killers at NARAL and NOW happy, mostly to keep the campaign money flowing, but in doing so he alienates millions of blue collar churchgoing in swing state areas, like Southwestern Pennsylvania, northwest Ohio, the large Catholic populations in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa.
If the President is smart he won't get into a "pro-live" v. "pro-abortion" argument with Kerry, because in reality almost 45% of voters consider themselves "pro-choice". Rather, the President should continue to hammer Kerry on these 3 specific issues where he's clearly out of touch. Further, even though evangelicals weren't voting for Kerry anyway, a discussion of "culture of life" issues will energize them, and ensure they don't stay home on Election Day, like they did to Bush 41 in 1992.
2. Tort Reform. This is an area where the President may be able to swing a few votes his way among suburban women, previously known as "soccer moms". The conventional political wisdom holds that these professional, educated women, while registered Republicans will vote for a Democrat because of the abortion issue. (We like to call these people RINO's).
The best example of where these type of women live is in the "bedroom communities" of southeastern PA (Montgomery, Chester, Bucks and Delaware County). These are the counties that gave Clinton and Gore their PA wins in the last 3 elections, despite the fact that the GOP registration outnumbers the Democrats in all the counties.
The one way to cut into that big lead is by scaring the hell out of these women that the John Kerry/John Edwards ticket is going to cause their OBGYN's to leave. And scaring them isn't bad here because it's true. Although lawsuits are not the only reason for the malpractice crisis, it's one of the biggest.
The issue also hits an area of concern of every one of these women. Why? Well, perhaps 10-20% of these women have been personally affected by abortion, but every damn one of them has an OBGYN, and that relationship, by its very nature is one of the most important non-familial or "friend" relationships a woman can have. By pounding this issue hard, and convincing women they're likely going to have to go through the scary prospect of finding another OBGYN, the President could make a good chunk of those women pull the "R" lever on the ballot for the first time in 12 years.
3. Social Security Privatization. Admittedly, this one is personal to us, as we would love nothing more than to own a portion of our contributions. And despite what you may hear, this issue is no longer the "third rail" of American politics. In fact recenet polls show this is a winning issue, with some 2/3 favoring some sort of privatization and . Also, any discussion of an optimistic "ownership society" as opposed to John Kerry's Sgt. Schultz approach to this issue ("I See Nothing, Noottthinnng") will undoubtedly work in the President's favor.
An often overlooked advantage to pushing this issue is the impact it could have on swinging some of the black vote the President's way. Why? Studies have shown that blacks get fewer benefits out of the existing Social Security System because of shorter life expectancies. Imagine the panic it would cause among Democrats if the President said that he had a plan to grow the wealth of black America through personal ownership of their retirement accounts that could be passed on to their children, especially given that over half of all blacks already support it.. After all, why do you think Black Entertainment CEO Robert Johnson is such a strong advocate of privatization and on the President's privitization commission?
The only note of caution we have here is that seniors, who come out to vote in high percentages, give the least amount of support to privatization. That could hurt the President badly in states like Florida and Pennsylvania, which respectively, have the highest percentage of seniors in their populations. Further, the lobby for the current failed system is strong and well funded. Still, we think this bold stroke would be advantageous for the President.
4. Gay Marriage If this one doesn't come up you know Schieffer's in the tank for Kerry. The President's position is clear. He wants a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, end of story. John Kerry, on the other hand, while he claims to think marriage is only between a man and woman, doesn't want to stop unelected judges from thwarting the will of the people.
Kerry will cite the 1996 "Defense of Marriage Act" as a law that protects states from recognizing other state's gay marriage. The only problem with that is that he was one of only 14 senators to vote against DOMA, and called it "malicious and mean-spirited" Pretty hard to run from that.
Most of all however, this issue gives the President an opening to talk about the larger issue of judicial appointments. He needs it, because he swung and missed at a hanging curve the other night. He needs to effectively tie John Kerry to the liberal judges he supports and bring up issues like the "under God" ruling as well as the numerous other instances of judicial tyranny that so often rear their ugly head. Further, like the abortion issue, this is an issue that will energize the Christian Conservatives into getting out the vote.
There are many other smaller issues that have yet to come up or be highlighted in this campaign or in the debates. Specifically, we're talking about immigration reform, gun control, ANWR drilling and affirmative action. In all likelihood they won't come up, mainly because, as it should be, this issue is going to focus on national security. And by his comments both today and in the past John Kerry can't be trusted there, which should make all these other points moot.
However, they won't be moot this week, and that's why we decided to highlight these issues now.
Ping
LOL.
Sorry, but we have now heard that before the first, before the Veep debate, before the 2nd, and now this time.
What's he waiting for?
Excellent analysis and advice.
BTTT
Back in the old days the Republicans used to scream about the deficit and could never get traction with it at the polls. Amazingly, the Democrats are screaming about it now and won't get any traction either. People only care if the economy is producing jobs, wealth, low inflation, and low interest rates. The other details have NEVER been an issue.
Kick some hiney Wednesday night, Dubya !!
Can anyone fill me in on the story that supposidly during the second debate W. was wearing a hidden receiver and receiving answers to the questions?
Oh, so maybe every time we heard sKerry use the word "nuanced" he was really saying "nuisance" and we were simply misunderstanding him?
I do hope the President will be on the ball and prepared for this debate.
The most telling thing to come out of the debate imo was the fact that Kerry very cavalierly and confidently talked about embryonic stem cell research, while the President was very grave and serious about it.
I don't see why you're so worried. He kicked Kerry's butt last time.
What's the format of this upcoming debate? Bush was so much more himself in the Town Hall format.
I pray that the President does well at the final debate. I don't think he has to win it to win the election. (barring any disasterous slips)
I'm not sure. I've been unable to find it as well. Can anybody here help ? I'd like to find out too.
He was wearing a bullet proof vest. There was a little box shaped whatever in the middle of his back and that may have been an extra microphone. It was much ado about virtually NOTHING.
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.
