Kerry Strategists: Clintonistas Torpedoed Our Campaign

NewsMax.com ^ | Nov. 12, 2004 | Carl Limbacher

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Kerry Strategists: Clintonistas Torpedoed Our Campaign

Ha! We've been saying this all along. Some folks need to lurk here a bit more.

[Baby Bear]

I think some stories need a DUH! alert. I have heard about this idea since early 2003.

[nikos1121]

I'm sure there was infighting in his campaign right out of the gate, as we learned in Newsweek's special report. We also learn that Kerry was basically running things.

It seems to me, that Kerry, himself failed to heed their advice coming out strongly and wrongly on the Iraq and terrorist issues in the waning moments of the campaign. I think if he had stayed true to the domestic issues it would have been a close election.

It was presumably Kerry, not his advisors, who insisted on bringing up the lost cache of weapons in Iraq, and other so-called Iraq war blunders just days before the election.

Another stupic article in my opinion that misses the mark. Was it Carville and company the ones who insisted he not do any press conferences, go on The Factor, etc. ?

nick

[2ndreconmarine]

Reports Huffington:

"In conversations with Kerry insiders over the last nine months, I’ve heard a recurring theme: that it was [Bob] Shrum and the Clintonistas [including Greenberg, Carville and senior advisor Joe Lockhart]

ROFLAO

Even the lib Demons call the Clintonistas, Clintonistas.

Gee, I thought that was FReeper slang.

Guess not.

[Wheee The People]

Confusion to the enemy!

[Southack]

Here it is in a nutshell: a white, liberal, elitist, East-Coast, male, trial-lawyer, all-Senate Presidential ticket isn't going to flip Red States to Blue.

Beyond that obvious truism, the Democrats had no ideas newer than 3 decade old Roe v Wade and save the whale Earth Day nonsense.

It's Republicans who are pushing the new, innovative ideas such as faith-based charities, privatizing Social Security, a national sales tax over an income tax, school choice vouchers for inner-city minority children, national missile defense, prescription drugs for seniors, spreading democracy around the world, etc.

A bad Presidential ticket with old ideas isn't going to beat a qualified Presidential team with innovative new ideas. Ain't gonna happen.

You don't flip Red States into Blue states with the combination that the Dems ran in 2004.

[El Oviedo]

I surely pity John Kerry. I suspect that when the Clintonistas took over his campaign that it will go into the mud.

My suspicion grow more at the time Kerry wore his hunting outfit and one of the Clintonistas did the spinning.

I hope John Kerry has the seen the truth about liberals running as moderates like Clinton.

Perhaps ala Miller - he will be one of our speakers during the next 2008 RNC Presidential convention.

[sinkspur]

Kerry would have lost by 15 points if Mary Beth Cahill had not been eclipsed by the Clintonoids. She was absolutely clueless about how to run a campaign.

[rotstan]

Hmmm,

First they blamed the homosexuals, then they blamed the hispanics, now they blame the Clintonistas. Anyone want to guess how long it will be before they get to the Jews?

[Not A Snowbird]

Didn't take long for all the finger pointing to start, did it?

[Greek]

One problem with the theory; they didn't stick to domestic issues. In fact, they did not listen to the CLintonistas at all. Kerry insisted on talking about Iraq, an area where he was always down in the polls 10-20%.

[HenryLeeII]

Well, when Hillary! sends out the flying monkeys to "help out," I guess next time Kerry won't be so quick to accept. Oops, sorry John, there won't be a next time for you...

[SE Mom]

Agreed. But it was a win/lose proposition getting the Clinton Gang to come on board. They provided much needed discipline and focus- but they focused on the wrong things. What's interesting is whether or not these guys even realize how much they wanted Kerry to lose- making way for Hillary. How concious do you think it was on their part?

[paul51]

They were the ones that decided to listen to the ones they blame. What a bunch of losers.

[JFK_Lib]

Kerrey's folks are smoking some bad crack.

Kerrey lost on the war on terrorism because of his shrill nit-picking on the war in Iraq and the stupid contrived controversy regarding the 'missing weapons'. It made him look like a half-baked dilatante who could never be trusted with the security of this nation.

Maybe had he focused solely on economics and just admited that Bush had done a reasonable job on national security, he might have won just because of the refreshing breeze of honesty he would have introduced into Presidential politics.

[StJacques]

But what they're not saying is that they were hoping there was some alternative to discussing Kerry's personal biography, because they knew that would be trouble.

And I also might add that it doesn't speak well of John Kerry to point out that a couple of Clinton political advisors could show up and change everything about the way Kerry relates to voters. A good candidate with a strong central core to his being and a clear message to voters would not be swayed by the arrival of new advisors seven weeks before the election. The fact that Kerry was shows that his was a campaign in search of a message.

[HenryLeeII]

Tom Vallely, the Vietnam War veteran whom Kerry tapped to lead the response to the Swift boat attacks...

Does anyone know if he is related to Gen. Paul Vallely (sp?), the Fox News analyst?

[angelanddevil2]

That might be true. They must be working on Hillary election for next time, which couldn't happen if Kerry had won.

[Donna Lee Nardo]

LOLOLOL