Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins
Do I think that the simple explanation: “She left the office to lay the groundwork for a run at the presidency and to counter a financial attack in Alaska.” would be acceptable to the American public?

_____________________________

I don't think it will sway the 70 million voters she would need to win, especially since the attacks would be succinct to the point of utterly accessible simplicity - "quitter". In print. On TV 'news'. On SNL. On ubiquitous posters. It would be her scarlet letter.

And, the battle over the brand would increase the divide not bridge it. If she were to be forced to repeatedly 'explain' then they would have successfully diverted her energies and effectively subverted her message. If she were to choose to take the "I answered that already, let's move on" stance it would do nothing to stop the attacks. In fact, they would likely increase in vitriol (remember with whom we are dealing - Alinsky).

This type of assault causing the candidate to appear both defensive and off message was used successfully against Kerry in 2004 when he spent two very valuable weeks in October fighting the Swiftboat guys. It is a tried and true tactic.

I genuinely believe that because of this, and to a lesser extent, her slim resume, she is unelectable. If we nominate her I see four more years of disaster in DC.

We seem to disagree on that. Time will tell.

523 posted on 04/21/2010 5:56:46 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies ]


To: wtc911
We seem to disagree on that. Time will tell.

Her being present in any national campaign would make the answer to "quitter" also a one word response: "Strategist."

And her presence in the campaign would be the irrefutable evidence that her straterery had paid off.

The public grows weary of overly-aired complaints that are overtly political. Many politicians innoculate themselves against these issues by bringing them up early in the campaign and answering them over and over.

GWBush could have done this with his alcohol issue had he been foresighted enough to see that back in 98-99. Instead, it became a bombshell when dropped the last week of the campaign.

Even by the end of that week it had already started to stall.

And a DUI and a bout with alcoholism is far worse than a strategic campaign decision.

They rehabilitated Kerry, despite his obvious anti-war, Jane Fonda connections, to the extent that he damn near won the presidency. He's probably the worst candidate to run in my lifetime, but they managed to do it and to do it well.

525 posted on 04/21/2010 6:27:10 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson