The emails I've been getting from Democrats and Democratic support groups 
continues to highlight the sheer ineptitude and incompetence that passes for 
Democratic political strategists and strategy and as a result, they are starting 
to sound desperate. Which is bad news because with Obama, admittedly a disaster 
as president for Democratic policies and beliefs,  and with Romney's  Republican 
policies a clear and present danger to the health of the country, it is who wins 
congress that will matter more than who is president.
 But in spite of the clear message that Democrats need to send which so far, 
they have been inadequate in sending, ( for a variety of reasons)  the content 
of the emails I've been getting  highlight only one thing --  how much 
Republican PAC's are spending in this race and that Democratic candidates are 
being outspent and can you send more money because the polls show they are 
losing or losing their lead.
 The problem is,  this is not about money or a product of Republicans 
spending more than Democrats. It isn't more money Democrats need. It's a 
message, a strategy a clear point that resonates with voters by using  something 
Democrats other than Obama have on their side that is worth more than money 
-- facts. What Democrats needs is to start using them in a forceful and 
convincing way and start using the part of the male anatomy that James Carville 
pointed out was missing from Obama.  It's doesn't take big money, it takes big 
ideas. And knowing how to communicate them.
 When I was Executive Director of the Denver Group during the 2008  
presidential primaries, I created ads and TV commercials attacking the DNC for 
their backdoor plan to try and push Hillary Clinton off the ballot at the 
Democratic National Convention and  not even allow her an honest roll call vote  
as part of a strategy (which has since backfired)  to present a false picture of 
party unity by pretending  that everyone supported Obama, which was clearly not 
true.
 With a very low six figure budget from individual donations, a budget 
miniscule by political advertising standards, I created ads and 
TV commercials that demanded enough attention and had a big enough impact to 
generate a lot of media coverage which resulted in media articles about our 
work, the advertising and the political goals they were designed to achieve. 
These ads and commercials resulted in  interviews in mainstream media 
outlets with myself and co-founder Heidi Feldman, like the New York Times ( 
twice) Huffington Post ( twice) the Hill, Congressional Quarterly, ABC News, Fox 
News multiple times, the BBC,   the Toronto Star,  various radio outlets, local 
Washington DC TV news stations, news outlets as far away as Japan, and we were 
the Question of the Day on the Cafferty File on CNN. Howard Dean was besieged 
with reporters questions  during his bus tour about Clinton and if she was going 
to be on the ballot at the convention and all  this as a result of well timed, 
well placed,  high impact ads and TV commercials on a budget so small by 
political standards, it wouldn't pay for the Koch Brothers cell phone bills for 
a month. So its never about money. Its about message and how to get it 
across.
 The latest plea for more money  in my mailbox from Democrats came on behalf 
of  Missouri senator Claire McCaskill. The email, from NY senator Kristin 
Gillbebrand,  pointed out the latest poll numbers between McCaskill and her Tea 
Party right wing opponent, Todd Akin showed McCaskill  now behind 49-45. And 
according to the email, "this after Akin's offensive comments about 
'legitimate rape' and whether Claire is 'ladylike enough' to be a senator. We 
have to absolutely do something about this".
 Yes you do have to do something about it,  but whose fault is all of this? 
Not having enough  money? Akin having more?  Or McCaskill's decision which was  
roundly and severely criticized here at the time, to not go after Akin over his 
ignorant and offensive remarks about rape and a woman's body "shutting down" to 
prevent pregnancy and make that a focal point of McCaskill's campaign.
 Within 24 hours of his remark Republicans were calling for him to quit the 
race and the Republican senate campaign committee said they were going to cut 
off money for his campaign.  Akin was on the ropes. But Akin stuck to his guns ( 
as offensive as his guns are), stood up to the media as well as the Republican 
establishment, stood by his comments and McCaskill did little or nothing about 
it instead of using it in every way possible against him.
 McCaskill and her "strategists" let Akin off the hook, never went in for 
the kill, never used a weapon that was handed to them on a silver platter and 
now they are complaining that Akin is ahead because they don't have enough 
money.
 The truth is Republicans know how to go in for the kill and Democrats 
don't. In fact Democrats seem to know very little about how to go after 
Republicans with a tough message and win a campaign. Instead my mailbox is 
filled every day with the same old song from MoveOn, the PCCC, Democracy for 
America and pleas for money from various candidates around the country who feel 
they are victims of Republicans outspending them, as if that and that alone has 
anything to do with anything. 
 There are a lot of ways Democrats can win and most Democratic 
candidates except for Obama should be far ahead of their Republican opponents. 
If they aren't, its not because they don't have enough money. Its not knowing 
what to do with the money they have. It's not knowing  how to formulate a strong 
and honest message, get it across forcefully and convincingly, and attack their 
opponent with the facts,while being honest . 
 It would also help to be honest and straightforward with disappointed and 
disaffected Democrats about Obama's  presidency and  his  failures in selling 
out of the Democratic and progressive agenda with promises to do something about 
it if they regain control of congress, and just as importantly,  point out the 
dangers in the policies of the opposition  in an honest, factual  and forceful 
way. Instead we see dull, ineffective, predicatable and easily ignored TV commericals by MoveOn and others with a plea to send $5 to help air them.
 What Democrats need is not more money. Its strategy, ideas, and knowing 
what to do with the money they have. So far, a lot of them don't.
Conservatism as it exists today and the Tea Party in particular, almost all of whom are completely ignorant as to what actually motivated the orginal Boston Tea Party, are and have been, anathema to everything the country stands for and has ever stood for as well as the principles and beliefs of the Founders. None of the founding principles of this country has anything to do with anything the Tea Party conservatives stand for and the same is true for the individual principles of Jefferson, Adams and the other Founders. They are a fat and easy target and if there is any goal for the upcoming election it should be to stamp them out as a political influence with resounding defeats everywhere. And doing it would, under normal circumstances be easy to do. But Democrats and their paid strategists seem to be befuddled over how to do it. Hopefully they will figure it out before it's too late.
Conservatism as it exists today and the Tea Party in particular, almost all of whom are completely ignorant as to what actually motivated the orginal Boston Tea Party, are and have been, anathema to everything the country stands for and has ever stood for as well as the principles and beliefs of the Founders. None of the founding principles of this country has anything to do with anything the Tea Party conservatives stand for and the same is true for the individual principles of Jefferson, Adams and the other Founders. They are a fat and easy target and if there is any goal for the upcoming election it should be to stamp them out as a political influence with resounding defeats everywhere. And doing it would, under normal circumstances be easy to do. But Democrats and their paid strategists seem to be befuddled over how to do it. Hopefully they will figure it out before it's too late.

 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 

2 comments:
Can the candidates use campaign money for their personal needs if there is any left over after the election? If so, perhaps Democrats don't care if they win as much as they care about being a candidate so they can live off of campaign donations.
they are evil, not incompetent, and they will get the result they want...both parties are one
Post a Comment