Saturday, October 02, 2004

Shut Up!

Something I just posted over on the DailyKos:

This was originally going to be a comment to this diary entry but I feel the message is to important to let it be lost in the wilderness.

kid oakland, please take this in the spirit in which it is intended, but I don't want to hear ANYONE talking about this election as if Kerry has it sewn up. Democrats have a tendency to relax when things look like they are going their way. From this day forward we should act as if we are 3 points behind and need every vote we can get BECAUSE WE NEED EVERY VOTE WE CAN GET.

There is no margin of victory large enough in this contest! George W. Bush must not be defeated. He must be utterly destroyed. Getting Kerry into the White House won't matter for sh*t if we don't do it in a manner so decisive that even the Republicans will have difficulty questioning his legitimacy (think Karl Rove attempting to spin the first debate for George and the NY Post reporter asking him to repeat his comment with a straight face.)

The following phrases and variations thereof should be forbidden:

"Victory is ours!"

"George Bush is toast!"

"It looks inevitable at this point"

"Kerry in a landslide!" (special note to Randi Rhodes)

The only thing that might be acceptable is some variation of "I'm cautiously optimistic".

I know some people need to hear good news in order to buck up their spirits. But anything you might hear from now until Nov. 3rd is just blowing wind. None of it matters until Kerry is declared the victor and he is sworn into office (one does not necessarily follow from the other).

Please don't be offended by this post kid oakland. But I didn't even read beyond the first could of sentences of your post because I simply don't want to hear analysis that says that victory is certain. If you or anyone else wants to say that things are looking up then please let us know. But don't tell us our job is done until the job is done.

The last thing we need to do is steal defeat from the jaws of victory.

Friday, October 01, 2004

Milestone

Sometime last night I passed the 200,000 hit mark. Thanks for the attention.

GOP infiltration?

Once may just be an example of an individual Republican taking the independent initiative to help out his candidate.

Twice suggests that there might be a deliberate attempt to infiltrate "undecided" groups in order to spin things for Bush.

Maybe its time to review the backgrounds of everyone in these groups?

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Q: Senator Kerry, do you believe that the President is a liar?

This afternoon on the Ed Schultz show they were discussing the debates and whether Kerry should come right out and accuse Bush of being a liar. Ed seemed to be in favor of it, but I am not. However, the question of Bush's honesty is likely to come up in the debate, so here's my chance to play debate coach and suggest how Kerry should deal with it:

Q: Senator Kerry, a significant number of people in this country have begun to question the honesty of the President, in both his domestic and foreign policy. A significant number of voters believe that the President deceived this country into war with Iraq. Senator Kerry, do you believe that the President is a liar?

Kerry: The question of lying is a question of intent. Now it is clear that the case for war was less than it was made at the time. But whether Mr. Bush intentionally mislead this country into war or whether his administration simply made a mistake is beyond my ability to judge. I'm not sure which is the more disturbing option: that Mr. Bush deliberately mislead us into war or that his administration was simply incompetent. However, I can tell you that I find it deeply troubling that we even have to ask this question. It is disturbing that we can't even be sure which of the these two awful options is closer to the truth. It is a failed leadership that loses the trust of a nation's people. When I am president I will work to restore the faith the American people once had in their president.

Q: So you won't tell us whether you think Bush is a liar?

Kerry: I will leave that judgment to history and the American people.

Q: But your personal opinion...?

Kerry: <shrug>

Yes, I know the debate rules don't allow for follow-up questions. But this is all fantasy anyway and I just like the image of Kerry shrugging in response to the question.

Kudos to the Kerry media team for newest ad

The last week has seen a remarkable series of powerful political ads coming from the Kerry camp. The latest is one of their best yet (link). It responds to the latest Bush ad, which again tries to paint Kerry as indecisive, by clearly showing that Bush's justifications for the war in Iraq have been all over the map. But it also takes it right back at Bush by saking him to explain how he is going to fix the problem.

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Am I in the top 1% now?

The average net worth of individual bloggers just went through the roof.

Monday, September 27, 2004

Assholes do vex me!

I've said before that now is not the time to engage in What-Iffing about a Dean candidacy. There will be plenty of time for that after Nov. 2nd if the worse should happen. But some are just not willing to wait until the verdict is passed before they comment on what might have been. Such is this essay by Peter Beinart in this weeks TIME.

I won't get into the content of the essay because, like I said, I've got better things to do. But I will note that Peter Beinart is the editor of the New Republic and the New Republic was vehemently anti-Dean during the primary season. It is the height of hypocrisy for him to come out now and wistfully muse on the benefit to the Democrats of a Dean vs. Bush race

Amazingly enough, Mr. Beinart begins his essay by criticizing the political punditry skills of the voters!

Political punditry is harder than it looks. That's what a lot of Democratic voters must be thinking right about now. Last winter Democratic-primary voters played political consultant. They tried to step inside the minds of swing voters and figure out which Democratic presidential candidate could beat George W. Bush. With an eye cast coldly on November, they rejected the man who had first won their hearts, Howard Dean, and flocked to the more "electable" choice, John Kerry. Among New Hampshire voters who said beating Bush was their biggest concern, Kerry beat Dean by a whopping 52 points.

Democratic voters should stick to their day jobs.

And maybe you should try some real work for once Mr. Beinart!

A "davastating" Bush ad?

Political Wire says, "Even Democrats have to agree President Bush's new ad is devastating."

Well, yes, it could be devastating, if it were presented only in a vacuum. The Kerry campaign's response to it should be simple: put out an ad with the exact same format, the exact same music, but use video clips of George W. Bush vacillating all over the place with regard to the War On Terror and The War on Iraq.

Just a few quick suggestions for clips to use:

  1. Bush saying that he was going to get bin Laden, "dead or alive", followed a few months later with him saying he doesn't care about whether he is dead or alive.
  2. Bush saying that we have to win the war on terror, followed by him telling Matt Lauer that he doesn't think we can win it.

Tagline: "Who is George W. Bush to question the decisiveness of others when even he can't make up his mind what his priorities are?"