Wow, the Charlotte Observer is a big surprise!
Posted by ga6thdem at October 17, 2004 05:01 AMThey did the same thing to Al Gore 4 years ago. Few candidates for President were more “squeaky clean” than Al Gore, but that didn’t stop Karen Hughes from expressing angry outrage at every minor criticism he directed at Bush. The result was that the election ended up being far closer than it should/could have been. Based solely on the record of the previous four years, Gore should have won by a substantial landslide. Based solely on the record of the previous four years, George Bush should be losing by a landslide today. Instead, this election is still too close to call. Why?
It’s because Republican strategists know now---just as they knew four years ago---that the KEY swing voters depend entirely on their “impressions” of the candidates. Republicans are savvy; they are cunning, and they know how to manipulate these people. Most Democrats may have been able to see through the phony outrage that the Cheneys expressed re: Kerry’s comment on their daughter’s lesbianism, but those impressionable swing voters saw only clips of angry outrage being expressed by the Cheneys and heard that this had become a big issue. Sadly, even though John Kerry won all three debates, his people lost the spin on the last one.
John Kerry could have turned the whole thing around if he had simply ridiculed the phony outrage they were expressing and exposed it for the cynical political stratagem that it was. By doing so he would have been able to further define the Republicans as conniving Con Artists who are trying to manipulate trusting voters with their devious duplicity. Unfortunately, Democratic candidates and their advisors tend to be stunned when they are targeted by publicly expressed Republican anger and feel as though they need to defend themselves. How should they respond? I suggest that Kerry’s rapid response team stay in constant contact with Jon Stewart for the duration of the campaign.
The kind of humor that will help Kerry in these last weeks is not more lame jokes like the one he uttered during the last debate (I had an immediate flashback to the failed attempts at humor of Mike Dukakis). All Kerry needs to do is give himself permission to start ridiculing Bush regularly from now on. Every time Bush falsely characterizes Kerry in a speech, John needs to mercilessly ridicule him for it and use the opportunity to define Bush as desperate and pathetic.
That is what Bush is doing to Kerry every time he stands up in front of his favorable crowds. Indeed, he has no record to run on, but ridiculing Kerry is the one thing that is keeping Bush in the race in the eyes of the swing voters. They really, really respond to that stuff. Get Jon Stewart's cell phone number, John. You're going to want to stay in constant contact with him from now on...
James
www.taxwisdom.org
Why the surprise over these newspapers endorsing John Kerry?
Lib papers endorsing a lefty senator is not entirely earth shattering.
Four papers that endorsed W. in 00(including his hometown paper) have switched to Kerry. No paper that endorsed Gore has gone over to the dark side this year, at least not yet. Kos has a wrap-up, although these papers arent included:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/11/133154/68
Posted by J at October 17, 2004 07:40 AMAn IDAHO paper endorsed KERRY!?!?! After Endorsing Bush in 2000?!?!
(head and world explode)
Posted by thecreature at October 17, 2004 11:25 AMAn IDAHO paper endorsed KERRY!?!?!
come on, you know Idaho is full of those latte-drinking socialist flower children/college professors. OF COURSE the second most liberal state in the union (after Taxachussetts) endorsed comrade kerry.
Posted by benjoya at October 17, 2004 11:43 AMthat one was for roger, natch.
Posted by benjoya at October 17, 2004 11:44 AMbenjoya, give me an honest liberal anyday over a dumb obergrubenfuhrer Bu$h!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by coblin at October 17, 2004 01:42 PMIt is worth noting that John Kerry has been endorsed by The Lone Star Iconoclast, a paper that is based in Crawford, TX. Have a look at:
http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm
They endorsed Bush in 2000 but are now appalled by what Bush's performance in the last 4 years.
It is good to see that there is still some commonsense and integrity left in Texas.
Avin Chitnis
Posted by avin chitnis at October 17, 2004 04:12 PMWell! Since I live in Boise, I was TRULY flippin' amazed that ANY Idaho paper would endorse Kerry - especially as so brazenly drive around town and the countryside with my bright purple on white 'Kerry/Edwards' bumpersticker.
So....I looked and no, the Twin Falls Times News DID NOT endorse John Kerry. It's here in all its despicable shittiness.
Posted by Kitt at October 17, 2004 06:52 PMWell! Since I live in Boise, I was TRULY flippin' amazed that ANY Idaho paper would endorse Kerry - especially as so brazenly drive around town and the countryside with my bright purple on white 'Kerry/Edwards' bumpersticker.
So....I looked and no, the Twin Falls Times News DID NOT endorse John Kerry. It's here in all its despicable shittiness.
Posted by Kitt at October 17, 2004 06:54 PMUh...my apologies for double posting; it said error soooo, I punched 'post' again.
Posted by Kitt at October 17, 2004 07:04 PMCmon guys you can name them before they actually do it. When the Washington Post, LA Times etc. endorse Kerry it's not going to be some big surprise.
Benjoya you forgot to add LIMP WRISTED PENCIL NECK GEEK to your latte-drinking socialist flower children/college professors.
You guys also have a Hitler/Nazi fetish. You bring back all the German names to describe your political opponents. After a while it gets a bit tiresome. Ok so some of the lefty names do also.
Kitt:
Thanks for the update; I amended my post to reflect the information you obtained.
Posted by Steve Soto at October 17, 2004 10:11 PMRogerS, you think WaPo will endorse Kerry? Really?
The rag is so vile with Kerry bashing I'd be surprised if it did.
Nobody reads newspapers anymore so does it really make a difference? The deciding factor in this election is the price of gasoline NOVEMBER 2!!!! Plain and simple! And IRAQ. If the green zone can be attacked...
Posted by BushHater at October 18, 2004 09:18 AMYou can add the Tampa Tribune, owned by Media General and once a staunch pro-Busher, to the list of non-endorsing rags out there...
In their agonized words, "But we are unable to endorse President Bush for re- election because of his mishandling of the war in Iraq, his record deficit spending, his assault on open government and his failed promise to be a ``uniter not a divider'' within the United States and the world."
And this: "It is an achingly difficult decision to not endorse a candidate in the presidential contest, and we do not reach this decision lightly."
Coming from Battlestar Floridactica, this is meaningful...