Taking a page from Rove's playbook .....

[HardWorkingDem]

What gets me is why don't the Dems take a play from Rove's playbook of his strategy of turning a person's strength into a weakness. For example, Bush is widely praised for his loyalty and resolve. Let's turn them into huge liabilities. For example, look at how many people he has fired versus firing those that have done harm to the American people. The only people he has fired have released information beneficial to the American people. On the flip side, Bush has steadfastly protected those employees that have done things to harm the American people instead of firing them.

Look at Rove. Rove should become the poster boy for Bush's disloyalty to the American people. The DNC and DLC should be running ads blasting that while Bush remains to Rove, he is being disloyal to the American people. These ads should have Bush's comments about what he was going to do with the person who leaked. And Novak's latest comments that Bush knows who the leaker is should be added.

This guy does not have resolve, but instead blind stubbornness. There is a huge difference.

[Burried News]

1. At what point do you decide that the loser in a 'professional'

wrestling match is not really trying to win?

[Al-CIAda]

5. indeed. -nt

[hwmnbn]

2. Good idea......

I think someone on DU posted this link a while ago. It is a list of "heroes" who have been purged by the chimp. It is quite telling he has fired no one in his inner circle of criminals. He's loyal to them.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=28817

[democrat_patriot]

3. The problem is getting the word out.

Republicans get their talking points and they repeat them on TeeVee ad nauseum. Word for word. On EVERY show.

Dems do not have this mechanism in place. All I hear is "America can do better".

[Al-CIAda]

4. The Dems FAILED to point out the obvious in the beginning.

Bushco's 'failure'on and before 9/11. Think about how often the criminals use this, and think how it would be very different if the truth were exposed.

[applegrove]

6. Because we are better than that. Attacking people for their strength

pushes great leadership out. And leaves the field filled with patsy brownshirts, hangers on, users, cronies and deminishes anyone who tries it.


We have nothing to learn from them. Around Katrina most Americans looked at themselves and said "I am an adult and I respond to things as an adult and not like a bunch of monkeys.

Of course Rove would love it if we started to mirror him. Would give him the ability to say "see - they do it too".

[HardWorkingDem]

7. Disagree.....

we have plenty to learn from anybody. This does not mean taking on the terrible qualities of someone, but if some tactic works for the Rethuglicans and it doesn't involve selling one's soul or turning into a rethuglican, than it should be examined.

What attacking Bush's strength means is to break the legs of clay under the mythical perception that his loyalty and resolve are good qualities, when they clearly have not been as he has used them.

People keep getting this concept messed up - there are huge differences between tactics and strategies and the content of those used. For example, recall the Rethugs and their creation of Willie Horton. I'm not saying we do something like that, but realize that the use of good media creations is something to examine and use.

Does this clear things up? To further illustrate. At one time no one knew of the effective use of mass mailings or the internet for political fund raising. So are you saying that if the Rethuglicans had found out about raising money over the internet instead of Howard Dean, Joe Trippi and MoveOn, you would not be in favor of us using the same strategy to raise money? I don't think you mean this and am using it to illustrate how if we observe a tactic or strategy that works for the rethuglicans, then we should think about using it ourselves - as long as it is an honorable practice.