From a Democratic Strategist: The MOST important thing YOU can do

[Dem_Strategist]

First: I am a Democratic Strategist. I will reveal my identity immediately following the election.

I will be posting here and starting a blog to help guide online activists.

John Kerry's chief opponent is NOT George Bush. It's the media. And you can help defeat Bush by doing everything in your power to fight media spin.

One of the ways to do it is to help promote and support the kinds of websites that Paul Krugman featured in a New York Times op-ed last week: Media Matters, Daily Howler, Campaign Desk, and so on.

Another is to join forces here and form your own media watchdog group.

Another is to join John Kerry's Media Corps.

Another is to start your own website listing media transgressions and linking to other such sites. (Form a webring.)

Another is to come up with creative ideas about how to counter media spin and sharing those ideas here.

This is the first step. The next discussion we should have is about the one-dimensional responses to the Kerry-Edwards strategy. Some of you are playing checkers while Kerry is playing chess.

I will provide you with some insight into the thinking behind individual decisions.

Let's talk.

[Killarney]

1. What is John Kerry's Media Corps?

what do they do and how can we join?

[Dem_Strategist]

2. This

http://www.johnkerry.com/mediacorps/

[Triana]

167. Joining Now...(n/t)

[NMDemDist2]

204. Ok I signed up, will the campaign send out email alerts? n/t

[calimary]

241. DONE!

This is GREAT!

I'm in. Just wrote to the Washington Post about the utter foolishness of their NON mea culpas "well, yeah, maybe we shoulda run this on page A1 instead of burying it on page A18, but it's not our fault. And we don't think we owe anyone an apology..."

ASSHOLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's GREAT that you're doing this. Have you seen Bernard Weiner's Crisis Papers call-to-action?

http://crisispapers.org/essays/awol-scandal.htm

Also - have you seen our FIVE STAR ACTIVIST'S RESOURCE THREAD? It's a beauty, and expanding all the time!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=106&topic_id=8816&mesg_id=8816

DEEEElighted you're doing this!

HUGS!

[NewJeffCT]

273. good idea

I'll sign up. Not sure if it will do much good, as my local paper seems to want to bury the Iraq story.

[blondeatlast]

3. I hope you've been lurking here a long while; if not,

you've missed some damn good strategists already.

In GD2K alone today, you can get advice on how to handle Nader, how to deal if OBL is captured, how to make Obama an asset to both the Illinois AND national campaigns, ad infinitum.

We'll do our part, will YOU?

[Dem_Strategist]

5. I have been here for a while

This message board is a valuable resource for Democrats. A number of prominent Dems lurk here. Some post on occasion.

The key to this election is to understand the mechanisms by which Republicans deal with the media and to stay not one, but two steps ahead of them.

[Carni]

22. Good-because I want to ask you

What is the Kerry camp going to do about this swift boat BS?

I don't want to see a whole replay of the Gore campaign with the turning the other cheek and staying positive business and I know a lot of other people that are concerned with this same issue.
They don't feel the campaign is hitting back hard enough (some don't feel they are hitting back at all)

Thoughts?

[alarcojon]

83. I second that question

and hope you will find the time to give us a response.

Welcome to DU, and I hope to interact with you on many matters.

[SangamonTaylor]

221. Clinton did his part on the Daily Show....n/t

[ibegurpard]

8. "We'll do our part, will YOU?"

That's my question exactly. For example, I want to talk about the whole "swift boat" thing. Here on DU, there has been extensive research into the background of right-wing activities of the key players... specifically John O'Neill. Yet, I don't hear any of the spokespeople bringing this up. Yes I know it's considered bad form to attack the person instead of responding to the argument but sometimes that is exactly what needs to be done. I also hear a lot of (and this concerns me a lot because of the Gore campaign) "we shouldn't be dignifying that with a response." That is a sure-fire loser in a media-world dominated by right-wing spinmeisters. Now, I'm not saying that the Kerry campaign needed to address the actual bogus charges but I think they should've been IMMEDIATELY pointing out the backgrounds of these people to discredit them before this whole fiasco started to take hold.

[KittyWampus]

213. Apparently Carville Got The Info On The Liars & So Did Chris Matthews

somebody handed them the opposition research.

[Gryffindor_Bookworm]

4. I'm not sure I believe you, but if you're serious....

....you and everyone else advising Kerry needs to RUN to http://www.whiterosesociety.org and listen to last night's Mike Malloy show.

Most DUers have firm ideas and strategies that would help Kerry -- if we, the liberal base, were important. I'm not convinced we are.

I don't mean to insult you; I'm very frustrated. I *want* to believe you. I really do.

[Dem_Strategist]

7. Mike is a true patriot

I'm glad Air America finally gave him a forum, though it's a shame he can't be as hard-hitting as he used to be.

I completely understand your skepticism. Judge my veracity based on the ideas and strategies I share with you.

[liberalnurse]

74. Excellent observation.

[Name removed]

246. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

6. If this is legit, going back to some previous threads can help

you understand that DUers have wanted Kerry to deal with the spin instead of playing chess.

We are willing to help, if Kerry is truly willing to listen.

[Dem_Strategist]

10. The Kerry-Edwards campaign stays on top of DU

as well as numerous blogs, websites, and chat forums. It factors into the campaign's thinking.

What YOU need to understand is the complexity of decision-making and the precision with which decisions are made.

[merh]

15. I understand the complexity of it, I think if you read any of my

posts on the issues you will see that I have warned folks not to judge without taking all aspects into consideration. But, being a DUer and monitoring many threads, I also understand the need for the simplicity of the response and the need for a quicker response to the lies.

I must say the campaign did great with the counter to "turn the corner" that was superb.

I am also glad you guys monitor the forum. What can we do to help other than what we do now. I would venture to guess that most DUers are waging their personal wars against the misinformation. We all have links to sources that debunk the myths and lies, we come here for assistance. Many have websites that do the same thing.

Let us know what more we can do and DUers will do it because we are serious about this election and our future.

[RogueTrooper]

26. I am glad they do

The Dean campaign never took DU that seriously and I always felt that they missed something important.

[merh]

112. You could spend all day and night responding to us

We have all sorts of ideas, but we are anxious and serious about winning.

Regarding the complexity issue, if you get the chance,please see post 61 at

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=printer_friendly&forum=132&topic_id=604705&mesg_id=605110

If the substance of this post is correct, then Kerry needs to let people know this (imho), to just say things are complex without a why or the emotions and reasons that make it complex doesn't always work.

Also, please try to get the Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots involved with Kerry camp or help them be heard. They are discussed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2199722

[volosong]

224. We Understand Very Well

How the Republicans can kick the shit out of us; steal votes; and spin the media dizzy. They are also doing a fair job of jerking Kerry around. I suspect that one of their plans is to keep him spinning in every direction reacting to their charges until he looks weak, indecisive, and foolish (not necessarily in that order).

George aWol Bush may have an IQ scarcely greater than 9+11, but he projects a (false) impression of steadfastness, authority, and control. Bush also speaks to crowds on the level of an 8th grader. That bestows great advantage in certain areas of the nation. Ironically, our Idiot Prez is a tough nut to crack, and he's going to be drawing the national security/terrorism card until election day.

John Kerry playing the punching bag may calculate on giving Bush enough rope to hang himself, but I wouldn't bet the Presidency on that.

[Jane Austin]

9. You don't say anything about writing or calling newspapers

Or radio and TV stations.

Does that not do any good?

What about under-the-radar leafleting; ie, leaving leaflets everywhere you go - - waiting rooms, break rooms, shopping carts restrooms, etc.?

[Dem_Strategist]

12. That's what the Kerry Media Corps has you do

.

[Nite Owl]

11. I received the email

regarding the Kerry media corp a while ago. Maybe you could share with the Kerry campaign that it should be sent out again. I'm sure that there are many new Kerry people joining that don't know about this. Do all the emails, calls and letters to the various tv news producers help at all or are we just whistling up a tree so to speak? The news that is left out is just as important as what is reported and the way it is reported in my opinion.

[DemNoir]

13. A Question

What media do you consider most important? Here at DU, I think we are much to concerned about cable news shows. It seems that not many people are really watching them according to the ratings.

[Dem_Strategist]

16. Good question

There has been a disparity between coverage of Kerry-Edwards in local press and the national media. Kerry's "Believe in America" post-convention roll-out has been received enthusiastically in local newspapers, but the usual suspects have pushed GOP spin in the national outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, and on cable nets and network news.

[kentuck]

140. But is it the same audience every night ?

If not...then the overall numbers might be larger than we think?

[NashVegas]

14. From a Democratic Underground User, The Most Important Thing YOU Can Do

Is leave our community alone to do its own thing instead of trying to harness it.

[Dem_Strategist]

19. That's an absurd statement if you really want to win

Think about it.

[NashVegas]

142. No, Not Really

A flowing internet is not the field for cementing wins, it is the field for keeping the game in play. Trippi & Dean - or someone in that organization - didn't understand that. To make this a field for winning, it requires you change the nature of the thing and in so doing, in the long run you choke the culture in favor of society.

In my more generous moments, I'd like to think Clinton's administration was fully aware of what they were doing with the hands-off approach.

[Jim Sagle]

227. Chickenshit bullshit.

[Hoping4Change]

150. Agreed, cisco's statement is absurd, I see nothing in your

remarks to suggest the Dem Party wants to control DU, you are stating that DU is a valuable resource to get an overview of what people are thinking etc.


I have often thought that the Dem Party ought to publicize DU in some way to get the word out that such a place exists because many new DUers are finding this place only by accident.

DU is a tremendous resource for people who have become wary of the the mainstream media and unlike many excellent websites DU has the advantage of progressive people opining each post.

The range of opinion here is evidence that this is not affiliated with the Democratic Party per se so it could be a valuable resource for swing voters who may want more information before committing their vote.

[KharmaTrain]

242. If DU Is Viewed As A Part Of The Democratic Party...

...it would be the end of DU as the vibrant community is is.

Another site would then spring up.

I don't see what's wrong with the Democratic party harvesting ideas or soliciting for free flow and dialogue here. It's not as though Dem Strategist is asking for money.

I sense we are among some very special company and I welcome this person to DU and hope he is able to dialogue with as many of us as possible.

Cheers!

[Hoping4Change]

256. I agree with you that DU should be separate however helping

to publicize the existence of DU as an independent progressive board doesn't mean that DU is part of the Dem Party. When I was suggesting that the Dem Party publicize DU, I was thinking of indirect endorsements, perhaps Carville making mention of it in a passing remark. Frankly I think DU's free ranging nature, one not tied to a Party platform is what makes it so valuable to the Dem Party.

[mzmolly]

214. I agree with you Dem_Strategist!

:hi:

Looking forward to your online guidance.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tandot]

24. I guess you are speaking for yourself, Crisco

I am interested in hearing new ideas.

As you are probably aware that freerepublic.com is extremely well organized. They know what to do whenever anyone in the media is saying anything negative about Bush. They've organized to contact Slim-Fast after Whoopy made her "infamous" comment about Bush and then bragged about the Slim-Fast response they got. They make sure that the SwiftVets against Kerry thing stays actively in the press by contacting the media. They continuously post email addresses and ways to contact lawmakers, the media, and corporations and urge their members and their families/friends to contact them.

I think we have to get better in contacting the media so they don't just hear from the right-wing extremist.

[NashVegas]

138. Apparently So

IMO, there are other sites and organizations for those who wish to harness a herd. I do not admire FreeRepublic for the exact reasons you mention, and am saddened that anyone would wish to remake DU in its image.

[Jim Sagle]

228. Chickenshit bullshit.

[Paradise]

28. I happen to 'second' your motion! :) n/t

[calimary]

244. I COMPLETELY and UTTERLY disagree.

This is a TREMENDOUS, Solid-Gold resource, with LOTS of excellent ideas and approaches debated and polished and fine-tuned here - ideas I would LOVE to see going mainstream. Because of the many links to alternative/international media and reports that never see the light of day in conventional "reporting," I think many of us here are better-informed than the average American. We tend to know about more stories, in more detail, than most. Yes, some of it is way out in left field. But other stuff is well-resourced, thoroughly-researched, and thoughtfully considered. And Dammit, it ought to be put to use!!!

There are some keen insights, and nimble minds here. They can be of GREAT use to you. I'm eager to contribute!

[Paradise]

251. Respectfully, variety is the spice of DU!

A staunchly independent thinker, once Dem Strat was vetted by Will Pitt, I welcomed him/her. :)

[blondeatlast]

30. I find that very disingenuous. I want to WIN, as well as discuss ideas,

critique our candidates/startegies, etc.

If they can take the criticism (and there's a lot of it) they stand to gain something very valuable.

If you think I'll let up on our candidates just because there is someone listening in, think again.

The campaign ends on November 2, but I'll still be here--and if the strategists are smart, so will they.

[WilliamPitt]

75. Wow. What a dumb idea.

[Walt Starr]

79. THANKS FOR CONFIRMING THAT Dem_Strategist is the REAL DEAL!!!!

I appreciate it, Will!

[69KV]

104. Harness DU or pick up good ideas from DU?

Think about it, the Kerry campaign and other top Dem leadership do read DU and they pick up good ideas here. I've seen several ideas that were first floated here or on blogs picked up by political campaigns. They'll flesh the ideas out first with advisors and focus groups of course. But discussing new ideas and strategies here can get them on the map nationally, if they're feasible. It's also how Dem strategists gauge what the Dem grassroots is thinking.

Is DU an organizing tool or just an isolated discussion board?

[NashVegas]

135. Thanks for Noting the Difference

I suspect it's lost on many.

[CBHagman]

133. I completely disagree.

We're not here for mental masturbation; we're here to learn, exchange, get moral support, maybe have a laugh, alert each other, promote reform, and hopefully see our candidates advance to elected office and then to more action. I don't want to be sitting here typing while America goes fascist on me.

[hippiegranny]

162. I do not agree at all.

We are not a private country club. Nor do we live in a bubble. This is much different from asking pro-Bush people not to participate.

[SemperEadem]

168. speak for yourself, as you don't speak for me in this

[mzmolly]

212. CRAP ON THAT! Let's get active man!!!

*sheesh*

I want to do more than discuss. I want to act. :hi:

[Jim Sagle]

226. Chickenshit bullshit.

[Chili]

17. this is absolutely dead-on

"John Kerry's chief opponent is NOT George Bush. It's the media. And you can help defeat Bush by doing everything in your power to fight media spin."

It does the Dems no good if we can't even get our message heard on the air, if we're shouted down and screamed out of existence. The format of pundits arguing with each other is detrimental to us because we aren't as rude as they are, and their voices are more strident. They fight dirty, and they argue dirty. Hard to combat that. That's why Begala and Carville are so effective - they don't let anyone get the best of them, they run roughshod over everyone arguing with them, but they are only two...

HOW to get our defenses - and offenses - heard when even CNN spins Kerry's message negatively? If not for Stewart, Maher, and Olbermann out there, we'd have no on-the-air voice at all. CNN is the most disappointing.

About the internet: those are great ideas, but you can't force independents or anyone with an undecided open mind to go to a website (Media Matters is excellent). It's the boob tube that commands attention; the more savvy voter already knows where to go for information and the facts, and they've already made up their minds.

Not being pessimistic, and not being argumentative about websites, just being pragmatic,... and looking for a solution. I do believe Kerry will win in November, but these are the dog days...

[THUNDER HANDS]

18. What happens

If Kerry starts playing Old Maid and we're all stuck playing hopscotch? What does the campaign do then?

Or what if I'm I really like Shutes and Ladders, but Kerry thinks that's too liberal and opts for a Connect-Four strategy?

I think we really need to know these things.

:D

Anywhoo, good luck with the media thing. I can't wait to find out your secret identity. Just out of curiosity though, are you a man or a woman?

[annxburns]

20. If you want proof look at this ...

Go to ABC News The Note. Yesterday they said the race was Kerry's to lose. Those comments were posted on the National Review website. Look at the post today. Filled with mea culpa's and a link to a disgusting RW sight which smears Kerry. Why? They got feedback and they bowed to the pressure.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html

Signed up for Kerry mediacorps ....

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tandot]

29. Thanks, annxburns. And Here is the reason for it:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1189547/posts

One of the posts:

To: mhking
Here is the email I just sent to the email address listed above:

I voted for Al Gore in 2000. I am voting for President Bush this year.
I get a little annoyed when I see article after article about people who have voted for Bush in 2000, but are now voting for Kerry, but no mention of the opposite side of that equation. Al Gore got alot of votes from Union Households and Southerners and I think that Kerry is going to lose many of these voters. I personally didn't switch to "Pro-Bush" until the run-up to the Iraq war, when I noticed that the democratic party started "Bush-Bashing" and playing politics with homeland security and Iraq shortly before the November 2002 elections.
That election was the first time I voted Republican. It was also the first time voting republican for many in the South(especially Georgia) and Union households(Especially in the Industrial Midwest).
Since then, the Bush-bashing has just gotten worse and worse, and I no longer see the Mainstream media(ABCnews included) as unbiased. I think that the Democratic Party has become more "Elitist" over the last few years, increasingly representing hollywood and left-wing urbanites, as opposed to working families. John Kerry is the perfect poster-child for the new "Elitist" Democratic Party that I no longer will vote for.



12 posted on 08/11/2004 10:47:03 AM PDT by Betaille ("Show them no mercy, for none shall be shown to you")

[enough]

23. Perhaps a less patronizing tone

would promote a more auspicious beginning for you here.

"Some of you are playing checkers while Kerry is playing chess. "

Please understand that this board has many functions, one of which is for immediate, "one-dimensional responses" to events as they go by. This is definitely a place where people feel free to vent, as well as to strategize, philosophize, and organize.

Everybody here is HOPING FERVENTLY that Kerry is indeed playing chess. Many of us are assuming that that is the case. We are eager to hear whatever enlightenment you have to give us, in detail. You can skip the posturing.

Welcome.

[Dem_Strategist]

42. Point taken and thanks for the welcome.

.

[tom_paine]

25. Thank you, dem_strategist

Welcome to DU!

:toast: :toast:

You might want to consider what inner thinking is being revealed here, though.

The Busheviks from the SS to Uncle Karl's Dirty Tricksters plus Pillboy Pigboy etc. is watching.

Not to say I am not appreciative of what you are doing, but consider that.

Finally, my thoughts (and I am interetsed to hear yours) is that we may be playing Checkers, Kerry may be playing chess in the manner of the Old American Republic.

But the Busheviks are playing the Caeser Game.

Think about THAT, too, please.

I would love to hear your thoughts.

And again...thank you.

I'll be joining the Media Corps, soon.

[Dem_Strategist]

43. I like your writing style

very original.

[Trajan]

31. I completely agree ....

But even you, a Dem Strategist, may be adhering to fallacious beliefs ..

The Media IS a huge problem, but it isnt the only problem ... it is but one element in a complex web of facts and realities ...

Let's not overly simplify our task: it really is numerous tasks against numerous entities through numerous strategems and numerous actions ...

We need to act against the media submission to the Bush campaign's harsh tactics, willing or coerced, as we also need to force the states to properly adhere to the strict certification requirements for touch-screen balotting, as we also need to force the states to maintain proper controls on voter registration rolls, as we also need to rally our own democratic voters for the election of their lives, as we also need to make contact with moderates and independents who are disenchanted with the GOP program of late ....

I could go on and on: there IS much to do .... Let's not oversimplify our work ...

That being said: It's good to have you aboard: ... I'm all for doing what we can whereever we can ...

[Hamlette]

32. My advice? Get James Carville. He's the only guy on our side mean enough

to get this bastards.

Where is he anyway?

[madfloridian]

33. Venezuela?

?

[Toby109]

87. How do we know this is not James Carville?

:evilgrin:

[JohnLocke]

164. Don't laugh.

It's very possible.

[Francine Frensky]

179. there's no accent

no way is this the ragin' cajun.

[volosong]

225. Where is James Carville?

Rest assured that he is very active and on top of the situation.

[Julien Sorel]

34. I'm not so sure thinking about the media as "opponents"

is the right way to go about it. I think I understand the intent of your message, but lots of people here are irrationally paranoid about the media as it is; labeling media as "opponents" will make that worse, and the tone of action will be negatively impacted.

Thinking of the media as "opponents" will also tend to reinforce a defeatist attitude some people here have adopted: "they are all against us, anyway, what's the point? Kerry will be Gored by the corporatist media no matter what happens."

The big picture goal is to change the direction of this country for the better. The next level down goal is to get rid of Bush/elect Kerry, plus as many other Democrats as possible. The means of achieving those goals is to influence and co-opt the media, which shape the opinions of the public. So the media are tools, and learning to use those tools becomes the objective of any collective action of informed activists -- us. Thinking about your tools as "opponents," or the enemy, doesn't help you to master them, quite the opposite, in fact.

[KurtNYC]

82. If the media is the opposition's tool then it IS the opponent

Where the media is biased - expose it.

When the media takes an increasingly disengenuous stance to protect Boosh -- help them discredit themselves.

And when the news media trys to manipulate the election through skewed polls -- sue them, weaken them and roll them.

[Julien Sorel]

94. You are thinking of the media

as innately antagonistic, which is the exact attitude I am against. Taken as a group, the media are not part of some pro-Bush/Republican conspiracy. They are people like you and me, with attitudes, pressures, strengths, weaknesses, and above all, limitations, just like us.

The smart thing to do is to figure out how to get them to express the message we want. Very few people in the media, Fox excluded, go to work thinking "I'm going to slant things so that Bush looks good and Kerry looks bad." This includes the editors. They have jobs and responsibilities, time constraints. In one of my past lives I was a journalist, and I can tell you that most journalists are simply trying to get a passable story out on deadline. When you think of them that way, as harried and often under-informed people, instead of as part of some hostile monolith, it becomes possible to figure out how to influence them.

So when you say, "Where the media is biased - expose it," I agree with you. I simply don't want people thinking the media are automatically biased against our goals. We can influence their reporting and change their biases through smart, focused, collective action. Or we can look at them as enemies, as roadblocks. I think I know which outlook has more potential.

[RandomKoolzip]

119. Actually, the media IS "part of some pro-Bush/Republican conspiracy..."

Seriously. Go read David Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine." The media is overwhelmingly under the influence of the "Four Sisters."

[Julien Sorel]

139. Go read Bernard Goldberg's "Bias."

It's a crappy read, but probably no worse than the book you recommended. Goldberg claims the media are biased left. So whose "expert" is correct? Ultimately, of course, it doesn't matter which direction you think the media are biased in, as long as you believe you can change that bias, or at least, influence the way the media report news.

[Maeve]

158. Compare the notes

"Bias" is minimally researched--one opinion presented without proof. "Republican Noise Machine" is meticulously documented.

Personally I want my news straight, with minimal bias and an honest attempt made to present truth. But that's not what Goldberg et al want--they want you to believe ALL media is slanted and truth is relative. Change the rules to that sort of media and the Big Liars win every time.

[Julien Sorel]

169. Footnotes, documentation.

I could write the most hideously dishonest piece if tripe imaginable and document it to the moon and back. So what? It wouldn't make it more correct.

Look, I keep saying this, and running in to people who simply want to "prove" the media are biased against them: it doesn't matter if the media are biased or not, what matters is what you do about it. That's been my point all along, but no one seems to want to get it. Use the media as a means to an end. They are pliable -- if you take the correct approach. Crying about a bias you think exists (and you're in a distinct minority there), isn't going to do a thing.

A hypothetical: You sell Coke. The media prefer Pepsi. Are you going to complain because the media are biased against Coke, or are you going to figure out how to get them to buy your product instead of the other guy's?

[Maeve]

190. "Dishonest piece of tripe" w/footnotes

Sounds like a Anne Coulter book! :D But very badly footnoted...

Same issue, different approaches...I want the media to be an honest broker, so I prefer to point out that blatant bias hurts everyone; the media advocating Pepsi over Coke hurts the consumer who may, in fact, want to go with the Uncola. To change this, you have to do several things at once--open new modes of communication and point out that the old modes are incomplete sources of info being two means to the same goal. That, and I do believe in the end that Lincoln was right about not being able to fool all the people all the time....

[SemperEadem]

177. oh, like Goldberg isn't biased and slanted himself

[RandomKoolzip]

232. No, really.

I'm serious.

This isn't a subjective thing. There's proof all over the place.

[Carni]

144. Look at the salaries of mainstream so called "journalists" and anchors

I agree with the original poster about the media being the main problem for Kerry in this election (sorry but I do)

Most of these talking heads are in a tax bracket that benefits greatly from the bush regime and I sometimes wonder if ideology has anything to do with what is going on in the US media.

Money talks...etc

[Julien Sorel]

151. I don't disagree with the intent of the original poster,

just the approach. I think elections are won and lost via the media. Clinton said something to that effect 10 years ago, and he was absolutely correct. It's the attitude that the media are opponents that I disagree with. Think of them as prizes, as tools, as objectives, as whatever, but when you start thinking of them as enemies, as many here do, you put yourself in a hole when it comes to influencing them.

The right wing has an entire apparatus of what amounts to monkeys throwing poo at media figures. Dittoheads, Rushbots, whatever names they go by, they have convinced themselves that the media consist of a bunch of damn liberals, who are out to subvert this country's values with godless hedonism, blah blah blah, and they attack the media at every turn for its putative liberal bias. It's a crude approach, but it's been somewhat effective. I think we can do better by using reason, forceful but thoughtful persuasion. The alternative is to be the left wing version of the fat guy with the pill habit, and I don't think it will work -- they've cornered the market on obnoxiousness. We're smarter than they are, we just have to act like it, and know that we can get results by playing the game better.

[Carni]

176. The fat guy with the pill habit has been quite effective

So has faux news.

Most of the general public isn't very "thoughtful" these days and Bill Clinton was impeached.

I think we need to hit the media at every opportunity and as far as I am concerned they are the enemy of the public good...

The mainstream media doesn't report anymore they spew propaganda.

[Julien Sorel]

181. They've always spewed propaganda.

So what?

This whole sub-thread simply reinforces the point I've been trying to make. Guess my communication skills need improvement.

[calimary]

258. I've gotta go with Carni on this.

Consider this passage:

Given The Post's reputation for helping topple the Nixon administration, some of those involved in the prewar coverage felt compelled to say the paper's shortcomings did not reflect any reticence about taking on the Bush White House. Priest noted, however, that skeptical stories usually triggered hate mail "questioning your patriotism and suggesting that you somehow be delivered into the hands of the terrorists."

It's from Howie Kurtz's article (surprisingly, on the FRONT page of the Washington Post) - "The Post on WMDs":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58127-2004Aug11.html

This is what they were talking about.

Somewhere here on DU, a couple of years ago, someone posted about having gone to a town meeting held by his congressman, Democrat Pete "Fortney" Stark of Northern California. Stark is NOT a man known for pulling his punches, okay? But a couple of years ago, he was utterly spineless. And he admitted it. And he said everybody else on Capitol Hill was, too. HE TOLD HIS CONSTITUENTS, FLAT OUT, that Congress was scared to death to say anything - ANYTHING - that smacked of not supporting "their president." That's because to do otherwise would be to bring down the wrath of God from voters who wrote or called or emailed by the THOUSANDS - with hate mail, slamming them as Saddam-lovers, questioning their patriotism, insulting them, threatening them (yes, there were threats galore), evil, ugly, vile horrendous torrents of complete ICK.

You know where those came from? From armies of "freepers" and "ditto-heads," who know only what limbaugh tells them, what hannity tells them, what the Pox "news" network tells them, what whichever knuckledragger is loudest and most obnoxious on the free republic website tells them, what lucianne and jonah goldberg tell them, what ann coulter tells them, and more. These people martialled their forces in HUGE NUMBERS - forces that are historically willing and ready to march in mindless lockstep with whatever their "leader" says (visions of Nazi stormtroopers pop into my head). It's a veritable Attack of the Clones. rush says "BARK!" and that, they do. They do it without question, so they demand all the rest of us do exactly that, as well. Fortney Stark is usually one of the first among us to yell "BULLSHIT!" and tell 'em exactly what he thinks, to hell with the consequences. He's usually not a bit hesitant or afraid to get in somebody's face if he thinks he or she is full of it. And if somebody like Fortney Stark can be cowed and bullied, I tell ya there is NO hope for the rest of us.

And how many of us weren't there, either? I lump myself in here, too, at least briefly. Because 9/11 and the rest of the frenzied hoo-hah left me silenced for a little while, too. I was one who wavered and said - well, maybe I better sit back and see what transpires. How much skepticism WAS there immediately after 9/11 when the White House was ramming the Patriot Act and the Iraq War Resolution down everybody's throats? When the overriding reaction all across America was to go kick somebody's ass, and the bloodlust for revenge was at the boiling-over point? There was NO ONE daring to say "uh, guys, can we stop for just a moment and seriously look at what's happening here?" NO ONE. And into that vacuum rushed the exploiters of limbaughland and rupert murdoch. They seized a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and ran with it. And they won, easily, because there was NOBODY ELSE out on the track, trying to run that race against them, and beat them to the finish line.

Further, I submit that the wily manipulators IN THE WHITE HOUSE, who realized these people were their (literally) "right hand," pushed them and cheered them onward. kkkarl rove is macchiavellian enough to recognize a Satan-given opportunity when he sees it. Especially since they had their plans all ready to go anyway against Iraq and were just waiting for something to spring the trap for them. Probably a select number of calls went out, from rove and friends, to get the limbaughs of the land onboard, and then the limbaughs all ran with it, suitably unleashed.

And isn't it so much easier is it to win, anyway, when you have completely disabled and disbanded ALL of your opponents? You can run the table, unchallenged. It's easy to win when you're playing by yourself. And there's nobody else playing against you, and nobody else is holding any cards, or throwing any dice, or moving any game pieces. Of COURSE you carry the day.

And that's what they did.

Furthermore, here at DU, it began, I believe, on or shortly after bush's inauguration day, when a few discontented souls found a place to meet and commiserate, probably thinking they were all alone in their grief and disgust. This site didn't start out to be almost 50-thousand members strong. It's grown slowly as more of us got more sick-to-death of the shit that's gone on, and started looking around. That phenomenon is happening all over the country now. And now, we're reaching the point where we ARE FINALLY beginning to hit back, and shout back, and we're actually muscling up to that gaming table and grabbing a handful of cards for OURSELVES. And the enemy, now fat, sassy, and spoiled, is outraged that we DARE want to get into the game when they've had it ALL TO THEMSELVES for so long.

They got used to things being the other way. They got used to having the game and the gameboard to themselves. They liked that a LOT because it meant they won all the time (kinda shows you then and there under what circumstances they even CAN win - ONLY WHEN NOBODY ELSE IS PLAYING!!!! That should tell you something about their philosophy and gaming skills. Hey, I'm a world-class soccer player when I'M the only one out there! Max Cleland would be a world-class soccer player if there was NOBODY ELSE out there.) And that's how they want it to stay. They're gonna get mean and nasty and try to bully us back out of the game - so they can return to their own comfort level where everything is how THEY want it.

But there's no more 9/11. That Is OVER. People are starting to wake up from their stupor, and all that's left is a trail of lies and suspicion and a lot of fishy smells. Fewer people are willing to stay blind, deaf, and mute anymore. There's just too much shit and wreckage and fuck-ups that's been smeared all over everywhere.

Look, I'm not criticizing ANYBODY here for inactivity or reluctance or paralysis-born-of-fear. I'm just as much at fault for not being more courageous and in-yer-face, and MUCH SOONER, than I was. I remember the names I got called, by some neanderthal, who did NOT appreciate it when I finally got up the nerve to answer one of those stupid anti-Clinton/pro-bush emails (what happened was - I got fed up, and I finally realized that I actually COULD do that - that there really was NOBODY stopping me). You should have seen the bile and the anger and the accusations that were hurled at me! The guy DEMANDED to know "WHERE WERE YOU 9/11?!?!?!?!?!!" Yes. It was "where were you 9/11?" There was no "where were you ON 9/11?" I was a Saddam-lover and a traitor and a commie and a baby-killer and a kitten-drowner and a vivisectionist and a Satanist and a monster and whatever foul epithets this guy could think up. And when I responded to this person, MORE vile and vitriol came back my way. I responded again, and got more of the same. I never could get through. We couldn't even reach any common ground. And I finally gave up because I realized there would be NO reasoning with this individual.

Same thing when we were protesting against the run-up to war. I can still remember the people driving by and flipping us off. Fortunately, in our neck of the woods here in liberal West L.A., there were more people who were on our side than against us. But people who were against us were SERIOUSLY, RADICALLY against us. And they WOULD NOT BE MOVED. They did NOT want to listen to ANY other point of view. At ALL. I had this argument with girlfriends who were just absolutely unmoved. "We HAVE to support OUR PRESIDENT!!!" "WHY won't you fly the flag TO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS! You've GOT TO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!" And it made NO impression at all when I'd respond that I'm supporting our troops by trying to KEEP THEM FROM HAVING TO GO OVER TO THAT HELL HOLE where they have NO BUSINESS BEING SENT!

Where we've come to, now, has been a long, arduous journey. And some people are still in the midst of that journey, or even just beginning that journey. Most of us - at least here on DU - got there a LONG time ago. But others are still on their way, and some of them have an awfully long way to go. And among the LAST of the latecomers will be the media, because those who haven't started that journey (because they can't, or they just WON'T) will do their damnedest to hold the media back.

I mean, look at Howie Kurtz's article. He's now voicing the general, hesitant, and reluctant admission by the Washington Post at large that it failed. On the coverage of the run-up to war. But do you see them taking that the one-step-farther that they need to go - and covering the campaign fairly, or holding bush's feet to the fire on Valerie Plame? Or much of ANYTHING else? I'm frankly surprised they've even gone this far. Because NOBODY likes to admit they made a mistake. We have a "president" who won't even entertain such a notion. So why should we expect real reforms, yet, from the media?

UNLESS WE BUILD OUR OWN LARGE, VOCAL, IN-YER-FACE ARMY that says TELL THE TRUTH - OR ELSE! We won't cause them to change if we're nice and mellow and mealy-mouthed about it. The people who got their attention to begin with - and STILL hold it - certainly weren't.

Sorry this is so long. But there ya go. They won't change on their own. They just won't. WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM CHANGE. In numbers as large as possible.

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. I assume you are exactly what you say you are

and of course I also maintain a healthy small reserve of doubt that maybe you are not. That is simply the way it has to be on public forums. So when you give us advise of course I will seriously consider it, as I would any thoughtful presentation. Your power to persuade here should be a function of what you have to say, not who you say you are, since we are in no position to double check that. Having said that I look forward to reading many more thoughtful posts by you here at DU.

Whenever I post at DU I always do so assuming that someone associated with Kerry's campaign, in a position such as the one you describe, will be reading it. May not be true in every case but I would be shocked if it never happened. It makes sense for Kerry's people to scan here for leads, ideas, and reactions. Same thing for Bush's people by the way, which is one reason why I never blindly accept where virtually anyone is coming from at face value alone. When I first showed up here at DU, some folks had some doubts about me, which is healthy. Objectively speaking, I don't mind anyone who still does as long as they keep an open mind while reading my posts.

Everything you have posted here so far makes good sense to me. By the way, sometimes I try to play chess myself, in writing posts here that I think someone like you might be reading. I assume others here do that also. If I point out a perceived area of weakness in Kerry's campaign, that does not automatically mean that I think his campaign is weak. I am trying to get YOUR attention, lol.

[Dem_Strategist]

46. Tom, you're perfectly entitled

to be a bit leery about my identity. It's really about the value of my suggestions. And rest assured, the campaign is listening.

[madfloridian]

36. How about Media Matters and Misleader and Rapid Reponse Network?

www.mediamatters.org
David Brock is even taking up for Dean and showing that he is being misquoted as well on the terror alerts.

http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/Read.asp?fn=df08112004.html
This site sends out a mailing every day.

I belong to both and get daily updates.

Also
http://www.rapidresponsenetwork.org/

[unfrigginreal]

37. Looking forward to your posts

I hope you're right about the checkers - chess analogy and there's a plan to go from a defensive strategy to an offensive one. It "feels" like we were getting better press prior to the convention and our "no bash" announcement.

Just listen to Imus these days, where he was calling for Cheney et al to be tried for treason a month ago, he's now back to his "Bush is a good guy" routine. He was basically defending the swift boat liars this morning and it didn't sound as though he planned to back off of that anytime soon. Mouthpieces like Imus need reasons to be critical of Bush because he'll certainly use what the other side gives him to be critical of Kerry, so I hope the campaign is paying attention.

Anyway, welcome to DU!

[Dem_Strategist]

45. Thank you

Imus will be Imus.

[henslee]

121. who listens to Imus? I do not think he is a factor. eom

[Carni]

136. I'll bet bush wishes he could say that about Stern LOL

I personally find Imus and his show unappealing... but he seems to have a wide viewing audience of swing voter types and every crumb of media support Kerry can get (whether I like the host or not)
is a plus IMO!

[madfloridian]

38. I do not like your checkers/chess analogy.

It is rather condescending.

[Dem_Strategist]

40. I said "some" of you

If it's not you, then please don't take offense. None was intended.

[madfloridian]

111. I have been told not to take offense here everyday.

I just said I thought it was condescending. If you have ideas for our Democrats to stand up and fight, I am very willing to listen. They don't know how anymore.

We are killing folks in Najaf, and we are not going to stop there. Tell me again why I should not be upset??

I don't mean to be rude, but I have been here since 2002 trying to get the media and the Democrats to get stronger.

Now the very candidate that gave a little energy is distanced and ignored. Thank goodness David Brock is trying to explain Dean's statements because most of the party do not have a clue.

[WilliamPitt]

101. There's a shocker

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redstateblues]

195. madfloridian is right- I have experienced the condescension as well

[grasswire]

39. uh....

...I would be more impressed with your first post if you hadn't sounded faintly paternalistic.

Keep in mind that brilliant strategists, media professionals, seasoned activists, top-notch writers, and political innovators post here.

Keep in mind that the biggest fault of Dem leaders and campaigns is their failure to LISTEN.

If the movers and shakers had listened to bloggers, DU-ers, activists, marchers, protesters, and the general howl from our solid Dem and progressive web sites, the world would be in considerably less pain than it now is.

So I'd like to have some indication from you (if you are actually connected in any official way to the campaign) how you are going to pass information in the other direction.

BTW, are you getting paid for this?

[Dem_Strategist]

41. When you find out who I am in November

you'll understand that I'm just trying to help us all win.

[TWiley]

48. Bush is scheduling a speech

three blocks from my home. Do you have any tips or links to current information concerning sucessful protesting at a bush speech?

[grasswire]

51. I don't consider your response...

...an answer to my two specific questions.

1. Will you be passing information the other direction?

2. Are you getting paid for this?

(If the campaign really wanted to harness the power of DU, they would hire someone who already has the ear of DU-ers.)

[Paradise]

53. sorry, i'm just not 'up' for "mystery" posters! n/t

[Dem_Strategist]

61. Everyone here is a mystery poster

:)

[Walt Starr]

65. I'm not

I'm open about who I am. So is Will Pitt.

Contact Skinner and get him to confirm. That would be adequate.

[Tom Rinaldo]

86. Makes good sense to me to for this person to hide his/her identity

If s/he is deeply involved in Kerry's campaign everything s/he posted on a BB would become public grist for debates and second guessing. Rather than exchanging ideas s/he would potentially be creating News with every post and would have to consider each post in that light. That simply is not the case for virtually any of the other people posting here, Will Pitt included. Look what happened to Chris Heinz when he dropped an off the cuff comment about the qualities John Kerry was looking for in a VP?

Maintain a healthy skepticism about the real identity of Democratic_Strategist, but we can't have our cake and eat it too. Either we can all feel honored to have a Kerry person drop by uncloaked, who waves the banner, and says keep up the good work but carefully scripts every word written, or we can have a free form discussion with someone who will not have to worry about his/her words being picked up and used out of context against the Kerry campaign. I opt for the latter, while maintaining a healthy doubt.

[Walt Starr]

89. I'm no longer skeptical

Will Pitt confirmed and Will's word is good enough with me!

:D

[papau]

85. "mystery poster"- a CIA/FBI file is a badge of honor - so I like a few

others post with no hiding our true identity (also what would be the point! :-) )

It will be fun to guess if I know you just by reading your word patterns!

And I am glad you will be posting more!

mail me if I can be of direct help in any way - other than money as I have little. Does the Campaign need one more Actuary, Tax person, or Finance person?

:-)

[Paradise]

95. :) Touche, Mighty Mouse! :) n/t

[CarolynEC]

76. You know, a big part of effective marketing...

... is understanding your audience.

But your statement says to me that you don't understand the DU audience at all. This "X-Files" approach seems likely to raise all sorts of alarms among the regular posters here, wouldn't you think?

Your credibility = zero unless and until you can demonstrate otherwise. You might want to give some serious thought to getting the "Skinner seal of approval," as others here have suggested.

[Hoping4Change]

159. It doesn't raise alarms with me. If you don't believe the

poster use the ignore button. Whether someone believes him/her or not makes no difference. How is the identity of anyone here influencing you? Do you change your opinion when you see a Will Pitt post? What if the poster was a repuke? We have here someone who is identifying him/herself as a strategist, the best approach would be to follow Pascel's opinion about the existence of god:

"If we bet there is no God, and there is we lose everything. If we bet there is a God, and there is a God we have everything to gain. Even if there is no God, we lose nothing. Better saved then sorry."

[SemperEadem]

182. Welcome to DU, Dem Strategist!

I, for one, am glad that you're taking the time to share your ideas, thoughts and insights with us. We all want a Dem in the white house, the houses of congress and the senate and as many governorships and state reps as we can get in November. If DU can be a resource to the Democrats with the goal being victory in less than 3 months, then, it's all good.


trivia: dumus is latin for bush.

[CarolynEC]

203. What would burying my head in the sand accomplish?

I will judge Dem_Strat based on the strategy he or she espouses. But in addition, if someone is on this board identifying himself as a Democratic Strategist, and claiming to dispense advice as a campaign insider, I think I have an interest in ascertaining whether there's any truth to it.

Pascal may be right about nothing to lose if there is no god. But my interests certainly are affected if someone is engaged in a disinformation campaign, or even just dispensing lousy advice to a credulous audience.

Edited to add: And, as I mentioned, descending on a board full of skeptics with an air of Mystery and Intrigue doesn't exactly scream out that this person is particularly skilled at marketing a message.

[Hoping4Change]

210. Actually your last comment about the mystery etc is interesting

and gives me reason to reconsider my post.

[Jim Sagle]

233. Chickenshit bullshit.

[madfloridian]

116. Who you are is no more important than what you stand for.

I know who I am, and I consider my thoughts just as important as anyone else's. I am willing to listen, but I don't like condescension....there has been too much of it here.

[Cassandra]

Will you announce Deep Throat after that?

Seriously, at some point I would like Kerry to speak about the value of community. When Dean speaks about this I find it very inspiring, but we don't have Dean front and center, so I'd like Kerry to pick up some of that slack. Someone on the tube said recently that taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society (I assume that's a quote from someone, but I'm not sure who). The next time Kerry gets swiped about taxes, I'd like Kerry to work on that theme.
When I'm speaking to a tax-hating wingnut, I ask them what it is they don't want to pay for (particularly good question in NYC where we have a lot of services) and they usually can't think of much except welfare, which is a fraction of its former self. I ask some of them if they grow their own food. If they don't and the truck bringing their food breaks an axle on the road they don't want to pay to repair, do they really think that the trucker isn't going to raise his fees to cover that, or refuse to deliver at all? When they went to public school, was the building already there, or did they have to build their own school building? The child who's education they don't want to fund might have turned out to be the best doctor for themselves or their children but we'll never find that out.
Sorry for the rant but I think you get the idea.

[GumboYaYa]

44. Welcome to DU Dem_Strategist....

I could not agree more about the media. We are in for several weeks of Kerry-bashing of the worst sort. I completely believe that Rove said that people would not know which side Kerry fought on in Vietnam.

It seems that every time the Repubs drop new accusations, regardless of the source, they are all out in force with a unified message. It is rare to see an individual who stays on message like Gillespie does. The Dems on the other hand seem to try to give real answers to questions where possible. That does not work in a soundbite world. The Repubs unity of message helps them cut through the clutter of the media b/c it is repeated so much.

What is the Kerry team doing to bring its allies together under one unified message?

[Domitan]

47. An idea

Now the GOP is using the media to attack Kerry's "sensitive" and thoughtful approach against Al Qaeda. Why not set up advertisments to show the folly of the GOP's hardheaded strategy vs Kerry's wiser strategy?

For example: Set up scenario where a town is plagued by gangsters.

Show a bunch of troopers razing the town to the ground. Plenty of gangsters are rounded up or killed, but so are many innocent civilians. Show many enraged people against the troopers who came to "save the town". Fastforward to scenes where many people take up arms with the gangsters against the troopers. Show an utterly lost cause with no winners.

Now show an alternative scenario with the same town plagued by gangsters. Show how the troopers and their superiors have successfully rooted out the gangsters without going all out using strategies such as supporting the civilians as much as possible (including showing them respect) which helps isolate the gangsters; more precise and patient strikes instead of going all out in blazes...etc. Show triumphant troopers and a town reclaimed by the civilians.

[gasperc]

49. help DU with alerts and stuff

like others here, I take you for your word, your a major dem-strategist and without a doubt many ideas/thoughts/stories were posted here and then found themselves somehow in the campaign a few days later. I also know the founders and the administrators were at the convention and beleive you guys hooked up. This is a very open forum, so help us with alerts or targeted e-mails, letter to the editors etc. I've used campaign underground a few times already to respond to something locally regarding Kerry. Be it statements by Cheney or Bush etc. Use the site as a tool, we all will help. We provided alot of seed money to the Ginny Schrader race, people from this site are helping to challenge Alexander's party switch, there have been great posts refuting the swift boat ads against Kerry which many, many DU'rs have used to incorporate into letters to the editor, etc.

We know running for Prez. is a huge chess game but this is a public forum, some people will get bent over the stupidest thing but alot of others pop up to help explain why you guys are doing things the way your doing them.

[blondeatlast]

50. C'mon, Karl Rove, you can't be THAT desperate!

All in good fun, friend, no offense intended.

;)

[Dem_Strategist]

63. Good one.

.

[The Wielding Truth]

123. Oh there are few lines they would not cross

Although, I tend to have faith that there is still an American dream living in this Party that believes there is strength in common individual freedom of thought. I am hoping you are a spokesperson for this freedom , DEM STRAD. Maybe you can funnel this fundamental idea into some delicious appetizer that the Right wing can ingest and be nourished. They need a good meal of truth and conscience.

[Walt Starr]

52. Welcome to DU, Dem_Strategist, but understand I am extermely skeptical

I cannot believe you.

If Skinner confirms you are who and what you claim to be, I will believe you.

Until then, I cannot take you to be what you claim to be. Sorry, but so close to the election, it is just as likely you are a disruptor attempting to throw us off in the wrong direction in order to help get Bush re-selected.

[Paradise]

56. I cannot believe him/her, either! n/t

[Walt Starr]

58. I will not believe them until Skinner confirms

If indeed they are who and what they claim to be, they can contact Skinner offline and Skinner can confirm.

Until then, I cannot take anything presented by this poster seriously.

[Paradise]

59. my sentiments, exactly! n/t

[Hoping4Change]

163. If you don't shoose to believe the poster use the ignore button.

You don't know the identity of any poster yet you engage. You or I could be a repuke but so what?

[Walt Starr]

166. Um, Will Pitt verified

and then I believed.

[Hoping4Change]

180. Frankly I think it was wrong for Pitt to do that given that repukes are

continually trolling these waters and now have been told that a bona fide strageist is here. To my mind that is about as brilliant as as bushco announcing the Al Qaeda opperative Khan. I hope demstrategist changes his/her name and lurks here.

[Walt Starr]

186. LOL, I think it's brilliant

Let 'em know that there are Dem Strategists lurking for ideas. Maybe they'll be busy preparing for the MIHOP outing while the little gems slip by and make it into the mainstream.

[hippiegranny]

207. i just wonder if rove's brain fund scanners

hang out at freeptardland - now that is a mother-lode of wisdom! ha!

[gasperc]

57. he did link to Kerry's media corps on a post

so this person might be who they say, but none the less , could this be someone who wins our confidence but then turns out to be a double agent for Bush???

I think you have a good point maybe this guy needs to be cleared by the admins before we get tricked into mass e-mailing on a phony story and then looking like dopes later!!!

too many angles, man, too many angles

[Walt Starr]

62. anybody could do that

A REAL Democratic Startegist would be able to contact Skinner offline, confirm who and what they are, and Sklinner could confirm that this is indeeda a Democratic Startegist.

Based upon my experience with Internet social interactions, healthy skepticism is always important.

[blondeatlast]

69. I've asked the Admins to look into this in AtA.

I wanna believe, but Rove IS struggling and just about desperate... :evilgrin:

[Walt Starr]

73. Okay, confirmation from Will Pitt is good enough for me

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=613305#613325

I know Will would never do anything to jeopardize this campaign!

[lostnfound]

209. Me too, so...lostnfound here, reporting for duty!

Sorry to be trite but I'm happy to have signed up.

[Worst Username Ever]

77. I second that.

[Eurobabe]

115. I third that. Sorry, too easy for someone to slip

on here and claim to be someone else, heck George Bush himself was on here a couple of weeks ago!

Suggest you get vetted by website owner(s). See what happens when the government screws with us?

[LiberalBushFan]

54. The debates are key, and it looks bad.

It appears the format is going to be moderator asks question, candidate gets one minutes to respond, etc. (i.e. Bush gets one minute to dodge the question and Kerry can't challenge him). If the debates are not renegotiated back to way it was when Clinton debates Bush and Dole then Kerry will lose. How did the Kerry campaign let this happen? This may be the most important thing we need to change.

The debates needs to be man-to-man so Bush can't dodge. No moderator bullshit.



Here's what bartcop.com had to say, this is right on:

Debate Formats for 2004
I didn't read ahead on this, ..cause I thought I'd be sick

Click Here

Exerpt:
The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) announced formats for its 2004 debates.
Dates and sites for these debates were announced on November 6, 2003 as follows:

First presidential debate:
Format

The candidates will be seated at a table with the moderator in the first and third presidential debates
and in the vice presidential debate. The second presidential debate will use the town meeting format
in which undecided voters, selected by the Gallup Organization, will question the candidates.

This is an incredibly bad idea. Accepting this format only helps Bush.
They'll stack the crowd with Freepers and suddenly it's a Springer Circus.


Each debate will last for ninety minutes, start at 9:00 p.m. ET, and take place before a live audience.

The first presidential debate will focus primarily on domestic policy, and the third presidential debate
will focus primarily on foreign policy. The town meeting debate and the vice presidential debate will be open to all topics.

Moderators

Each debate will have a different single moderator to be selected by the CPD.

That means they'll be FOX News bastards.


The moderators job in the first and third presidential debates and the vice presidential debate will be
to introduce and change topics, to ensure that the participants have equal time, and to encourage some
direct exchange among the candidates. The moderators will select all topics and questions.

This is an incredibly bad idea. Accepting this format only helps Bush.
Why can't the candidates debate man-to-man? They know what subjects are important.


In the town meeting debate, the town meeting participants will pose their questions to the candidates.
The town meeting participants will review their questions with the moderator (Brit Hume, who will
green light pro-Bush questions and bury the questions about WMDs) before the debate for the
sole purpose of avoiding duplicate questions. (and protecting Bush)

The moderators will have discretion to ask follow-up questions in all debates.

That means Brit Hume will press Kerry for details, pretending Kerry didn't answer the question
will accepting any crap Bush says as a full and complete answer. Kerry doesn't want to win?
Brit Hume will be all over Kerry with, "So why did you lie to America?" while FOX Fave Bush
will get the never-ending, "Well done, Mr President" grab on the ass after each non-answer.

First presidential debate: Fox
Vice presidential debate: ABC
Second presidential debate: NBC

This article failed to get into more specifics, such as are they going to play that silly game
where they count the seconds until Bush is off the hook, then make it illegal to go back and
make Bush answer the questions that he ran out the clock on?

I warned Kerry that the election would be won or lost with the debate rules.
Gore ran rings around Smirk, but Smirk kept weaseling out with those time limits.
Kerry seems to want to be "Gored" and that's not good

[gasperc]

60. Fox and Brit Hume moderate the first debate??

what a farce, I hope this is a joke post

[LiberalBushFan]

67. I'm afraid it's no joke.

Here's the original article:

http://www.debates.org/pages/news_040617.html

Moderators will decide on ALL the questions.

[CarolynEC]

102. Take heart! Fox is providing the "pool" coverage...

... but that doesn't necessarily mean they're the moderators.

Pool coverage refers to who sets up the cameras, microphones, etc. It's done all the time in, for example, courtroom stories -- just a way to keep things simple, rather than letting every news outlet clutter the room with its own equipment. Everyone just shares the signal from the one set of cameras and mikes.

The page you linked to says the moderator will be determined no later than Sept. 10, and doesn't mention Hume (thankfully!). So it may be that there's no connection bewteen who handles the pool coverage and who does moderating duty. Don't despair yet -- there's still a chance they'll pick Bill Moyers!

(Okay, maybe that's a bit TOO optimistic, but you know what I mean. :) )

[LiberalBushFan]

108. Perhaps, but that's not the biggest problem.

The main problem is the format, regardless of the moderator. If they're going to be answering mostly the moderator's questions rather than each other's, it's hardly a debate.

And since the debates are only 90 minutes, it's gonna be that 60 second answer bullshit. Bush can use his 60 seconds to just do his soundbytes, and instead of Kerry calling him on it the moderator just moves to the next question.

What's the deal with only 90 minutes? Weren't they much longer previously? Is choosing a president that unimportant today?

[CarolynEC]

131. I understand what you're saying...

... but a skilled debater can answer whatever question he or she wants, without appearing to dodge the question. It's a matter of redefining the question -- "I think what you're really asking is..." or "The answer lies in a deeper context..." or "This is directly related to the issue of..." -- or simply asserting one's authority to address a point that's been left unfinished. Thngs like that.

Is Kerry a skilled debater? Absolutely!

But, for just the reasons you've cited, he's really going to have to have his game on that night if he's going to win it.

[Ruby Romaine]

84. yeah, just look at the Davis/Schwartznazi debate-A Repuke moderator!

n/t

[CarolynEC]

55. A question for you, regarding Sandy Berger...

The day the story broke, ALL day long, the Associated Press was running write-throughs that referred to Berger putting documents in his pants and in his jacket.

Not once, as far as I could see, did they add the word "pockets," which would have given the story an entirely different tone.

I e-mailed the two reporters working on the story, pointing this out, and got no reply. What did the Kerry campaign do? Were they on the phones to the reporters and their editors, demanding clarification?

Or is that MY job alone? :wtf:

People here ARE doing their part. They ARE monitoring the media, they are writing letters and e-mails, they are out there engaging voters one on one. They are well aware that the media is the problem -- hell, 90% of this forum is devoted to that topic on any given day.

Creative ideas? We've got 'em. But unless the campaign is fighting just as hard to alter the media environment, our collective effort seems doomed to be little more than a footnote in campaign history. A website by CarolynEC criticizing Bush and the media means NOTHING in the scheme of things, if the campaign itself is unwilling or unable to use its own credentials to get on the phone and start engaging reporters and editors in shaping the day's news.

Frankly, aside from "join the Kerry media corps," your advice here seems to be pretty devoid of substance. And it makes your debut here and your "deep throat" approach awfully suspect, to say the least.

There's no lack of energy and committment at this level. Don't tell us to create more of it -- show us that the campaign is going to harness it.

[grasswire]

64. excellent post, thanks n/t

[tom_paine]

70. Well said, EC. Your response, Dem_strategist?

Upon further reading of this thread, I too am going to be somewhat skeptical.

But I am listening with an open mind.

What say you?

[Walt Starr]

71. I have an open mind

But cannot trust him on this until skinner confirms.

I would put 100% trust in anything Skinner has to say on the subject.

[merh]

66. Welcome to DU!

I hope we can help! :hi:

On Edit: I have joined the effort & signed up at Media Corps.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

68. All my advice can be boiled down to three points:

1) Listen to the grassroots. They know their friends and neighbors better than your polling experts do.

2) Fight back as hard as you are attacked.

3) Set the agenda; don't let the Republicans set it for you.

[merh]

81. I agree with you -- those 3 points are key!

Thanks for the post - I couldn't have said it so well and so succinctly.

[Skidmore]

105. Bingo!!!

Take back the language and regain America's humanity.

[longship]

185. One more point

Kerry's Grand Canyon statement was stupid beyond belief. Bush wasted no time in exploiting it. Kerry must stop supporting Bush on the war.

My fourth point:

Kerry must always frame his dialog with the public (press, etc.) in context with how his position differs from the Bush record. Note that this is not what the Bushies say that they will do or say they have accomplished but what has actually happened in the past three years.

Key points:

• Preemptive war-making
  
• Job creation
  
• The federal deficit
  
• Trade deficit
  
• Alienating our friends
  
• Infringement of Constitutional rights
  
• No Child Left Behind
  
• Science policy
  
• Extreme partisanship
  
• ...and so many more major issues to which the Bushies are vulnerable.
  

Also, we must never let the public forget:

• I oppose nation building.
  
• I am a uniter, not a divider.
  
• I will be the education President.
  
• I will create X million jobs.
  
• I will not raid Social Security.
  
• ...and so many more broken promises.
  

No statement should be verbalized by Kerry/Edwards without selecting one from the first list and one from the second list for contrast. Let nobody in the country be in doubt of the recklessness of the current administration.

[noamnety]

72. I know first hand this part is true

"Another is to start your own website listing media transgressions and linking to other such sites. (Form a webring.)"

I'm not doing a media watchdog site, just a debunking one, but I put it together Aug 1st and was getting hundreds of hits a day, almost immediately, and when I looked at the referrer logs, it was split fairly evenly in 3 areas. One was me linking it on forums, another was other people linking it up (Matt Gunn, some daily kos blogs, and someone here - that's how I found this place). And the third category was google searching. When the swiftboat ads first broke, for a day or two my debunking site was in the top 3 for some of the search strings, meaning people from all political views were getting exposed to it.

The fact is, the more sites we have, linking useful information back and forth (the webring concept) the higher up we jump in search rankings. And the more voters we reach.

People are looking (googling) for the truth, and it needs to be out there, not just on one site that they can dismiss with a shrug.

[fiorello]

78. Thanks! I'm so glad to see positive suggestions!

I need reassurance that letters to the media (such as Kerry's Media Corps) really makes a difference. If it does, I'm signing up - and if it does, I hope it continues after the election as an organized convert-the-media activity.

(Media Corps is hard to find on the Kerry web site - I never saw it until you posted the address.)

I tend to think that other web activities are just talking to the already-converted.

How-to-expose-the-media needs to continue as an ongoing topic - separate from the armchair campaign strategizing.

[Radical Activist]

80. RA To Media: This is your last chance

The fact that the corporate media sucks is something everyone from Ralph Nader to Joseph Lieberman can agree on.

I already get most of my news from non-corporate internet sites. I want to put the corporate media on notice that they will permenantly lose their audience if they continue with the right-wing corporate propoganda BS that they've been spewing. The fact that everyone watched the Dem convention on C-Span should give them a clue but I doubt it. They need to shape up or I'll tune out. That's what they'll hear from me. I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!

[RFKHumphreyObama]

88. Welcome to DU Dem_Strategist. We are honored and thrilled to have you here

and I look forward to reading more of your posts as you go along

I'll try and be creative and think of ideas and strategies over the next few weeks and months

[noamnety]

90. the media corps

If you have doubts about the effectiveness of the Media Corps, look at the catastrophic effects of our lackluster efforts compared to the Rove machine:

From the Washington Post on why they didn't push stories casting doubts on the WMD:

"Across the country, "the voices raising questions about the war were lonely ones," Downie said. "We didn't pay enough attention to the minority."

... "Priest noted, however, that skeptical stories usually triggered hate mail "questioning your patriotism and suggesting that you somehow be delivered into the hands of the terrorists."

http://forum.johnkerry.com/index.php?showtopic=56213&st=15&p=408514

[janx]

91. HELLO, Dem_Strategist! Some of us have been passing along

information to some of these places already, but thanks for pointing out useful channels.

We had great fun, for instance, last week...Our responses were EXTREMELY rapid, and they worked.

Would you please elaborate on your checkers/chess analogy?

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

92. Dem_Strategist, this is what I have been waiting for...

Thank you, Dem_Strategist: This is what I have been waiting for, an
inlet into the campaign.

(As an aside: This is my very first post on DU, been a lurker for a while now, feeling increasingly frustrated at the one way street that campaigns most often are. So, thanks again for the opportunity.)

You are dead-on about the chief opponent being the media -- I have been saying this for the last 10 years (my witness: Clinton "scandals"; does anybody here think this would have been possible if the media had not actively colluded with the Republican party?).

The key to understanding the process for fighting back is to first recognize that Kerry is playing it about right (in fact, he can keep the responses to the shrub's attacks a bit shorter and a bit more humorous on the one hand and bait the shrub back a bit more; but this is only a question of degree, essentially he is dead right on the track). What we have a problem with, is the usual Democratic problem: absolutely no support system worth the name. Prominent Democrats need to understand this and need to have a concerted strategy to attack this from the top down. I have a few suggestions:

0. Hold a summit meeting of the most prominent Democrats (Clinton, Gore, etc) and impress upon them the importance of understanding fully the barrier that the media has become, and the urgency of their putting their lives on hold for the next 3 minutes. Give them a tutorial on the art of public speaking, with special emphasis on simplicity and forthrightness (Clinton could be a great tutor, but he does not have the depth and breadth of understanding that Gore has of the current problem: so may be Gore can prepare the tutorial and Clinton can deliver it :)). The stranglehold the media and the Rethug's have on our political discourse is possible only because the Democrats do not project publicly, their full private understanding of how bad the media situation really is. Democrats have to refuse to play this silly game -- when an interviewer asks "How many languages can Teresa say shove it in", the response is not to act as if this is a normal question, the right response is to tell them that the question is the one that needs to shoved. The first principle of combat (which is what the political scene has become) is to not fight on the enemy turf -- we *have* to set the limits on what constitutes legitimate inquiry for the public good and what most certainly is off limits.

1. Then, have these tutored and ready prominent Democrats, who also have a sense of urgency about the media recklessness and are willing to politely but firmly, "take the gloves off", go on talk shows -- this point cannot be emphasized enough. I am sorry to say this, but we get weak-kneed representatives from our side showing up on these shows (prime example: the insane reluctance to draw attention to the shrub's AWOL-ness and the multiple deferments of the top echelons of this administration whenever Kerry's war record is challenged and on the other hand to counter the charges on Kerry directly, succinctly and poignantly: He showed up when he absolutely did not have to; the medals were given by the military, not by himself; he has had these for 30 years, why is the challenge being mounted now?; all but one of the accusers was there as the incidents occurred; what was the shrub doing when Kerry was in the Mekong Delta, anyhow?)

2. Learn to speak the truth without squirming: Why is it that Democrats on these TV shows and other media, display this absolutely puzzling sense of unease saying simple, patently obvious things? I contend that this tendency is the one that has made this Orwellian media world possible, as I said earlier. Take for instance the popular myth of "we have not been attacked for the last 3 years, therefore we are stronger and safer (due of course to the sage stewardship of the conscientious, hard-working pResident Bush!)": why will Democrats not point out that, on the one hand that it was a clear 8 years between the two attacks on our soil the last time too and on the other hand that, as the terror warnings indicate, Al Qaeda is already (this soon after a devastatingly effective BIG plot) in the land with on-going plans?

3. It may seem that the 3 points above are tangential to the current campaign -- I contend not; Kerry cannot break through the 50% mark unless we launch a broad and strategic counter-attack. We let this state of affairs come to pass only by not being vigilant and concerted, it will now take that much more coordination to effectively push back the relentless tide.

This will also set the stage for enabling Kerry to function when he wins -- if we do not broaden the scope of the discussion and goad the media into playing fair, then Kerry will be as hobbled as Clinton was. What good will the win be, then?

My last suggestion is that we, the citizens, also organize a huge peaceful protest against the media -- may be a mass hunger strike or a sit in at some national park or at the media locations. I for one am willing to go hungry the next three months or three years if it will get the media do start doing the right thing...

[Hoping4Change]

170. I can't agree more that Dems interviewed in the media have to

start calling a spade a spade. It is beyond belief that Dems play dumb about the games the media is playing during interviews. It seems as if they believe that if they play nice eventually the mean ol media types will change their ways.

BTW Sick_of_Rethuggery welcome to DU! Glad you're here.

[Gold Metal Flake]

175. ALL READ!! GREAT POST!!

Welcome to DU, Sick_of_Rethuggery. :hi:

[hippiegranny]

183. this is an amazing post

what a debut!!! i hope dem_strategist printed it out. i hope to hear ALOT more from you, sick_of_rethuggery!

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

215. Thank you, for the warm welcome!

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for all the welcoming messages -- I have long enjoyed all your conversations and am glad to belong to a group of intelligent, involved people.

Best Regards...

[KurtNYC]

93. Please, please get a reflector for Kerry's photo ops

The lighting is terrible. One person with a handheld reflector, possible amber, would make a huge difference. The lighting at the Grand Canyon was especially harsh and you couldn't see John's eyes; just brow shadow. Surely $160 is worth it.

http://www.evsonline.com/merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=1037

[Kenergy]

96. Welcome Dem_Strategist...

I trust Will on this.
Any suggestions/insight you have are welcome.

[CarolynEC]

103. I still need convincing...

... I'm kinda new to DU, and I don't know who Will is. Can you shed some light? Right now, all my alarm bells are ringing over Dem_Strat, for a range of reasons.

[Walt Starr]

110. Well, let's see, Elad has vetted them

Elad is one of the three guys that runs DU, so if Elad says it's a fact, it's a fact.

[CarolynEC]

126. Link? Thanx. :)

[Walt Starr]

161. Here ya go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=120x20632#20634

[CarolynEC]

200. Got it. Thanx. (eom)

[Gryffindor_Bookworm]

127. Why all this secrecy?

Will Pitt posts under his real name. :shrug:

[Walt Starr]

160. Will Pitt is not a Democratic Strategist working on a campaign

He's a writer who can use the exposure.

I'm just a crusty old curmudgeon.

[Gryffindor_Bookworm]

193. I guess my concern goes back to Kerry's distaste for the liberal base.

The only reason not to post the name here is if Kerry is ashamed or fears a negative reaction by having the name of a strategist associated with DU.

Otherwise, it looks brilliant. "Harnessing the power of the global community and realizing that the internet is where politically savvy voters meet to exchange ideas, the Kerry campaign has assigned a strategist to participate in these discussions. The largest of the progressive online communities, DU...."

See? That's a POSITIVE. Unless they're ashamed of us. :cry:

[Hoping4Change]

171. Why aren't you posting your name?

[Gryffindor_Bookworm]

188. self-delete (dupe)

[Gryffindor_Bookworm]

189. The day I claim to be an official strategist on behalf of our party,

I WILL post my name. :eyes:

[Hoping4Change]

172. Why not use the ignore button?

[JDPriestly]

201. Will is Will Pitt of the website, Truth Out. Welcome.

[fob]

97. Here's my 2 cents - Re Vietnam Vets

I passed by a pickup truck yesterday and it had about 25 bumper stickers on it. NRA sticker, Vitenam Veteran licensce plate, "Honk if you slept with Clinton", American Flags and similar right-leaning ultra-patriot I'm right because I'm right type rah-rah stuff, but here's the kicker.

Front and center of all the baubles was a faded yellow sticker with red lettering that read - "I was there in Vietnam - Proud to have served".

I thought that message was a winner that would trump all the faux-granduer. Kerry could adopt that and gain the confidence of vets.

"I was there and was proud to have served" That's it. No doubt that is a real feeling in the VV community. And it points out bush*s status without pointing an open wagging finger, "I was THERE".

Welcome aboard DS!

[banana republican]

98. Talk to me about Chess & Checkers.

[Paradise]

99. Dem_Strat, you've been vetted! Welcome to DU! :) n/t

[Hoping4Change]

174. My suggestion DemStrategist to to change your name and

return as anonymous given that certain posters have forced those in the know to confirm your credentials. Frankly given that repukes troll these posts do you not think it is better to have anonymity?

[ScreamingMeemie]

100. And the most important thing the campaign can do is realize that they

may be alienating an entire group of hard working dems who would walk the line for them if only they felt their voices were truly being heard.

Welcome to DU! :hi: I guess I'll go back to my checkerboard now. ;)

[Walt Starr]

106. An Economic policy that mirrors the Enronomics of corporate abuse

is NOT a sound policy! We've had Enron style economic policy for nearly four years, and we can see the results in the lack of meaningful jobs! The guys at the top get the breaks and the common person pays the bills!

[The Wielding Truth]

125. Yes !On the MONEY - No Pun

[Joanne98]

107. We know about the media

We complain about it all the time. If Kerry doesn't hit back then they have an excuse to hide behind. They just blame their lack of truthful reporting on the dems. They shrug their shoulders and say, if the Dems would just make a statement we would report it. the swift boats is a perfect example. Kerry could have cut them off the first day. they have tons of garbage but he didn't and look what's happened. the Kerry camp doesn't listen to us. I'm in Ohio and our rep just got here and she HAS NO BUDGET. we're having to do everything ourselves. we have been getting pretty good at going around the media but we can't fight back for Kerry. Media matters is a good site but the media isn't everything. Face to face still works too. You should hedge your bets and invest in both of them.

[Meshuga]

109. Not fair!

"First: I am a Democratic Strategist. I will reveal my identity immediately following the election."

Damn you! You are killing some of us curious DUers! :)

Edit -> added a smile just in case! :)

[medeak]

113. thank you

for giving us some organization to our well meant intentions.

Think you're correct re media. Have spent last year sending PNAC facts etc to cable news, and op ed people at NYtimes and Washington Post..was surprised to find how lazy the media truly is.

There has to be a way to fight the talking points given out by the administration.

[janx]

117. IMPORTANT: (I'm fairly sure you are aware of this)

Very specific strategy should probably not be listed on this board. Right wingers monitor it constantly.

Your links will be very helpful.

And I must say that I like your sigline so very much. It reminds me of last summer.

And you're very right (and funny as hell) when you say that we are all mystery posters. ;-)

[KurtNYC]

124. Strategy which relies on secrecy is doomed

Since there really are no secrets per se, only things that most people don't know yet. I used to work in direct marketing and we knew everything the opposition was doing -- where they ran their ads, what their budget was, what works for them, etc. And just for comparison, think how transparent the Bush strategy is (to us anyway).

But in tangental agreement on a minor point, I think there is a dilution effect when things (letter writing campaigns, etc.) seem less than organic.

We have the truth on our side - who needs secrecy.

[Cha]

118. I figured Kerry was "playing chess"..but it's good to hear

it anyway.

And I fully agree that our number one enemy is the press. I'm really happy that this is being addressed front and center.

Glad to have you aboard, Dem_Strategist!

[Eurobabe]

120. Has anyone in K/E read Lakoff's Moral Politics?

I just started it last night. It is quite interesting. This paragraph hooked me into reading the 2nd chapter even though I was tired last night:

"Conservatives know that politics is not just about policy and interest groups and issue-by-issue debate. They have learned that politics is about family and morality, about myth and metaphor and emotional identification. They have, over 25 yrs., managed to forge conceptual links in the voter's minds between morality and public policy....as long as liberals ignore the moral, mythic, and emotional dimension of politics, as long as they stick to policy and interest groups and issue-by-issue debate, they will have no hope of understanding the nature of the political transformation that has overtaken this country and they will have no hope of changing it." Geroge Lakoff, Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Univ. of Chicago Press, 2nd ed., 2002.

[gumby]

178. Lakoff's analysis is spot-on

I think this is why Dittoheads believe the Pigboy.

Pigboy's program is largly about spinning American mythology. Listeners automatically identify with the myth so they automatically believe the lies.

(what's K/E)

[librechik]

208. Kerry/ Edwards, no doubt n/t

[Kahuna]

122. Tell us something we don't already know. Most of us have been

knuckling up with the media since their trashing of Gore. We're doing our part. Now if only you strategists and pundits would do your parts.

[Joanne98]

141. Here here

It's hard to fight back when Kerry sits down.

[henslee]

128. RE: RNC protests in NYC... advice for anyone attending?

[Cha]

132. My humble advice is there should be nothing but

Peace..but then you knew that.

Are you getting these updates from UFPJ?

Here's mine if you aren't..


ACTION ALERT * UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE
http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545
To subscribe, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email
============================================
Dear UFPJ supporter:

WE ARE MARCHING! On August 29, United for Peace and Justice will hold a massive, impassioned, peaceful, and legal march past Madison Square Garden, the site of the Republican Convention, to protest the Bush Administration's deceit and destruction.

But we will NOT be rallying afterwards on the West Side Highway. As we announced in a press conference today, exiling us to a remote stretch of sun-baked highway makes a mockery of our right to assembly: The deal is off.

Our medics have told us that the West Side Highway isn't a safe place for seniors, children, and people with disabilities to rally. Our sound engineers have told us that it's not possible to set up a quality sound system there. Many of our members have told us that they simply will not go to such an awful and marginal location. And our common sense has told us that this deal was a set-up by a Republican mayor openly hostile to free speech.

Central Park is the only sensible place for us to rally. We filed a new permit application today with the NYC Parks Department to rally in Central Park on August 29, using the Great Lawn, North Meadow, and East Meadow. We will keep you informed of the City's response.

Our march plans remain unchanged: We will assemble beginning at 10:00AM at Seventh Avenue and 14th Street, and step off at noon for our legal and peaceful march past Madison Square Garden.

You've supported us politically through this difficult struggle against the effort to repress our protest, and now we need your financial support, too. This long fight for our right to assemble has been very costly, and we need to raise more than $75,000 by the end of this week to move forward with our organizing efforts.

Every dollar you donate today is a statement of support for our right to hold this crucial protest against the Bush Agenda. Please dig deep into your pockets and make the most generous donation you can - we can't allow Bush, Bloomberg, and the Republicans to stifle our cry for peace and justice!

You can donate in several ways:
* Using a credit card online at http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate
* By calling in a credit card donation to 212-868-5545
* By mailing a check or money order to UFPJ, P.O. Box 607, Times Square Station, NY NY 10108

The war in Iraq worsens every day, the U.S. economy is battered, and our civil liberties are under assault, while the Bush Administration shamelessly tries to frighten the population into silence. We say NO to the war, NO to the lies, NO to the greed and the hate, and NO to the attack on our basic rights.

With less than three weeks remaining before August 29, we all need to kick into the highest possible gear to make this protest a success. Now's the time to finalize your plans to come to New York City for this crucial and historic day. Urge your friends, your family, your co-workers, and everyone you know to stand up against the Bush Agenda by marching with us on August 29.

Keep checking our website for new resources and information, and we'll see you in the streets!

In solidarity,
United for Peace and Justice

============================================
AUGUST 29, THE WORLD SAYS NO TO THE BUSH AGENDA!
Massive Protest at the Republican National Convention, New York City
* Assemble at 10:00AM, Seventh Avenue @ 14th Street
* March steps off at noon
============================================
Visit the RNC mobilizing section of our website for resources and to endorse the August 29 demonstration:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/rnc
============================================
We need your financial support to make the August 29 protest a success:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate
============================================
To receive email updates on the August 29 RNC protest, visit:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email
============================================
ACTION ALERT * UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE
http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545
To subscribe, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email
============================================

[Dover]

129. cherished hypotheses

Science secret of grand masters revealed
Mark Peplow

Chess experts gain the edge over opponents by falsifying their own ideas.

Chess novices' optimism leads to a crushing defeat.

© Alamy

For all you budding Kasparovs out there, a team of cognitive scientists has worked out how to think like a chess grand master. As those attending this week's Cognitive Science Society meeting in Chicago, Illinois, were told, the secret is to try to knock down your pet theory rather than finding ways to support it - exactly as scientists are supposed to do.

"This is a new result in the psychology of chess, as far as I know," says Mark Orr, a chess enthusiast and Ireland's first international master. The research could help developing chess players to hone their skills, he adds.

In deciding which move to make, chess players mentally map out the future consequences of each possible move, often looking about eight moves ahead. So Michelle Cowley, a cognitive scientist and keen chess player from Trinity College Dublin in Ireland, decided to study how different chess players decide whether their move strategies will be winners or losers.

Along with her colleague Ruth Byrne, she recruited 20 chess players, ranging from regular tournament players to a grand master. She presented each participant with six different chessboard positions from halfway through a game, where black and white had equal chances of winning and there was no immediately obvious next move.

Each player had to speak their thoughts aloud as they decided what move to make. Cowley scored the quality of the move sequences by comparing them with Fritz 8, one of the most powerful chess computer programs available.

She found that novices were more likely to convince themselves that bad moves would work out in their favour, because they focused more on the countermoves that would benefit their strategy while ignoring those that led to the downfall of their cherished hypotheses.

Conversely, masters tended to correctly predict when the eventual outcome of a move would weaken their position. "Grand masters think about what their opponents will do much more," says Byrne. "They tend to falsify their own hypotheses."

"We probably all intuitively know this is true," says Orr. "But it's never a bad thing to prove it like this." ...cont'd

http://rolos.nature.com/news/2004/040802/full/040802-19.html

[Bernardo de La Paz]

173. Excellent post; . . . nt

[Sweet Freedom]

130. First of all

welcome to DU :hi:

if I may add another way to fight media spin (and let me duck-and-cover first)...

debunk all those stupid right-wing e-mails!

Some moran hears a lie on TV, writes an opinion piece as a factoid--minus any sources--and then inflicts it upon the members of his e-mail distribution list, urging them to "pass it on to everyone you know".

Before you know it, your local paper prints a LTTE warning us that THK and Hillary are secret lovers who haven't paid a cent in social security, plan to tax your e-mails, want to remove any reference to Christ from the airwaves (not to mention the crosses at Arlington field) and actually flew the jets into the WTC via remote control -- killing that poor tourist on the observation deck.

I know some DU members see ulterior motives when others post e-mails and request a debunker. But I say go for it! To me, these e-mails can be worse than the talking heads on TV, because they are so easy to forward to the whole world--especially if no one ever holds you accountable for your actions.

I have a RW relative who believed all of this nonsense and passed e-mails on as the gospel truth. I taught him how to look up hoaxes on the Internet. He did not take my advice, so I debunked every e-mail he sent to me thereafter (I bookmark all that I can). Result: He no longer sends hoax e-mails--to anyone (and maybe he's learned something about his party--hasn't even mentioned smirky in our last conversations).

I know it's not much and doesn't always work, but it only takes a minute to teach someone how to look up a hoax (or to Reply to All). I think it's worth it.

(I would actually like to see a section on DU specifically for debunking this nonsense.)

[LimpingLib]

134. Any chance there can be a payroll tax exemption for low income Americans?

Or are you here just to tell us to march straight?

Anyway the first $10,000 of income can eaily be exempted from payroll taxes , at least the 7.65% end the workers have to pay.Keep their credits counting as if they paid it in.Raise the $85,000 ceiling higher if need be to make up for the revenue. It really shouldnt be revenue anyway , its supposed to go into a trust fund.

Economicaly , nothing can prevent a soon to come strong recession or depression better than getting some money into the hands of lower income Americans.National savings even 10 years ago was +10% now the average American is at -5% with over $5000 in credit card debt on average.Exempt the first $15,000 of income from the income tax up from about $10,000 presently.

End of my futile first (and last) attempt.Im sure you will pass this message along to Kerrys open ear (yes...very sarcastic).

[LimpingLib]

137. O hell one more....how about a national credit card?

Since the average American has $6000 and FAST growing in credit card debt that they must pay 20% interest per annum on , how about the government issues a "national patriot credit card" (yea cheezy title) of say a 6%-7% interest rate?

The government can do what it does best.... borrow the money at 5% (like it always does)then actualy not run up debt by charging the consumers in this consumer nation an equal to or higher interest rate .

Wow,imagine that...free money to borrow,? Even better,could even turn it into a federal profit. And consumers save $800 per year in compounding interest pile up that saves them over $5000 over a 5 year period but help the government reduce the defecit.Just think. Turning the consumer debt into an asset that creats trillions over a 10 year period for the government!!!

Or wouldnt the credit card companys like that?

Ask Kerry!!! (while him and his resident geniuses are breaking from chess)

Edit: (as if this will happen) Tell the credit card companys that they can take all their money, after the government lends the money to people to pay off and cancel their Visa, and use it to actualy start a business that doesnt use people and go create some jobs. (as if)

[demwing]

143. Another is to start your own website...

I've started a website, but because of time restraints from a new job, I haven't finished it.

Any one in the Kerry crew that helps develope websites?

Any one on DU that could lend a hand?

Look down there for a link

.|
.|
.|
\|/

[rumguy]

145. Deal with the $87 billion vote

And deal with it in a way that is clear and forceful - frame it as a vote for principle.

Also point out that Bush threatened to veto the bill if it wasn't to his liking - this was brought up yesterday on CNN and Blitzer acted like he'd forgetten.

[LTR]

146. Welcome aboard!

And yes, I believe you are who you say you are (whoever that may be). :)

I think it would be stupid for anyone working on a campaign not to lurk on DU. Think about it - the idea of thousands of people helping you do your job. We should all be so lucky.

As you know, there are lots of good ideas to be found on DU. Again, welcome aboard, and I'm glad people over at the campaign are actually listening to what we have to say.

Good luck in the coming months!

[buycitgo]

147. didn't see this til I started THIS thread, to which nobody has

responded

do you know Chris Sautter?

PM me

[Guaranteed]

148. Alright, if Kerry is playing chess, might I give a bit of advice?

Kerry is playing awfully defensively. He needs to re-align his pieces so that he can ATTACK- he has to go after Bush's king. He would have to make a couple of strategic sacrifices in order to get his pieces in the right place (to stretch the analogy even further, he has to re-align his integrity), but the fact is that Bush isn't playing with much. His defense is weak as hell, he left his king right out in the open. It's up to Kerry to reposition himself and go after it before Bush becomes too dominant.

Kerry needs to attack. It's the only way to win.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

149. Who cares who you are; Just post the Strategies, Mr/Ms Strategist

Who cares who you are; Just post the Strategies, Mr/Ms Strategist

Posted by Dem_Strategist: "When you find out who I am in November you'll understand that I'm just trying to help us all win."

We may.

In the meantime, it doesn't matter who you are, or who you say you are, or who others say you are.

If you are a real strategist, post strategies. You have staked out strategizing as your forte. Post some. Live or die online by the strategies you post.

In board games, there is a tendency to respond to your opponent's last move. A better strategy is to consider the whole board as if you just arrived, and to look for the biggest, best move anywhere on the board. Don't respond to every little needle here, like if chess or checkers is condescending or not.

Seems like Kerry lately may have fallen into Rove's trap of becoming too nuanced in response to Bush's taunts. This seems to be "following your opponent around" on the board. What say you? How much should we or you or Kerry respond directly, and how can we control the flow instead of merely responding?

[CarolynEC]

165. So far, that's what's lacking...

In terms of the original post...

"John Kerry's chief opponent is NOT George Bush. It's the media. And you can help defeat Bush by doing everything in your power to fight media spin.

"One of the ways to do it is to help promote and support the kinds of websites that Paul Krugman featured in a New York Times op-ed last week: Media Matters, Daily Howler, Campaign Desk, and so on."

--> PEOPLE HERE ARE DOING THAT ALREADY


"Another is to join forces here and form your own media watchdog group."

--> PEOPLE HERE ARE DOING THAT ALREADY


"Another is to join John Kerry's Media Corps."

--> OKAY, GOOD SUGGESTION, ASSUMING JKMW IS AT ALL EFFECTIVE


"Another is to start your own website listing media transgressions and linking to other such sites. (Form a webring.)"

--> USELESS. ONE MORE AMONG MANY. PREACHING TO THE CHOIR, ANYWAY.


"Another is to come up with creative ideas about how to counter media spin and sharing those ideas here."

--> PEOPLE HERE ARE DOING THAT ALREADY


Need some substance here, Dem-Strat, else this is much ado about nothing.

[kodi]

152. what type of prior effort has been effective versus media spin?

go with what works.

one has to consider that different tactical methods may be required to counter media spin depending upon media type.

responses to national print media, eg., ny times, wash post, la times, time, newsweek, wall street journal, will be different than rsponses to media spin coming from right wing politicians, right wing radio, cable news distortions, or internet sites.

any good hunter knows intimately his/her prey. details as to what and how the media "spins" has to be coupled with how effective it is.

one needs to attempt to quantize the effectiveness of the spin and how to use limited resources to counter it.

this is like a land war, where ground acquisition is the measure of success. how does one go about reclaiming the maximum territory lost from media spin with the least amount of resources available?

a laundry list of media spins is fine and dandy, it is a first step and the web site media whores online led the way back in 2001-2. now there are others, but what they do is list and critique media spin, what is necessary is to use effectively this information and desemminate it to counter the media spin. simply having a web site with a list of media spins is nothing more than stockpiling weapons. they are ineffective unless they are used on the adversaries.

so, there must be a conduit (or process)for the information gathered from these sites to reach the public at large and to the decision makers who dictate what is "news."

we are, in effect, going to have to "sell" the counterspin to the public.

how does one do that?

[bigtree]

153. Activists' Resource Thread c/o Calimary, Media Contacts- Use Liberally

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x614019

[mistertrickster]

154. Glad to hear that Kerry is playing chess and I agree that a lot of us

ARE playing checkers. Kerry already has us, he doesn't need to appeal to the DU community (and liberals like us) by saying he's going to pull troops out of Iraq the day after he's elected or institute national health care for all (or something)--even though these may very well be his primary goals.

He has to appeal to those squishy swing voters (whom I personally loathe with every fiber of my being) who because of their willful ignorance or elitist attitudes (too "good" for the "dirty" game of politics) don't fully engage in the process of democracy. Jim Hightower (or was it Carville?) said it best: the only thing in the middle of the road is a yellow stripe and road kill.

These people might vote for Kerry IF he appears to be a centrist as opposed to Bush's right-wing radicalism. Clinton didn't really become popular until he moved to the middle, which explains why Bush is getting LESS popular--he keeps moving more radically right.

Kerry can come out as a flaming liberal and make US all happy, and he can lose--or he can run as a centrist and win and move the country back to its liberal base.

I prefer the latter possibility . . .

[Fleshdancer]

155. We should all adopt a few journalists....

If everyone took the responsibility to read or listen to a few specific journalists every day and hold them accountable and to send out info alerts to the Kerry campaign, it would make it harder for the journalists to get away with making false accuasations.

When making a complaint about a biased or incorrect story, is it better to notify the editor or the reporter who did the story in the first place?

[hlthe2b]

156. Welcome Dem_Strategist:

I'm setting aside skepticism, especially after Will Pitt (who appears to know your identity) provided a bit more reassurance. I have developed a pretty finely tuned intuition when even the most subtle disruptors come our way. I also have a feeling that if you are well known to us through your writing, that some may well pick up on your identity via your writing style (but I promise not to speculate, even if totally convinced).

To keep this brief, to the extent that you can explain the thinking behind the strategies to major media incidents (RW attacks and misunderstood Kerry/Edwards responses or comments) that seem ripe for "sticking," it would help tremendously. Right now,.these are the Swift Boat attacks and the WMD-Iraqi War Resolution vote issues.

I for one recognize the complexity of the calculations behind official response, but I'd certainly like to know what entered into those calculations. Sadly, the days of expecting that those who do the "right and ethical" thing (in the purest definition) will automatically win out are over--if they ever truly existed. Even the most honorable and ethical national candidate may be forced to adopt strategies that may be "borderline" in nature and disdainful to our more idealistic nature. There is a fine line in holding to our ideals and values versus EFFECTIVELY fighting those who do not share those views: this is a "realization" that many here need to know that is understood.

Welcome aboard :toast:

[madmax]

157. The media treatment of Al Gore is what made me take notice

I wasn't very political prior to Selection 2000. May I suggest http://www.mediamatters.org

David Brock and his staff do a great job of reporting bias and lies.

Does emailing CNN, MSNBC do any good?

[Francine Frensky]

184. If Kerry doesn't go negative soon, he's toast, dude.

Sorry, but that's a fact.

I agree about the media, but they have to make a living, and dirt SELLS papers and ads, and they would rather run something negative than rosy positive. That's a fact of life.

Think about when the dems started doing well: when dean took the lead and turned the conversation in an anti-Bush direction. Bush began to bomb in the polls, and it finally looked like the dems had a shot.

Remember the joke about the two guys in the woods hiking, and one puts on running shoes in case they see a bear, and the other guy says, you can't outrun a bear, and the first says, I know, but all I have to do is outrun YOU. That's what Bush is doing. Things are bad in the country, and he doesn't have to say a positive word, he just has to smear Kerry down to his level.

[cprise]

206. Bad advice, IMO

They'll only present conservative negativity as real news.

[Francine Frensky]

216. Kerry would be losing now but for Dean!!!!

I am no crazy Dean supporter, btw, I liked Clark. BUT, it was the dems going negative on Bush, saying the things that HAD to be said, that were considered "impolite" in Wash, but Dean said them, that brought people around to the dems.

THERE'S A LOT TO BE NEGATIVE ABOUT!!! is my point, and if the emporer is naked, and we just ASSUME that everyone else will see that, because it is so glaringly obvious to those of us who pay attention, then we will lose because Joe Sixpack, who lives in a fogworld, has NO CLUE that Bush is an idiot and NEVER WILL unless someone brings it out.

I'm not saying "go negative" like make up sh** like those veteran people, but I'm saying let's have some ads of bush actually talking and saying some of the ridiculously stupid things he says.... we need to get that stuff out there in the public, or Kerry will lose SOLELY because it will become a race to the swing voters of the lesser of two evils, and they will side with what they know vs. what they don't.

[depakid]

187. If I accept your premise

that "John Kerry's chief opponent is NOT George Bush. It's the media," then the question becomes, why doesn't the Kerry campaign hire more media savvy people to deal with them?

It's pretty obvious to anyone who has any campaign experience or who even has a four year memory that Kerry's getting Gored (and Dukakis'd). Yet his campaign doesn't seem to get it. What do they do yesterday about the controversy over Kerry's statement on IWR? They ignore it talk instead about presciption drugs!

If Kerry really wants to win in November, that's a very strange way to go about it- letting Bush and his surrogates crow and distort his record. And all the clever statements about Kerry "playing chess, not checkers," aside, Cahill and Devine don't seem to have learned a learned a thing from the failed 2000 and 2002 campaigns- and if it wasn't so important, I'd say that they deserve the pillorying they're getting.

[henslee]

191. Time for a new thread, DS? This one is taking a long time to load on my

satellite connection.

[liberal N proud]

192. To Democratic Strategist, a question about my method...

I have been conducting an email campaign for months (since Dec 03). Most of the effort involves point out to family, friends and others that I know that lean Republican when they vote. My strategy is to point out to them the incorrectness in the stories that bush admin pumps through the media. I always try to find good facts and back that up with links to multiple sites with supporting those facts. Sometimes I get into good debates with some of these people. I know that I have only lost one friend and I wasn't too sure how mush of a friend he was.
The second part of my effort is to email the networks (mostly CNN and NBC) when I see one of the reporters pandering to the right. Like when a reporter on NBC asked the question of a guest if it was fair to criticize the President for his actions on 9/11.
My question is: Do you think this method is wrong (mostly the first part) or am I just making enemies! I am willing to do that if it means winning the White House in Nov. This election is just too important.
Thanks

[malatesta1137]

194. great advice for us

now if you could consider MY two pieces of advice for the Kerry campaign:

1- Kerry will HAVE to become negative if his lead by Sept 15 is minimal or non-existent. If by election day Kerry is ahead by 2 or 3 point, BUSH WILL WIN. Negative campaigning works. Kerry needs to be aggressive/negative like Republicans, so far he's been like Gore in 2000, positive and ineffective.

2- Kerry needs to STOP changing his statements on Iraq. Saying that he would have voted for the war even knowing what he knows now will make some on the left stay home election day. The Iraq War is Bush's biggest problem, Kerry should capitalize on it.

[lancdem]

198. He didn't change his statements on Iraq

[malatesta1137]

202. but the media and Bush say he did

and that's what matters. That's why Kerry needs to be EXTRA careful.

[jgardner]

196. Welcome to DU!

What I've been wondering is why the Kerry campaign isn't pointing to all of the campaign promises from 2000 that Bush has broken. If he lied to everyone then, why should anyone listen to the campaign nonsense he's spouting now? I don't think that asking pointed questions would count as "bush bashing".

[philipowitz]

197. Serious Suggestions

To "Democratic Strategist"

I'm happy to see a democratic presidential campaign that knows how to fight! The results so far are better than for the hapless Mondale, Dukakis, and Gore campaigns. I sometimes think in despair that we won't be as effective in political campaigns until we learn to lie as well as republicans...

But, despair aside, I think we are doing well, and also that there is more to say. I can tell you, from being a left-wing troll on right-wing blogs, that people who think of themselves as "conservatives" are aware that W is not fulfilling their desires for "limited government". Whatever that means, both "liberals" and "conservatives" can agree that W just spends too damn much of our hard-earned tax dollars. I'm glad to see at least that Kerry has been pointing out that W cannot really be considered "conservative" in that sense. Way to go!

Now here's what I think is missing: W is not a "conservative", he's a CORPORATIST. If the self-described "conservatives" could be made to focus on how much W's policies are geared toward the success of multi-national corporations, you might be able to make them see that the W administration is not in their best interests.

I don't think multi-national corporations are inherently evil - i think they are inherently dangerous. It's people who are dangerous! A good person in charge of a multi-national could do much good. Human nature being what it is, however, multi-national corporations have come to have a huge influence on national policy, and the W administration is obviously in their pocket.

My advice, therefore, is to show how much of a corporatist W is, and continue to push for policies that will encourage multi-nationals to work for our common self-interest, and not to continue to export the american economy overseas for the short term good of their balance sheets.

</end of rant>

[bushwakker]

199. What YOU can do is find some people with a pulse to appear

on the various programs and defend Kerry and counterattack effectively. I'm not impressed with the folks I've seen out there. They are not prepared. It's pretty easy to take on the GOPers - you know what the spin is every day - yet you send clowns out there who just accept all the abuse. I could do a better job.

[cprise]

205. Media strategies

First, lets not kid ourselves about the nature of mass media. They are not the enemy just incidentally: They are now an instrument for a class war whose victims dare not speak its name. I fear that before long, most people will not be able to remember or imagine anything better.

Kerry has already hinted that media reform may be necessary. Returning to that theme before the election will only make them more hostile. Nevertheless, be prepared to handle this as a surprise topic during the debates, and for Bush and the press to be 'scandalized' by anything you say.

OTOH, if you want to fight them, then divide and conquer is the only way you can do that right now. Use the web and BitTorrent to distribute video clips containing "details" of Fox's dishonesty toward Kerry's campaign and invite the media to air them. If you can initially come up with material comparable to something you'd see in Outfoxed, then you now have a tool to intensify the misgivings between Fox and other networks that started over Outfoxed.

Draw people to PBS. Reserve some of your most intriguing topics/positions for the interviews you have with them. You will get more of your message out this way, but you have to start now.

Kerry's body language should move a bit toward "strong, kind grandpa".

[mzmolly]

211. Thanks I agree totally hitting the media is key.

Though I'm no strategist, I look forward to your continued suggestions!

Welcome! :toast:

[HarveyBriggs]

217. OK, Let's talk.

You're weak.

Not you personally, but the "carefully planned" strategy and chess playing -- that's real weak. Look where chess playing has landed Bobby Fisher.

In terms of propaganda (and I'm talking the true definition, here), why do you let the other side kill you?

Media bias is one thing. But don't blame their bias on your weak message. Remember, media is plural for medium -- the medium through which we receive your message and theirs. They can slant a story, but first you have to give them one. And you don't.

I'm not writing about dirty tricks here, but they are so much better at propaganda 101, they know all about "Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it." So they win on points like flip-flop, and "Can you imagine what Al Gore would have done on 9/11."

It's not enough that you sit on the sidelines and whine about the other side is unfair, and mean, and kicks sand. It's not enough to walk away a loser with your head up because you refused to play by their dirty rules.

At least fight back. At least have a message. At least stand up tough. John Kerry has promised that, but I haven't seen nearly enough of it.

I've watched you guys work on both sides. I KNOW what Roger Ailes can do. I've seen first hand how his boys tore Dukakis up. I've also seen the weakness of Dem strategists.

Long before Tom Vilsack ever got to be governor, he was down 70-30 in the polls. I worked for him in that little run-down building on the East End of Des Moines' downtown. And I saw him go through 2-3 teams of you guys. They were awful. And like you, they were awfully arrogant with the rank and file volunteer.

Tom won because he stayed on message. And he and his wife had enough respect for us volunteers he wouldn't put up with that "big-shot" strategist garbage alienating his volunteers.

You guys haven't done that on-message stuff yett, because you still haven't figured out your real message yet. These guys are 20 years ahead of you, and you only have 3 months left.

So why the #&%*! should I bust my tail-end writing letters for free, when in the end -- and Kerry wins, you'll only be more arrogant, get a cush job in the White House, and triple your six-figure consulting fee?

And what do I get? An invitation to Join the sixth-tier innauguaral dance that one of you folks will feel disgraced over, because you were asked to attend and mingle with the peasants (and you're a Dem!)?

One of the wonderful things about working early in the campaigns now that I live in Iowa is that we have a chance to meet the candidates before you #%*&ers get your hands on our campaign contributions and get between us and the candidates.

We think we do a good job of spotting a good candidate here in Iowa. Lot better than Joe Trippi ever did.

My precinct had John Kerry signs busting all over, back when orange hats were the rage and Dr. Dean was the media darling. And before this post, you -- the big shot strategist -- didn't even know my name.


Harvey Briggs

[Kukesa]

218. I hear ya, Harvey; I'm a volunteer, too. n/t

[HarveyBriggs]

220. Thanks Kukesa!

May your phone bank work bring many $2,000 checks, your fingers stay strong stuffing envelopes, and your knuckles grow callouses from knocking on doors!

Harvey Briggs

[ljm2002]

234. Hear, hear!

Harvey Briggs says: "You're weak. Not you personally, but the "carefully planned" strategy and chess playing -- that's real weak."

I'm with Harvey (and tom_paine) on this one: while we're considering your "chess vs. checkers" analogy, perhaps you should consider another analogy: chess vs. all-out war. See, the other side isn't actually playing chess, nothing so civilized as that. And as long as you delude yourself on that score, you haven't a prayer of coming up with a successful strategy.

HB: "So they win on points like flip-flop, and "Can you imagine what Al Gore would have done on 9/11.""

Think about it. Why don't we see a response like, "I don't have to imagine what George Bush would have done on 9/11, I know what he did. It's on tape. He froze like a deer in the headlights. He abdicated his responsibility to protect the American people on that morning". Well, you get the idea.

Oh sure, you're probably thinking, we can't say stuff like that about a sitting President. Their attack dogs would be all over us!

Why yes, so they would. And so they are, all the time, regardless of what you do or what you don't do!

And that is not going to change. So you need to be ready not with bare knuckles but with brass knuckles. Don't let these goons knock you down without a full-on fight! Do it for us, the little people, the ones with nothing to lose who, because of that, have a clearer idea than the privileged strategists who frequent the halls of power...

I'm not putting you down. I just think you need to understand, we need a fighter out there. AND we need someone who takes the offensive. Don't want to play dirty? Well, you don't have to get as dirty as they do -- after all, we have the truth on our side. But we do have to get our hands dirty, there's no two ways about it.

Oh, and one more thing. The American public likes a good fight. It gets them to sit up and take notice. So please, remember, yes we need to talk about issues. But we need to show a little honest emotion from time to time. If the other side says something that's fighting words, call them on it, and don't mince words.

In summary: TAKE IT TO THEM. DON'T LET UP, DON'T BE TIMID, and DON'T BE COWED BY THESE ONE-WAY SONS OF BITCHES.

[HarveyBriggs]

239. I appreciate your support, ljm2002, but

Sometimes fighting hard does not mean fighting dirty.

Or even being the louder screamer, like Sean Hannity.

I do think some of these Dem strategists forget their mission, and forget the reason why their candidate is popular.

In both cases I cited earlier, Vilsack and Kerry fired their strategists, made strong, clear appeals to the public and won.

Kerry, in combat and here in Iowa, has demonstrated that when his back is against the wall he'll strike back with incredible clarity and ferocity. He wins and his opponent loses. And right now that message is muddled.

More important, that is exactly the kind of leadership this nation desperately needs right now. To put it in 80s terminology, Kerry has the right stuff. Bush doesn't. Right now, it appears that the Republican strategists are more keenly aware of that fact than the Dem strategists.

Outside of Kerry's war record and his voting record, he appealed to me (and I believe to a lot of other voters) as having a more conservative personality than George W. Bush. Bush is the quick-draw, shoot-from-the-hip gunslinger who empties his guns without hitting anything -- just look at Iraq. John Kerry thinks about stuff, and considers his options, then gets the job done.

Maybe this is part of the chess game that's been introduced. But the message is lost.

In addressing, dirty vs. fighting hard and clear, I point out today's Crossfire with James Carville and John O'Neil and today's Hardball, with Chris Matthews and John O'Neil. Carville shouts and screams like a raving rightie, and Chirs Matthews simply asks, "So what's you're point? Who do you think is braver? Who did more for his country?" End of match.

(One point missing, "What is this doing to troop morale, when a soldiers knows that its OK to take away their military honors years from because of their political views? There is a war on right now and public doubting of the military's judgement in such matters is wrong.)

Anyway.

There's not enough of this coming out of Dem headquarters. Not enough clarity. I don't have to join another Dem Strategist gimmick (I've joined three of these kinds of things) to realize that these strategists get together in their meetings and come up with ideas, but they don't come up with a message.

I read the post at the top of the page and see the pointy-haired boss from Dilbert coming up with another comittee-driven plan that has no substance.

What's sad, is that this candidate has substance. And I see his handlers getting in the way.

This election doesn't have to be that close. Bush support by November should be under 40%, and it's the strategists fault that he isn't closer by now. This does not have to be a close election.

Harvey Briggs

[ljm2002]

255. "Sometimes fighting hard does not mean fighting dirty."

Yes, you are of course correct about that. I got a little carried away. When I said we "need to get our hands dirty" I should have been clear -- we really don't have to fight dirty in the same way that they do, by lying and shouting louder. But, I do stand by my basic points: we must take the offensive, and we must always call them on their attacks. My rule of thumb when dealing with bullies and thugs (which is really what we are dealing with here): Don't start sh*t, and don't ever take sh*t.

As for the emotional tone of my post -- well, again, I think we need to inject some of our own emotion into the discourse. Not doing so allows the other side to paint us as "effete liberals". However unfairly, the fact is, people respond on a gut, emotional level, and we have to communicate at that level, not just at the rational level.

I certainly concur with your opinion about the shouting-match style of debate. I don't like it either. You don't need to shout to convey emotion, and usually you'll be more effective when you don't shout. But we cannot let the thugs dictate the terms of the debate. And we must not fail to see the true nature of the struggle we are in: the other side is *not* playing chess, they're playing all-out war (or at least, all-out gang warfare). We ignore that at our peril.

[HarveyBriggs]

259. Indeed those righties can get a person's blood boiling!

I have to admit I had to leave the room twice last night watching Chris Matthews with that O'Neil fellow.

Even, so I admire how Chris kept his cool and ended up making a very good point at the end.

I think that was a good lesson for all of us, in how to deal with a bad case of the "screaming righties."

My hat is off to you!

Harvey Briggs

[tuvor]

219. I don't want Kerry to win

so much as I want bush to lose. And I'll bet that's the sentiment of 99% of DUers. (Don't get me wrong, I *like* Kerry!) Obviously (if this simple citizen of Soviet Canuckistan may be so bold as to speak for DUers) our objectives, as well as yours, overlap, Mr. Strategist.

It seems to me that Americans largely will vote *against* a candidate before they'll vote *in favor* of a candidate. (Politics of fear, anyone?)

Otherwise, Bush could never be as successful as he has been. Otherwise, McCain or Gore would be in the Oval Office right now.

My feeling is you have to bring bush down, much more than you have to lift Kerry up.

Please, find the most adhesive clumps of dirt you can, aim carefully, make sure it all sticks, and don't give bush or his minions a chance to even try to wash it off. They're playing with their own ball, and sorry, but you have to play their game, or they're going home--back to DC.

Fighting with honor is a great thing, but this election, IMHO, is much too important to worry about fighting honorably. If you actually *do* bring honor and integrity back to the White House, everyone will forget about the dirty campaign.

Whatever you do, since I can't vote, I wish you all the best of luck.

[tuvor]

240. Someone put it more eloquently than I did.

From Hoffmania's blog:

Look, I completely understand Kerry's "nuanced" response, but these animals don't know nuance. They don't know a lot. They only know what they want to hear - and they run with it and hammer it and hammer it and hammer it into submission. And the press cares even less about nuance. They want a clever sound bite and Bush is delivering it for them at Kerry's expense.

Team Kerry. Please. You have to know your opposition. They're not subtle. They're not patient. They don't like detail. They do understand one thing: Kicking someone really hard and really swiftly in the nuts. They do it all the time. It makes them feel powerful. The response? You have to kick these guys in the nuts hard and you have to kick them in the nuts often. Because while nuance works for thinking people, it's ice cold death against these insane freaks. Next time, Mr. Kerry, just say "no."

And dammit, plant that foot of yours repeatedly in those little pebble-sized nobules of Silly Putty they call - you-know-whats.

http://hoffmania.blogspot.com/2004_08_08_hoffmania_archive.html#109228732176232372

[RhodaGrits]

249. Yes.

We need a two tiered response. I have been wailing that how can anyone with working circuits support Bush at this point. Kerry can continue to issue nuanced statements for the faithful and thinking but he needs sound bites like the aforementioned ""I don't have to imagine what George Bush would have done on 9/11, I know what he did. It's on tape. He froze like a deer in the headlights. He abdicated his responsibility to protect the American people on that morning". Except use another word in place of "abdicated" LOL

And I've already gotten a "rebuttal" from a RW'r for making that point - he was quoting Kerry saying in an interview that he stopped thinking for 40 min after the 2nd tower got hit. I am working on yet one more response now.

Here's what he sent me: And we shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think," Kerry continued to King.

Kerry said he was shaken out of his non-thinking state by seeing the "cloud of explosion at the Pentagon." From the time between the second World Trade Center attack and the attack on the Pentagon, forty minutes had elapsed. That's forty minutes of the Democrats' presidential nominee being unable to think. Yet despite the fact that as senator, Kerry was unable to think for forty minutes, the American public is supposed to believe that President Bush was wrong to continue reading for seven minutes and that as president, Kerry would have acted immediately.


This is the kind of bullshit that needs to be responded to immediately every single time because they just keep spewing. They don't get nuance. They need to be kicked, hard.

[osaMABUSh]

222. Wow, it appears we have a DeepThroat in our midst

now let's see where it leads...

[Gregorian]

223. Bush's question to Kerry re. IWR

When Bush asked Kerry if knowing what he knows now, whether he'd still authorize the IWR, I sensed that the very act of asking implied that Bush knows that the act of going to war was flawed.

I'm not sure how to say it. Maybe someone else can. Maybe this is the wrong thread for this. Maybe it's too late to point this out.

But, why else would Bush frame that question if there were no reason to ask? If there were nothing wrong with the resolution to go to war?

I'm just saying this. It may be obvious to all. But perhaps my tiny observation will help.

[Norquist Nemesis]

229. That's why I think Kerry should have responded with

"Mr. President? Why did you ignore the resolution I voted for and rushed to war?"

[Gregorian]

236. And yet another response would have been to

immediately turn it into the question- Well, Mr. Bush, knowing what we all know now, would YOU have taken us to war.

I think we know his answer. But it deflects the question, and it refreshes the idea that Bush did this unneccisarily.


Let's think, and win! Rove is a bastard.

[dmr]

230. Welcome to DU, DS

:hi: This is a great thread, typical of DU - full of everything!

I will do whatever I can do to help, I am looking forward to your suggestions from the campaign camp (I signed up for the Media Corps earlier today). I've been sitting in my little home office writing email, snail mail and making phone calls since the advent of DU. I talk to people in real life about Bush* and Senators Kerry and Edwards. I make donations when I can.

Whatever you need that is within my powers to do, I will do it. There have been many great suggestions from DUers on this thread, and I'm hoping you will take them back to your team.

I like LydiaLeftCoast's suggestions:

1) Listen to the grassroots. They know their friends and neighbors better than your polling experts do.

2) Fight back as hard as you are attacked.

3) Set the agenda; don't let the Republicans set it for you.

We need to stay focused and not allow them their diversion tactics. I know that is hard, because as you say the media is our foe, too.

I know I could not, nor could any other DUer, emotionally take a Bush* win (or theft) for another 4 years of the White House. Our country and our world can't take it either.

Once we win, we still have to stick together to continue the fight because the neo-cons and their media will sabotage every Kerry-Edwards move, even if they have to invent something.

We have to stick together to assure more Democratic victories in the House, Senate, gubernatorial, state and local races.

We have to stick together to assure our elected Democrats fulfill their obligations to us, not to fall for traps that may further the right wing agendas. I will support any Democrat who is willing to stick their neck out on a limb on my behalf.

There is so much to do.

Once again, a big hearty welcome to Democratic Underground - a goldmine of critical thinkers, astonding imagination and awesome researchers!
:) :kick:

[Me.]

269. "Mourning in America"

"2. Fight Back" I totally agree. Don't let them get away with anything. Answer everything.

For example; Bush has a new ad, "Morning in America"

why not a dem counter: "Mourning in America"

Loss of lives in Iraq
Loss of jobs
Loss of health care
Loss of education.....

[cidliz2004]

231. You are right.

The media has been "spinning" in politics since...well, I don't know when it actually started, but I know that when Bill Clinton was elected President, I became acutely aware of "hate mongering".

This election is really between three sides, the Repubs, the Dems and the Media. What day is it, which way is the wind blowing and what's hot and what's not?

I have become more than disenchanted as many other ABB people have become. We have passionately supported our primary candidate only to have the "decision" taken from us. The media, blackballed one primary candidate, snuffed out another and resurrected a third while promoting the 4th. The media has been very very busy.

Now that we (at least most of us) have sucked it up and fallen in line, what are we to do in the process that has so very little to do with us? Are we merely to show up at rallies? Or should we write some letters that some intern might and I do mean might read? Or, should I send a letter to a media outlet, or JFK's campaign, or maybe even try to become active in my local political group, that really is more like a "good ole' boy network, that is more interested in "screening" potential precinct committee people before "allowing" them aboard the sacred organization. The interesting thing here is that out of 200 precincts (wild guess, for total over number) 10 of them actually have Democratic Precincts committee people and 200 of them have Republican Precinct Committee People. The question is: Why is the Democratic Organization being so picky about enthusiastic newly joined Democrats wanting to help? Why no guidance? BIG QUESTION.

When I send these letters and I get an "auto generated" response, is that to mean that have I reached my target? Or is it going in the big media circular far and away?

There are so many questions on this campaign and it's strategy. So many of us don't understand what you are doing. So many of us worry and are obsessed with this Presidential Race. We cling to the DU because there we find the ability to find answers, share frustrations and ask questions that actually get answered.

We have been railing at the media FOREVER already! Maybe it is time that some of YOU start railing at them. YOU, afterall, have the REAL VOICE in all of this. YOU afterall, are the ones that will get the attention on a national level. YOU are the ones who REALLY know what is going on out there. We can only guess as to what you are doing, why you are doing it and when you will do something different.

We are your blood, We are anemic, We need a transfusion of strength, from you. We need a transfusion of hope from you and most of all we need unobstructed vessels to travel through.

Thank you for trying to save us from another 4 years of 43', but really, you need to be thanking us for supporting such a remote campaign.

Weary

[AgadorSparticus]

235. jesus, this place can be annoying sometimes.

1. welcome dem strategist. looking forward to hearing your ideas and other DU'ers ideas that are relevant to moving forward and not backwards.

2. what's the fixation on WHO this person is, anyways?? believe or not believe. who cares. it should always comes down to personal responsibility and discernment of ideas anyways. take the ideas on its own merit and forget the messenger. and i think that would be wise to do with ALL posts.

3. and god forbid if we here on DU don't dissect everything to DEATH...not much chance of a mass kool aid lineup anytime soon on DU. hell, look at how much we've already dissected the first post with relatively little information. i truly believe we have some of the brightest minds in the country here on this board.

i personally, would like to see more of the kerry that responded to bush's turning the corner. language is very important. i think the media and the american public likes the verbal acrobatics. it provides the flare and drama that the media and public salivate over and if we can play that game, we can expect more airtime. i'm not talking about being nasty negative like the bush ads. i'm talking about being clever with words. like the smackdown contests in the playground. minus the momma jokes, of course. ;) just kidding. just my 2 cents.

[Dover]

237. And what 'strategy' is in place to counteract extensive voter fraud..again

No verifcation, paper trails, no significant exit polls, etc. Etc. ETC.

All seems like a big waste of time if this fundamental problem is not resolved by November.

[Dover]

247. ......I'll answer since I don't expect a response.

NO strategy, apparently. Makes ya wonder about Dems.....

California Certifies Diebold Election System's AccuVote-TS Touch Screen System for the November Election

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=SVBIZINK3.story&STORY=/www/story/08-12-2004/0002230845&EDATE=THU+Aug+12+2004,+03:03+PM

[Blue_Roses]

238. OMG--after reading the 200 or so responses to this thread

it cracks me up. First of all the skeptism. Who cares if Dem_Strategist is from the "Planet of the Apes" (hopefully not, because that means he would see Bush on a regular basis)...point is, think outside of the box people. Why so much skeptism? Put your ideas out there. That's what this election is all about. The media is not taking a back-seat to what we think. They are going full steam ahead with what they think will be "news-worthy." This is a game to the media. They could care less that we are without healthcare, STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET, robbing Peter to pay Paul. With Katie Couric's $7 million deal she got a few years ago, why the hell should she care. She still gets a paycheck and benefits when the day is over.

I think we HAVE TO think outside the box to win this one. The fundies are hurting us with the self-righteous use of "God" and his "will" in every sentence of Bush's campaign. They know it "toys" with emotions and work it to their advantage. It saddens me that they are using God as their political billboard and I know it saddens God too.

[calimary]

243. Dear Dem_Strategist:

How much time have you spent here yet?

We are doing MANY things that might assist you.

Please consider our Five Star Activist's Resource Thread, for one thing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=106&topic_id=8816&mesg_id=8816

Also, a DUer named Class Warrior issues a MEME MEMO, frequently, to get everyone here thinking about WAYS TO WORD things - "because message matters." The premise: To REFRAME the issues/discussions/debates so that we TAKE BACK the language, take back the initiative, take back the agenda, and ultimately, take back our country and OUR White House. It's an attempt to counter-act and short-circuit the newt-gingrich-birthed demonization of all things liberal, Democratic, or progressive, through the use of strategic word choices. I say we turn the tables on 'em and beat them at their own game.

I've sent my own strategy notes to Ann Lewis at the DNC many times, about these discussions and some of my own. I'd be thrilled and honored to share them with you.

This is EXCELLENT, and URGENT, and LONG OVERDUE, what you're doing. I'm glad you're enlisting the HUGE, POWERFUL, and PROFOUND brain trust here at DU. Harness it, and let it roar for you! It'll push Kerry/Edwards all the way to the winner's circle! Can't wait to brainstorm with you further.

[HuskerDem]

245. The disco ball spins slowly but with mechanical reliability and purpose...

.................. "I'd........... love to love you baby.............. "I'd........... love to love you baby.............

OK, I'm in. Creative ideas for countering spin (without violence).......... that could be a challenge. Hhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmm.

[Generic Other]

248. There's a Democratic Strategy?

I'm so relieved. I thought we were just making it up as we went along!

I certainly welcome any advice for how to achieve a Bush-free America come November.

Welcome to DU!

[nofurylike]

250. Welcome, DS! n/t

[The Wielding Truth]

252. Who are you?

Why not let us rally to your side by telling us who you are?
It seems it would only solidify your purpose of helping the Kerry campaign if we knew you and your staff.

[Justice]

253. I am listening

Why is the media behaving in this way - is it stupidity, ignorance, lack of resources or an intent to have Bush* win? Understanding the why may help us.

Ann Richards spoke at a house party in NH this week and said she believes the election will be determined by single women 18-40ish. Ann says she encourages women to vote - without discussing who they should vote for - just that they have the ability to determine the direction of the country. Do you agree?

[wildeyed]

254. Good idea.

I don't really care who you are, these are good ideas.

I was attracted to DU b/c I was dissatisfied with the mainstream press. I started here by lurking in LBN and after a while, began posting occasionally.I find that writing responses for the op/ed page of my local paper comes more naturally to me now that I am accustomed to writing responses to articles posted here. I am getting faster, too.

Many of the regular posters here are extremely well read, both in current events and history. Many write like angels. I am sure you could find a powerful media response team on this site.

Let's get ORGANIZED. Let's WIN.

As far as checkers vs. chess, I think allot of DU folks care deeply about this election. We are the ones who stay up at night worry about it. I have actually taken to praying for John Kerry and a Democratic win in November and I am not religious.

I am guessing that much of the trashing of Kerry's strategy is more a reaction to the anxiety than Kerry's actual actions. He is pulling ahead in polls, despite the media and RW smears, so someone somewhere is doing something right.

[AmerDem]

257. It's great Kerry and the campaign look to Du...

as a place where they can read heartfelt posts from true Dems that are seriously concerned with the direction of our nation. Reading the posts by Dem_Strat have given me an uplift of hope.

America can be the America we all know and love again!

[Ascribe1]

260. one way to affect local t.v. coverage

I've worked in television (in various departments, including news, both network and local) for many years. About fifteen years ago, I started calling network news assignment desks when I found language in news stories biased or misleading. I haven't done this in a very long time. When I made the calls, even without coordinating this effort with others, I felt my individual efforts, engaging the assignment desk editors in conversation had some impact (and they were usually willing to discuss my complaints thoughtfully, without rushing me off the phone). If a website such as democratic underground were to post the phone numbers for local assignment desks at local tv stations across the country I believe it would have a terrific impact. (The website, i.e., DU, would probably need to put up a requeset for readers to do a little research in their communities - like asking friends if they know anyone who works at the local station... all it takes is one person inside the station with an internal phone directory). Of course there are 'official' methods for contacting local TV stations, but they rarely have real impact. Going right into the heart of the news department is the way to really be heard.

[Warren DeMontague]

261. Allow me to join in the chorus...

Of saying "Welcome..."
:toast:

The media corps is an excellent idea. I usually fill up my quota of writing to the local papers, anyway, (one every 90 days is the limit they'll print, here) but it's worth staying on top of what the talking points are.

Unfortunately, I have watched with dismay as the media has engaged in a race to the bottom, covering with increasingly less substance,
spinning stories and setting a snide anti-Dem tone in a blatantly Biased way (CNN's attempt to out-FAUX FAUX is the most recent, egregious example) and I'm not sure, aside from writing letters to the editor(s), what can be done about it. There is an extremely well-oiled, well greased (especially in their palms) cabal that is palpably pushing for four more years of this of this crap. And they seem to dominate, at least at the boardroom level, the few companies that own the major media outlets in this country. The internet has been wonderful at allowing unprecedented levels of distribution of information that was not possible even a decade before, but the downside of this democratization of information is that "facts" and "opinions" seem almost interchangeable. If you look hard enough, you can find a basis for almost any point of view, and whether or not it's backed up in reality, there are enough yahoos parroting a particular line, like "John Kerry is a traitor", that it becomes indistinguishable from proven fact in many minds.

With that in mind, and the undeniable sound-bite, instantaneous nature of the game we're in, my advice to the Kerry campaign, in a nutshell, would be this: "Complexity" is great. Look, we all want a president with a brain, and preferably one with more than a fourth grade reading level. Unfortunately, when you start throwing around words like "complexity" and "nuance", particularly when trying to explain this "I actually voted for the 87 billion.." thing, half of the country has changed the channel to the ball game. The people who are intelligent enough to have a grasp of those words are, for the most part, already voting for Kerry. First off, Kerry shouldn't be in the position of having to "explain" anything. But what he should have said, George Bush style, is "I voted to support the troops. I voted against supporting Halliburton." Short, simple, unapologetic. And it will be left up to the GOP to sputter and explain about how what he said isn't "precisely accurate". Many people, god bless their pointy little heads, apparently like the fact that George Bush is a so-called 'straight shooter'.. Never mind the fact that he's shooting straight at the broad side of a barn and hitting the kitchen window. What Kerry needs to do is tailor some of his sound-bites in such a way that these folks can grasp. "How is tripling the deficit fiscal responsibility?" "How is neglecting Afghanistan in favor of an ill-advised Iraq invasion being strong?" "How is John Ashcroft waging war on terminally ill people in Oregon making 'protecting the homeland' priority number one?" "How is deporting known Terrorists, like Nabil Al-Marabh, to Syria, as opposed to interrogating and prosecuting them, waging an effective war on terror, and the most dangerous persons assosciated with 9-11?"

Anyway, if you think reading the profanity-laced rants of a California Voter who's had it up to here with the fundamentalists and other right-wing maniacs who have taken over the GOP (and, by default, the country), might help, you can check out my blog...

Good Luck!

[Kat45]

262. I've already joined John Kerry's Media Corps

Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to write any letters to the editor yet; I hope to do so soon. I was also approached to call talk radio, but I declined on that one because I'm not quick enough on my feet to hold my own vs. the RW talk jocks.

Welcome to DU, DemStrategist! :hi:

[DeminDC]

263. Hello to DU Community... Message for Dem_Strategist and Kerry Folks

Long time lurker here... This site is a great anti-Drudge, and I like what you guys are doing.

I happen to intern for a campaign, which I would prefer not to reveal, but rest assured that it is a Dem campaign and would like to post some thoughts for Dem-Strategist and the other Kerry folks who lurk on here.

In my view, this is an important phase of the campaign because Kerry's support in the polls seems to be reaching a peak, and there is a possibility that Bush can "turn the corner" with the Olympics (folks rally to the flag), his convention, and so forth. His campaign knows this and is trying to fire a shot across Kerry's bow, which we saw with the Bush question and the "sensitive" matter.

What I am suggesting is this:
1) Kerry needs to come up with a personal theme that ties everything together and makes people relate to him as a person as much as his positions on the issues. So, "stronger at home, respected in the world" would not work because it fails the first test, as it does not incorporate Kerry's personal, non-professional life in a measurable degree. The obvious example of what I'm looking for is something along the lines of CLinton's "A Place Called Hope" theme from his speech at the convention.
Right now, it is obvious that Kerry has an edge on 95% of the issues with the 5% being an important one, which is terrorism/foreign policy. People know where he stands and knows that he protects the environment, wants energy independence, etc. What people do not grasp is just how important and related all of this is. Gary Hart's most recent book on grand strategy ties it all together, but Kerry's job needs to be to make it understandable and palatable to the general public.
Admittedly, he did make some inroads at the convention on terrorism, but Kerry's speech basically was a laundry list of what he supported without a laundry basket to keep it all in place if that makes sense to anyone. So, my message is to can whatever theme the campaign currently has and come up with one that encompasses:

1) Why John Kerry's positions strengthen the American empire at home and abroad... (remove outsourcing of our future to China in the form of budget deficits, energy independence to remove the geopolitical significance of OPEC, etc.)
2) Kerry's life story

I submit that "stronger at home, respected in the world" fails for a couple of reasons. 1) What about stronger in the world? Kerry needs to convey thematically that his policies do make us stronger in the world while making us respected in the world. 2) I think stronger at home is a bit vague. Kerry's discourse should be more in terms of security-speak, which is at the very heart of postmodernism. Security should be discussed in terms of the environment, retirement, healthcare, anti-terrorism, etc. His speeches should hit on why Kerry makes us more secure at home than Bush on all of these fronts and why Kerry makes us stronger in the world for reasons X, Y, and Z.
So, a possible substitute would be "Secure at Home, Stronger in the World." However, there needs to be some way to make that hit home so that folks relate to Kerry personally. That is something that I can't figure out at this time, but I thought that I have made a good start.

My second suggestion relates to tactics. Kerry, because he does not have an overwhelming message that ties everything together, is not getting coverage. Folks do not care too much about covering what he thinks about Yucca Mountain because it does not affect folks in NYC enough to cover it on the news. If he had a message that explained how it relates to Kerry's larger goals, maybe it would get play. Regardless, if he wants to avoid getting defined and savaged in the press, he needs to go negative, which does not need to encompass personal attacks. Kerry needs to have some zingers on the stump that get play and take Bush off his feet. Bring up the issues, but bring Bush into the equation. "Bush does not mind outsourcing your job. Now he wants to outsource your future." We need bite-sized attack lines, not convoluted verbosity.

My third suggestion is to let nothing go unnoticed. Bush's folks said something about "Want a job. Get prozac." today and there seems to have been no response. Bush comments on tribal sovereignty and there is no response. People need to know about these things, and Kerry;s campaign cannot be afraid to hammer Bush. Hit him on his negatives and drive his polls down instead of wishing the clock until November 2 read 10 hours and counting.

Anyway, I don't want to appear harsh in my comments because I have been a Kerry supporter from day one and know that he is on the side of truth in terms of intellectually responsible positions on the issues. My harshness stems from the fact that Kerry is in a great position right now that he and his campaign have earned, and I don't want it to be squandered.

Good luck to you and please respond if you have the opportunity, DUers included.

[Warren DeMontague]

264. Yeah, that Prozac line was very

Marie Antoinette-ish. Thanks for the reminder. There may be a bumper sticker in there, somewhere.

:hi:

[oasis]

268. Welcome to DU DeminDC. You have some great ideas.

[fortyfeetunder]

274. A little less than a gentleman

This campaign reminds me of Bush I vs Dukakis. It was intensely negative, and capitalized on that Willie Horton thing, which Dukakis never was able to shake off. Dukakis tried to be a gentleman and it backfired on him.

Perhaps Kerry has been too much of a gentleman while the Republican pit bull is nipping at his leg. If he doesn't do something, they will be after his neck.

When a pit bull is attacking your leg, and wants to go after your neck, you don't look around and predict "Help is on the way". No!

(With apologies to animal rights activists) You take whatever blunt object and beat the living s**t out the dog so it knows you are not available to be attacked again. That is the tactic Kerry has to take, period.

edited to get rid of something...

[Warren DeMontague]

265. One More Issue:::

I understand that the word from on high, as far as "talking points", has been to stress the issue of stem cells vs. a woman's right to choose. I understand why some may think this is a smarter, less divisive tack to take, despite the overwhelming evidence that the majority of Americans are Pro-Choice. However, and this is not mutally exclusive with the stem cell debate, either, why is no one in our party willing to point out, loudly, that the HLA Plank as written in the GOP Platform will not only criminalize abortion, but will criminalize IVF and other fertility treatments, and also would lead to the criminalization of the birth control pill and other common forms of contraception? I think that these are very extremist, radical positions that are generally kept under the radar by the GOP powers-that-be. I'm certain your average female, suburban "swing voter", whatever she may feel about abortion, doesn't want the pill to be a controlled substance. The GOP's continued domination by far right religious extremists is an achilles heel. We should take advantage of it.

[Swamp Rat]

266. Working hard here in New Orleans from the inside to turn this state blue

If you have any suggestions Dem_Strategist, for me and my specific area, please "PM" me (send a personal message). I'd like to discuss strategy but not on an open forum. The Busheviks are watching DU - which a GOOD thing for their plebes - but there are some professionals that have infiltrated and I'm loathe to give away particular tactics.

Welcome to DU! :toast:

Geaux Kerry!!! :kick:

[Sweet Freedom]

267. How can we encourage news stations to cover protests?

Every day in our country, there are hundreds of people protesting this administration and I only hear about it through the Internet. (But let twelve freepers show up at a park and it's headline news.)

I'll ask people I know if they saw the huge protest in Anywhere USA. They have no idea what I'm talking about because the footage didn't appear on mainstream TV.

There are so many people who have no idea that millions of Americans oppose this administration. I think knowing that others feel the same as you, empowers you to become involved. I also think that knowing so many people oppose what you support, causes you to question your own beliefs.

What can we do to change this? Do we videotape these events ourselves and send them to the media? Do we take photos and include them in LTTE noting that their paper failed to cover the protest? Do we hire a well-known professional photographer to cover the bigger protests in hopes that name recognition opens the door to coverage? Do we protest outside one offending TV station and alert others to this news in hopes of getting them to cover it? The RNC is coming up. Are the protests going to receive mainstream coverage?

Recently, someone posted a link to a website that had photos from a local Bush event where hundreds of people turned out to protest. (Sorry, I don't have a link and can't remember a key word that would aid me in a search.) One comment from the Webmaster was that the Bush supporters were shocked (shocked!) that so many people disliked Bush. They had no idea!

I think pictures tell stories to Americans better than some of the best written articles. (Look at the Iraqi prisoner abuse. The average Joe wasn't outraged or disgusted -- until he saw the photos.)

Maybe the key isn't being heard. Maybe it's being seen. How do we accomplish this?

[eridani]

270. Don't answer this, but---

--you're Michael Whouley, right?

Of course no one really needs to know if I am right or wrong. Carry on either way.

[con_o_rama]

271. Since we're taking a page out of Norquist's book...

Let's also look to two other areas of media action, which are needed not only in the run-up to the immediate election, but also for the campaign ahead, for the next several years, and which will, even if a two-termer, outlast the Kerry presidency.
1) Take back the dictionary of political battles. The right has successfully set out a terminology for every issue, vetted by marketeers, and Republicans who do not use the official terms are literally fined by the RNC. Norquist put this list out every Wednesday for years, but who knows where it comes from now. This is how we were burdened with 'pro-life', 'Partial-birth abortion' and 'tort reform,' to name a few.
A good place to start on this would be to call the media on their echoing of RNC talking points without acknowledging their source. Let's start by e-mailing and lettering every paper, program and journalist (real and so-called) for using the term 'flip-flop,' first only when speaking of John Kerry, and second, without attributing the term to the Republicans, rather than using it as a general term. Recommend a thesaurus if they have to buy the RNC's line.
2) Co-ordinate talking points and issue priorities across interest groups. This'll be a real pain, as it is much easier to co-ordinate a bunch of groups whose vision is a return to a somewhat-existent past, say, 1907. As a counterpoint, every Liberal has his or her own vision of the future, which is why ours is a hopeful but disorganized party. Yet the conservatives were in the same place we are 20+ years ago, they created an infrastructure that remained standing and ever-moving throughout the various elections, and look where it got us: America's government is now the most hated in the world!

So this 'mediacorps' rapid reaction approach is inherently behind the curve, yet necessary, as is my suggestion #1 above. But we MUST also implement #2 if we are to do anything more than continue to play major leagues without any equipment, regardless of the quality of our ideas and abilities.

[Bogus W Potus]

272. Suggestion for the strategist

I know this has been said before, but please work with Kerry to make him less long winded. He needs to be more like his running mate John Edwards and just talk with more simple words. People will be more interested and he will start to climb even higher in the polls I think.

[BobL]

275. I agree

The media is the opponent to the extent that they control microphone.

The Republicans are uncreative and predictable, they are essentially peddling the same old tough on crime crapola repackaged as the war on terror.

The Kerry campaign has to be "sensitive" when crafting their responses to the red meat that Rove & co will sure hurdle their way.

I was unimpressed with the response to "knowing what you know now"...I understand the political realities and the need for Kerry to send a signal to the wealthy elites that actually run this country, but I would have rather seen a message that reassures the base and achieves that same goal...something along the lines of

Our position is to be tough on terrorist and respectful of the needs of our allies.Our position is to work together with all of the nations of the world joined in the common goal of confronting every threat to the peace, stability, security and interest of not only the United States but our allies as well.The president has said "bring um on", we say "take um down, together"...When I cast my vote to authorize the use of force it was understood that this was no blank check,I trusted that this administration would honor their word and there duty to abide by the conditions contained in that resolution.So Mr. reporter, I ask you to go back to Mr Bush and ask him to explain his actions and failures leading up to the invasion, when I receive those answers from Mr. Bush I will gladly answer with a simple Yes or No....

I was impressed with the way the campaign gutted Cheney,That was a brilliant stroke of genius.We can expect more of the same from Rove.His strategist are telling him that they need to move Kerry left, make him look like a weak liberal.In fact if I were Kerry I would have someone going over every speech that Bush , Cheney, Rumsfield et al have ever made and pull out any "liberal" sounding words, craft a couple of catchy sound bites around them that espouse the core message then turn their rhetoric around and shove it right up there asses when they go on the attack.

I think so far the Kerry people are doing alright,Bush has managed to isolate himself at a time when he need's to be reaching out to the middle.If you look at the Republican convention roster, it is clear that they are attempting an "extreme makeover" with the line of moderates slated to speak.There are cracks in the goose stepping ranks.Powell will not speak and the evangelicals are screaming because they haven't received there invitations yet...

What you witness at places like DU is frustration...liberals are tired of politics, they just want to jump in the ring and whip some ass.

And that's my 2 cents

BobL

[roseBudd]

276. Media is important but so is reaching out to teen spirit

I agree that the letters to the editor approach is important. I work for a paper and I am pretty sure that disqualifies me for inclusion on the editorial page. Newspapers get lots of letters and only a few are published. Our talking points are followed by their talking points.

I did contact conservative syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker after her disingenuous claim that Theresa Heinz-Kerry had said "shove it" to a reporter, when the person in fact was the editorial page editor of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a conservative daily newspaper owned by Richard Mellon Scaife. That won't change the bias that flows from Parker's pen.

I want to do something that I know will bring X number of votes into what I consider to be the Kerry column.

As far as I can figure the biggest block of untapped secular, left leaning bodies can be found at music venues. The GOP is going after blocks of religious voters. We should be targeting the concerts, bars, college campuses.

Should I walk around with voter registration forms and just sign up unregistered 18-29 year olds since I live near a college campus and a music venue?

Should I walk around downtown on my lunch break registering minority youth to vote?

I live in a swing state that is close and only went for Bush by 3.5% in 2000.