A note to all who compare Kerry to Dukakis

[Big Al from WI]

Bill Hillsman, an advisor to Paul Wellstone and Jesse Ventura, among others, makes a good point in his book, Run the Other Way. That is, you cannot really compare what happened in the past to what happened now. You cannot say "Well, this worked for so-and-so back in 1992 or 1988, therefore it will work now. Or, this failed for so-and-so back in the day, therefore it will still fail now.

He says that this is one of the major flaws of most campaigns, because no two situations are exactly alike. And think about it- there are so many differences between the situations of Kerry and Dukakis. I know we think that Reagan was not a great president (or even a minorly good president), but a lot of people disagreed, and a lot of people voted for him. The "Reagan Democrats," and all that. So then, George H.W. rode the coattails of Reagan's popularity, you could say. What does George W. have to match that? George W. has a worse record than Reagan and George H.W. combined. Perhaps Kerry's campaign should make light of Bush's horrible record more often, but for a surprising amount of people, it already speaks for itself.

Also, Kerry's reputation as a "good closer" can't hurt either. He seems to function better when all the pressure is on him, whether it was in Vietnam, or in his Senate campaigns, or anywhere else. It seems like that's just the way he works. We should do all we can between now and October 1st to help expose the right-wing's lies (LTTE's, etc.) and help campaign not only for Kerry, but for Dem candidates in the House, Senate, and state legislatures. After October 1st, re-evaluate what is going on, and remember, a month is longer than it may seem. A lot of things can change in a month, or even a few days.

[Zomby Woof]

1. you are correct

Despite the cliché to the contrary, history does not repeat itself.

Welcome to DU. :toast:

[oasis]

2. Bookmarkable observation.

:think:

[AmericanErrorist]

3. The only place where Kerry and Dukakis belong

is the fact that Kerry was Dukakis's Lt. Governor in the 1980s.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

4. You are SO right.

No two elections are exactly alike. It is foolish to try to replay an earlier election, or to use an earlier election to determine what to do or what not to do in the present one.

But I still would advise Kerry not to get in any tanks! :-)

[JohnKleeb]

5. yeah, yeah!

Definely. Thanks.

[lapfog_1]

6. I would only add

that campaigns should always question conventional wisdom as well.

For example, conventional wisdom says that you run a "base oriented"
campaign to win the primaries, and then switch to a "centrist message"
to win the general election (because you need those "undecided voters").
BUT, this year that conventional wisdom may not hold. This election
may be decided by who motivates the BASE of the party to get out the
vote. The country has pretty much aligned themselves into two camps,
so there aren't a lot of middle voters. However, by appearing either
wishy-washy or "the same as the other guy", the candidate may well
unmotivate the base and lose.

In another example of conventional wisdom that may not hold, look
at the tone of the campaign. Conventional wisdom would have you
believe that the public doesn't like negative attack ads, however
the results may be quite different. People may not "like" the
attack ads, but they ARE influenced by them.

BTW, these two examples are true for BOTH candidates. Bush may lose
by appearing to be "just like that socialist commie bastard Kerry",
or Kerry may lose by appearing to be "just like that Nazi Neocon
tool Bush".

Always question conventional wisdom and assumptions.

I made a career out doing just that with high tech. It served
me well in a very dynamic environment (things that didn't make
sense two years ago, all of a sudden made perfect sense... and
then 5 years later, made no sense again).