True or False : This election is about Bush more than his opponent??

[kentuck]

It really doesn't matter who the Democrat is - other than how thick is his shield? People will either decide that he is a strong military leader or they will decide that he is one of the stupidest, most arrogant, and calamitous fuck-ups we have ever witnessed in this nation's history? He could be running against Yosemite Sam - it doesn't matter.

The only way it matters which Democrat he runs against is the ability of the Democrat to fight back - and the willingness to fight back. Otherwise, most people have already decided whether or not they want to hire or re-hire him for this job? It appears they are ready to kick him out the door without any unemployment and without hesitation. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, Dubya...

[UpsideDownFlag]

1. if he doesn't win, it will sure matter who it was.

[tom_paine]

2. "the ability of the Democrat to fight back - and the willingness to fight

back"

Yep. Sorry to say I've seen precious little of that from kerry/Edwards.

Oh, they seem to be marginally better than Gore in 2000, but WHERE ARE THE ATTACK ADS?!?

My God, in this Sovietized Land, it is DOUBLY as improtant for Kerry/Edwards to use the TV, not to mindlessly Bush Bash, but to INFORM a dazed and Pravda-ized public of what their Imperial Lying Whore Pravda isn't telling them.

But instead, utter silnec out of fear the Bushevik Sub-Media and Corporate TV Pravda will slam us.

Got news for you folks counseling caution, cowardice and fear, they are going to slam us NO MATTER WHAT WE DO!

[jarab]

3. Total agreement here ...

A wimpy campaign is not my preferred way to campaign against these brawlers. Brawl with 'em, and frame it as love.
...O...

[kentuck]

4. Tough love ?

:)

We're only being tough on 'em 'cause we love 'em....People just need to know the truth and hey are obviously not capable of giving it to them...

[jarab]

9. Our candidate owes it to us

(the electorate) ..... that we're assured of getting the truth.
How else are we to be truthfully enlightened if there are no counterattacks to their lies. I could not care less which agent puts forth the counter arguments; we surely can't depend upon the media.

If our candidate or his agents are incapable of mounting vigorous retorts without stepping on his shoelaces ("sensitive")?, he needs to barefoot it. We shouldn't hesitate to "fight back" against the distortions and lies simply because we're unprepared or ill-equipped to meet the challenge of their subsequent attack ... which will surely always materialize.
IMO, a passive candidacy at this early date is ill advised, and I would be hard pressed to think of a time when it would be judicious. These nuts are at war with us; "we're either with 'em or agin 'em".
jmho.
...O...

[John Q. Citizen]

8. tom,

The real question is, is Kerry's strategy working? I would say yes, it is. Kerry's leading in almost every national poll as well as in every electoral college analysis that I've seen.

If we win, it makes no matter that the Repos will attack NO MATTER WHAT.

"Oh, they seem to be marginally better than Gore in 2000, but WHERE ARE THE ATTACK ADS?!?" Seen F-911 yet? Seen any of the Move-on ads?

Kerry doesn't have to attack Bush personally, though he does constantly criticize many bush policies.

The Kerry strategy has nothing to do with "counseling caution, cowardice and fear," it has everything to do with winning the election.

The country is divided. No matter what Kerry says against Bush, about half the electorate are going to vote for Bush. Why waste time beating a dead horse?

I know it would make you feel good to have Kerry verbally rip Bush a new one, but making you feel good isn't paramount right now.

Kerry will win because the swing and the new voters are trending his way big time. Apparently he has given more thought to a winning strategy than you have, tom, which isn't too surprising.

Tom, why would Kerry directly attacking Bush be a smart move to win? Please give me your analysis instead of your frustration.

[tom_paine]

13. First off, as we well know Kerry's "lead" is eaten up by Disenfranchisemen

Mannual Electronic Vacation Home Voting Vote Blocking Phony Felon Purges and several other NEW ones I've just heard about

(and almost certain some new merthodologies that will catch us by surprise)

You asked for my analysis, well here it is:

(and I am NOT referring simply to Kerry verbally attacking Bush and F9-11 is NOT an attack ad, it's a goddamned movie made necessary by the collapse of the Free Press in Amerika)

Which brings me to the primary reason. We all know the Orwellianism of Amerikan Press, but what it means is that people have been purposefully denied information that could be detrimental to the Imperial Family.

A single example: The CBA conclusion that Bush Tax Cuts (as we all knew) benefitted the wealthy far more than anyone else.

Now, we also all know this WILL NOT BE SEEN on TV. If it is seen it will be desultory and perhaps only as a scroll flash-by.

Even if it is shown, it will be distorted and smeared by the Busehviks with the happy help of the Bushevik host.

But, that is something the American People need to know.

And they'll NEVER know, 99.5% of them, maybe more.

People assume that when people like me start saying fight back that we are talking about Mindless Bush Bashing.

Which is in and of itself a Bushevik Big Lie and would it make you feel better if I told you that they affect me and all of us even as we know about them and try to defend ourselves.

But Modern Psychomanipulation is strong enough that it can even shatter defenses these days, 50 times morer powerful that what the original Goebbels was selling.

But I AM NOT spekaing of mindless Bush Bashing. What I am speaking of is getting out the MOUNTAIN of scandals and demonstarble LIES told by the Busheviks the knowledge of which has been ABSOLUTELY DENIED to Amerikans by the Pravd aWhores.

In other words, inthe absence of a Free Press, Kerry should be using Paid TV Ads to supplement it and bring these facts to the forefront for an ignorant and slavish populace that they might rouse to the Call of Liberty.

So, there is my primary reason. I am not advocating that which you thik I am but rather that which the Busheviks would have you perceive me as wishing.

(sorry if that offends, it still sometimes sneaks up on me, too, even now)

I have others, but this post is already too long.

That one reason should be enough. The "negative ads" would simply be to fill the void left by the Death of the Free Press. They woul merely point out the many lies of the Busheviks and wouldn;t even need to be all that negative.

[rowire]

5. ABB: Anyone But Bush

eom

[VOX]

6. In order to fire *, you have to offer an appealing, competent opponent...

It's a great deal about *, but not all about *.

What chance would the Democrats have, say, if they were running Tom Daschle/Dick Gephardt for president/VP?

Fence-sitting voters have to be offered a choice in which they feel confident before they'll stray from the illusion of the "don't switch horses" path.

[Larkspur]

7. True, all elections are a referendum on the incumbent

Kerry won't win this election; Bush will lose it. Bush shouldn't be in a position to lose the election. He should have been impeached and sent to the Hague for war crimes.

Kerry's "win" will be a Pyhrric victory, if he continues the same imperialist "free" trade platform that he's on now.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Oh, I don't know,

Kerry was courages enough to take on the Government on Vietnam, and he took the enormously popular Reagan administration on to help stop our secret and illegal wars in Latin America.

I don't know what you were up to during those times, Larkspur. I went to protests, wrote letters, and did what i could, but I'm sure glad Kerry was willing to do what he did. I thought Kerry had a very positive impact in fighting imperialism.

[Larkspur]

12. He's been an imperialist puppet since those younger days of his

He supported the 2002 Iraq war, which was clearly a war of imperialism.

[MichiganVote]

10. Its not about Bush and its not about Kerry. Its about us and what

we want in this country and what we want to do or not do about what is not in this country. Its about us, citizens, americans, parents, young adults, the retired and so on and so forth. Its about us, what we want. A stronger America.

[noamnety]

14. False.

Kerry's got an extra ability not only to cast his votes right, but to inspire other people to think intelligently about our place in our local communities and in the global community. He's as much about teaching his principles as he is about legislating them. I am looking forward to his press conferences and state of the union addresses, I think they'll go beyond the political rhetoric of I'm good and here's why" - I think he'll use them to mold the shape of the country.

Dean had a similar ability to inspire, which I think is why we still see so many deaniacs, and he's still a huge asset to the campaign (besides just not being Bush). But Kerry's ability is a little extra. I think at the end of his two terms, we'll not only have better policy, but we'll have a smarter electorate who can put into words what they are looking for in a leader, and why.

Short term, he may win on the ABB platform. But long term for the country, it's not about ABB.