Josh Marshall has some advice for Democrats. Get a grip.

[pscot]

We have a tendency to run around waving our arms and shouting that the sky is falling every time there's a flutter in the polls. Suck it up, people. Attitude matters. Here's Josh.


"Today I realized that what had been a congealing sense that the second half of August had been a bad couple weeks for Kerry had turned into a galloping panic that his campaign is in disarray and hope for his candidacy may be close to over.

There are articles about a possible shake-up among high-level staffers, blind quotes from Democratic insiders saying that after a couple more days it may be too late; and I've gotten a slew of emails from readers either asking me if I still think there's hope or ranting that they've had it with Mary Beth Cahill or Stephanie Cutter or someone else.

All I can say is, really, really, shut up and calm down.

Politically, this is one of the worst things about Democrats -- and it has many sources. As a group they seem to have a great tendency toward becoming disheartened, turning on their candidate, doubting his strategy, doubting his advisors, and so forth. Unfortunately, the candidates and advisors have an equal tendency to be open to that kind of fretting. And with the media playing the handmaiden to the synergizing anxiety, the whole thing can become very demoralizing and damaging for campaigns.

Many folks look back and say Al Gore ran a terrible campaign. Maybe. Maybe not. For me, I look back and see something different. I remember a campaign that was far too sensitive to the spin and CW of the moment and thus capable of being buffeted by the smallest political squall. This, rather than any particular tactic or strategy, has always struck me as its greatest failing.

The Bush 2000 campaign was wholly different. They had many reverses. But there was never any serious question that a Rove or a Hughes would get canned. And if there was, the campaign sent out a clear signal that it would never happen. On many levels they were more disciplined.

That difference made a big difference in consistency of strategy and morale among the troops.

If you're a regular reader of this column, you'll know I've been very critical of the rapid-response from the Kerry campaign (wherever it may have gone to) as well as their seeming disinclination to go on the offensive and stay there.

But the difference between the race today and where it was two, three or four weeks ago is still very small. The difference in the national polls is very slight. The last nine major national polls have ABC (tied), ICR (+3 Kerry), Time (+2 Bush), Fox (+1 Kerry), CNN (+2 Bush), NBC/WSJ (+2 Bush), LAT (+2 Bush), NPR (+4 Kerry), IBD/CSM (tied).

(Those numbers are from the graphic on the front page of Pollingreport.com.)

Let me be clear: Those polls tell me the momentum of the race has clearly moved in the president's direction. And some of the state-by-state numbers (like PA, for instance) show that even more clearly. For all that, though, it is difficult to say that Kerry has lost the race when it's not even clear that he's behind.

Again, this is not a Pollyannaish post. The Kerry campaign needs to get control of the debate back from the president. And they need to start hitting much harder. But Democrats themselves need to be a lot tougher and hardier about the cycles campaigns go through. And that applies to self-serving Democratic 'insiders' too.


http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[GainesT1958]

1. And he's RIGHT, dammit!

How's the "sky falling" when Dub actually LOST a lead to Kerry inn one poll? When people are still just as sick of him over the economy, the Iraq quagmire, "we can't win" war on "terra", lack of leadership in general, etc.?

All this moaning..GET the heck OVER it!:mad:

John Edwards put it quite succinctly on Monday: "We have a plan...they don't. And that is the difference!"

:kick:

B-)

[RobinA]

2. I Think The Problem Is

not a jog this way or that in the polls, but the feeling that the administration is calling the shots.

Also, from my perspective, given the facts of the Bush record so far, there is no way in hell the race should be this close at this point. The fact this it is, is a bad sign in my book.

[dennis4868]

5. Bush calls the shots....

because the media lets him.....Kerry cannot get away with changing his mind on an issue (i.e., can win the war on terror) or cannot have a questionable history (war hero vs draft dodger....which has gotten more attention?).

The media follows the Bush plan and Kerry is behind the eight ball everyday.

[MrBenchley]

3. Amen to that.

[John_H]

4. "The Kerry campaign needs to...

get control of the debate back from the president. And they need to start hitting much harder."

Despite the political judo chess masters calling us chicken littles, hand wringers, et. al. all most of us ever demanded was the implementation of the above. Nobody ever waved their arms at my house.
It appears Kerry agrees. Needless to say many things are still going to need to change to make regaining control of the debate possible but he's making a very good start, especially with his speech on Thursday.

[Hornito]

6. And good advice too. As someone who has been involved in

politics for over 35 years, I've learned not to get too excited during this period in the process. Now, come three weeks out, if things are still looking stinky, then it might be time for a bit of panic.

Regardless, I am still holding to my prediction that Kerry will garner 57%-60% of the vote, and take the race. He hasn't begun to fight yet. Stay tuned, ...camly.

[emulatorloo]

7. Agreed - the campaign has JUST BEGUN

These wacky "undecideds" are just starting to pay attention.

Same w wavering Bush voters.

Once the repug convo is over, we kick into high gear.

[mzmolly]

8. He's got some great points. Sounds like the campaign could use this

info.

That difference made a big difference in consistency of strategy and morale among the troops.

I peruse conservative discussion boards. And, they never get down. Their blind faith carry's them ... perhaps we could use a little of that koolaid ourselves ... seriously :beer:

[mondo joe]

9. Why are those who are concerned depicted as "we've lost"?

There are people who are gracely concerned about the direction of the campaign.

What I'd like to know is why those who are concerned are depicted as saying WE'VE LOST when that's definitely not the case.

Is expressing concern now the equivalent of surrender?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

10. Sounds like he reads Will Pitt

:)