John Sasso: 5 reasons Dukakis lost.

[Julien Sorel]

John Sasso was Dukakis' campaign manager. He is a key adviser to Kerry. He has a reputation as a dirty fighter.

At any rate, after the election, Sasso said Dukakis lost for 5 reasons, and they are instructive for any campaign, I think:


1)"First, we did not, to my mind, properly or convincingly, make the case for change."

2)"Second, it is politically dangerous to take for granted that voters will automatically assume the Democratic candidate holds dear the country's basic values: God, patriotism, family, freedom."

3)"Third, the Republicans routinely field a squad of political professionals, most of them now with years of White House and presidential campaign experience (while) Democrats somehow field a squad of smart but insurgent players, who do not fully understand whole areas of the country and operate far more narrowly."

4)"Fourth, the media still have not figured out how to deal effectively with negative advertising."

The fifth had to do with Jesse Jackson, so I won't post it here because it is largely irrelevant.

I'm curious to see how people would rate Kerry's campaign using these four criteria:

1)Making a case for change.

2)Demonstrating that he is in tune with the country's values.

3)Putting together a capable team.

4)Dealing with the media.


Who thinks what? An A-F or 5-1 scale (5 being best, 1 being worst) would be easy, comments would be appreciated as well.

[jonnyblitz]

1. where did you get this? I am curious what he said about

Jesse Jackson. I read somewhere that the DLC was formed in the 80's by southern white DEMS to counter Jesse Jackson..

[Julien Sorel]

7. He said basically that Dukakis erred in not

standing up to Jackson at the convention, when Jackson was pushing to be VP. People forget this now, but Jackson got nearly as many votes in the primary as Dukakis did, something like 7 million for Jackson, and 9 million for Dukakis. He was a force. Jackson wanted to be the VP candidate, which wasn't going to happen, but Dukakis handled things behind the scenes with careful diplomacy. Had he been more forceful, Sasso argues, it would have helped his image with the rest of the country -- made him look tougher. Clinton was able to brush Jackson off, and it reassured people, especially in the South, that Clinton was capable of standing up to the Jesse Jackson wing of the Democratic party. Yes, there's some kowtowing to racism in there, IMO, but there's also realism.

I do not believe the DLC had anything to do with Jesse Jackson. The DLC is really about giving people who are pro-business but social liberal-to-moderate a place in the Democratic Party.

[GOPAgainstGW]

2. Dukakis = Idiot - Idiot - Idiot - Idiot - Idiot There's the 5 reasons!

[rndmprsn]

23. i respectfully disagree

about dukakis....the governor who engineered the massachusetts miracle was and is not an idiot...perhaps slow to engage etc.

false and negative ads created this impression...we know this, don't believe the hype!

[papau]

3. There is no "dealing with the media" as they are whores on a chain -but

the other 3 thoughts are valid - the only way to overcome the media/GOP love of negative the other guy sucks campaigns is to indeed

1)Making a case for change. - and the economy and jobs and health care and environment all are easy pickings - if Kerry goes at least a little negative by saying how Bush is destroying each.

2)Demonstrating that he is in tune with the country's values - means a lot more go to Church moments and less macho hunting/wind surfing bull shit.

3)Putting together a capable team - and that simply means what it says - Kerry needs good local people.

[Xipe Totec]

4. It's The Media, Billy

1).- To make a case for change you need to get your message across which requires access to the media.

2).- Demonstrating that you are in tune with country values also requires access to the media.

3).- Putting together a capable team means one capable of getting the message across and through the media.

4).- Dealing with the media means realizing that we got screwed more than a year ago when Michael Powell, Colin Powell's son, became chairman of the FCC and removed all barriers to monopoly control of the media by the likes of Rupert Murdoch.

[Julien Sorel]

6. I think the media are a lever.

A powerful lever, but a lever all the same. Or maybe a prism. Or maybe a prism that acts as a lever :-)

At any rate, while I agree the media are key, the other three are also important: to one extent or another, reality has an impact on what the media report, and the other three are, in effect, reality, if that makes sense. Essentially, a good team will help deal with the media, while crafting a message that both makes an argument for change, and convinces people that you share, or at the very least understand and respect, their values.

Part of the values issue is hard to control, because of deeply rooted public perceptions. I don't expect, for example, Kerry to be viewed as religious as Bush, even though I believe Bush's convictions go no deeper than Elmer Gantry's. But Bush is a "southern" Republican who takes an anti-abortion stance, so he's going to win the religious values debate in a walkover with most people. Yet Kerry can certainly hit a threshhold there -- be religious enough at least not to alienate people.

[chelsea0011]

5. Or these five reasons: 1. Sasso2.Sasso3.Sasso4.Sasso5.Sasso

Welcome aboard!:( :( :(

[Julien Sorel]

8. So you think Sasso is to blame?

Would you care to expound?

[dsc]

9. Sasso didn't run Dukakis' general election campaign until it was too late

He was forced out when he was discovered to be behind the mailing of a video that proved Biden was a plagerist (during the primaries). From either late May or early June until October, Sasso was out.

[John_H]

10. Sure.

1) As far a proviiding a detailed plan for change and showing that JK is a credible alternative to chimp as a "war president" Team kerry gets a 10. One of the best policy operations I've seen in my years of studying the juncture of politics and policy. Unofrtunately, #1 relies largely on #4 to be successful.

2)Another nice job. Until Aug. the GOP/Media meme that JK was a stoic, cold, Gorelike, statue just didn't stick, largely because the candidate is not a stoic, cold, Gorelike, statue, of course, but because the campaign out him out in venues that demonstrate he isn't.

3) For a variety of reason, I'm convinced that the particularly risk averse and arrogant brand of careerism, common among Democratic staffers, is rampant within Team Kerry. This is caused by factors too numerous and too complex into here, but it is a major, major problem, particularly when it comes to dealing with "base" groups and the media.

4)The press operation, which I'd rate slightly above average, is much better than the surrogate operation which is horrible (and which may be run out of DNC, not the Kerry campaign). We've batted this one back and forth at DU for months and everyone's thoughts on the subject are on the record in detail.

[Julien Sorel]

16. You rate the campaign higher than I do.

I think they are hitting the change message more or less correctly now: "How can we be strong abroad if we are weak at home?" but I think they were sidetracked some during the convention. And I also think they need to sharpen it a tad. I still think they are doing well here.

The reason they were off message a little during the convention is because they were focusing on shoring up the values piece. I think they've done solidly here, Kerry's military service is good, and he has a relatively clean background. Still, you run into limits with the man himself, and the limits any Democrat faces in the country today. People simply think Republicans are better on values.

I like Cahill. I like Sasso. Actually, I like most of Kerry's staff, the problem I have with it is Kerry himself. He needs to let someone else write his speeches, or at least have a bigger hand in co-writing them.

Media relations is tough. On the outside, we just don't see enough to really judge, I think. But one thing I do see is the DNC itself needs to do something about cranking out a consistent, unified message and having Dems pound it in the faces of the talking heads. This should be in response to every issue and event that comes up.

[kodi]

20. john, #3 is and has been for years the worst problem of the bunch

there is no one close to kerry who rose thru the ranks of organized labor and who has been involved with the cut-throat fighting unions have with management. that type of fighting hones one's skills in combating the economic power structure and demands an ability to cast one's position in populist terms.

as you pointed out, the kerry camp has well heeled and educated, button-downed careerists.

even though one could counter that orgainized labor supported gephardt and he lost in the primaries, one has to admit that what gephardt said about labor and the working class is exactly what kerry needs to do to appeal to the traditional democractic working class voter who has drifted away from the democratric party because they feel that the democratic party has abandoned them to corporate interests...and lot of these folks might vote for nader as a protest against what the democratic party has not done for them.

[Octafish]

11. Willie Horton ad was nice...

... below-the-belt shot. There was plausible deniability as the ad "originated" outside Bushler campaign HQ. Same went for the Dukakis-Snoopy helmet tank photo-op.

Meanwhile, George Herbert Walker Bush used every time he opened his wimpy piehole to label Dukakis a "Tax-and-spend Liberal from Massachussets" who allowed "Boston Harbor" to be the most polluted waterway in America. Bush basically lied day and night to label Dukakis all things negative.

Then Pruneface Reagan got the message out at the puke convention that Dukakis was psychologically unfit for the job because Duke talked to a counselor aboud depression after his brother was killed by a hit-and-run driver. Reagan's words, IIRC, were "mental invalid." Dukakis's own-post convention bounce soon evaporated.

In 1988, negative attacks were very effective in a Lee Atwater kind of way. Smear Boat Liars should be nor surprise in 2004.

[Snellius]

12. He sees the problem but still thinks within the same box

The one to take advice from here is not Dukakis's campaign manager, whose recommendations are rather out of date (especially regarding the new role of the media and the hegemony of a one-party state), not even from Bill Clinton, whose personal charisma made up for several policy mistakes (especially on his health plan and how he handled attacks from the right). The one to ask is Gore, who by the end of his campaign -- and increasingly up to now -- has realized we need a much more sweeping and truly revolutionary vision of America's future. Unfortunately for Gore, he only came to the realization near the end, when all he could really put forward were the rather old and overused rhetoric of populism, but I look to Gore as the real ideological architect of the new Democratic party.

[Julien Sorel]

13. " a much more sweeping and truly revolutionary vision of America's future"

fits into Sasso's "box" as you put it. It's part of connecting to values, and the change message.

Sasso is talking about the mechanics of a campaign, nuts and bolts stuff. "A much more sweeping and truly revolutionary vision of America's future" is, well, to put it unkindly, a meaningless slogan; to put it kindly, it's energizing rhetoric.

[Snellius]

18. We could get more specific but this is just a post

My main problem with Sasso, like with Al From and Shrum and the DLC crowd is that they think they can help Democrats by appealing to traditional values of family, god, and country. These values have been so co-opted by the religious right, the media machine, the corporate power structure, and the neoRepublicans that the only way of appealing to the real values of honesty and justice and peace and goodness is to show Americans how those ideals have been perverted by blind fanaticism, corporate greed, and mass media-manipulated fear. The Dem party is not ready to take on that power structure at yet. Yes the problem is change. But change of what? Unless we are willing to take on powerful corporate, religious, and media interests, all that will change is personnel.

It's not just a matter of style, or even policy, but of substance.

[Rabelais]

14. Sasso sounds like a moron

Elections are won by psychology and marketing, something he obviously knows nothing about.
Bush never made a case for change.
Bush never demonstrated he is in tune with the country's values.
Bush had a "capable team" only because Gore;s was pathetic.
Yes Bush was successful at dealing with the media.

[JI7]

15. maybe not to you, but he has to others

[Julien Sorel]

17. Interesting.

1) Bush ran his 2000 campaign on the theme that he was like Clinton, but without the blowjobs. His "change" piece was that he was going to bring morality back to the White House.

2) His values piece was religion and patriotism. People bought it. People still buy it.

3) I don't think Rove is the genius people here say he is, but he is certainly competent, and Bush has an extremely deep pool of experienced people to draw from via his father.

4) Bush didn't get blowjobs from interns (that we know of), but he got so many from the media he didn't need them.

[JI7]

21. Ralph Reed

i the religous right helped bush a lot, especially with turnout on election day. i remember pat robertson or some other religious right fanatic saying he was going to lay low so he doesn't hurt bush with the moderate voters who tend to be turned off by people like him.

[dsc]

19. My grades

Making the case for change. Overall A, during the convention C-. Kerry has detailed plans but didn't mention many of them during the convention, and his surrogates didn't either. He should be hammering the economy day and night until November.

Values B- maybe C+. We are still debating the social issues on Republican territory. Instead of pronouncements on same sex marriage, or at least along with them, Kerry should be talking up things like ENDA and hate crimes legislation. We are on the people's side on those issues. Instead we are discussing an issue which splits our base instead of theirs. We are doing the same thing on abortion. Partial birth abortion is a political disaster and never should be discussed without the context of Roe V Wade and federal judges.

Here we get a D. Republicans have learned long ago that running a primary campaign takes different skills than running a general election campaign. Yet, time and again, we let candidates who win our primaries keep their teams intact and not take proven winners in general election campaigns. And the results have often been the same, a loss.

Here we get a C. Our surrogates have been lousy in many cases. It hasn't just been the terrible Podesta during Swift Boat follies but we have had dreadful spokespeople on every issue under the sun. They also don't say the same things as other surrogates leading to a confused message. It is hard for me to believe we fax talking points to the media when we clearly don't fax them to our surrogates. We need to do those things.

[WI_DEM]

22. ok

1)Change. He has done a good job, but I think he blew it during the convention. They didn't talk enough about what they would do differently. It was too much about the past--Kerry's Vietnam history. That is fine and they should have done it for a couple of days but then changed to speaking about specific plans and the change they plan to bring about. Also, the major issue confronting this country is Iraq and Kerry has not spoken out as much as he could on this issue or the prison scandal under Bush's watch.

2) Speaking to the countries values. Well lets say the values of some who think that you are a true American only if you wave the flag. I think he has done as well as any democrat I've seen. The military history, waving the flag at the convention, he attends mass regularly, ect. The problem is he doesn't wear his religion on his sleeves like Bush does which offends fundies. While he has done as well as anybody could on this--the republicans still have the upperhand if a AWOL president and a five time deferment VP can label a war hero a liar about his record in the military and get away with it. The swift boat lies should have been immediately squashed. I think he is on the right track now and have been impressed with what he has done since the GOP convention.

3) Campaign professionals. Bush has Rove who runs a tight ship and while he is devious he is also brilliant. Kerry has everybody under the sun and now he is bringing in Carville, Greenberg and a few others. He has to streamline and get a coordinated message and pick out two or three key issues and hammer away at Bush on them every day.

4) Dealing with the media. This is the hardest since the corporate media is already in the GOP's pocket. But we can try to make our case better. I have found that many of the Kerry surrogates have not been as aggressive in countering the smears. There are a few who are very effective and we should utilize them as much as possible: Max Cleland and Bob Kerrey have been from my pov the very best and perhaps the best on either side. I'd also like to see more people of color as surrogates. I'm worried about the AA vote. Not that Kerry won't get 90% of it, but whether they will turn out in sufficient numbers. Gore won the popular vote in a great measure thanks to an unusually large turnout among AA. So far, I don't sense great enthusiasm for Kerry in this community.

[blondeatlast]

24. Overall, slighhtly better than 3.

Change: 3. The case is obvious, it's staring us in the face, but it isn't used effectively. This is where the campaign needs to be truthfully aggressive. The don't have to sling mud--the mud is already on the pResident. Just USE the mud. Tell us where Bunnypant's has failed, and what Kerry can do to fix it.

Values: 3 again. Health care hits home and they use that issue effectively. I'd like to see them use the unions more effectively. Hit it hard in Right-to-Work states, like Arizona.

Jobs are THE economic issue, and are more easily campaigned with than the economy, if that makes sense. Job loss doesn't need details.

Team: 3. We need Sasso AND Cahill, but Sasso should be leading the charge.

Media: 4. We need to trot out our awesome surrogates at every opportunity. I was NOT a Dean supporter, but he can really energize and needs to be used aggressively and often.

Edit: more on the values issue. Kerry is a better example of "family values" than is Bush, but I'm not sure how to get that across. GREAT kids, decent relationship with his ex-wife, obviously very much in love with Teresa.

He's a living, breathing example of a good, strong family, which I think will resonate as a "value" with more voters than the R "family values" rhetoric. But it can't come across in sound bites.

In the end, I think this too is an economic issue. If it can be tied to the weakened economy and job loss, it's a slam dunk.