Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Democracy and Elections

10 Ways Obama Should Not Imitate the John Kerry Campaign

By Drew Westen, Huffington Post. Posted August 26, 2008.


Dems have used the same playbook to guide themselves to losing presidential campaigns for decades. Here are the techniques Obama should avoid.
Advertisement

In the presidential race of 2004 we had the Two Americas. In this year's race we have the Two Obamas: the one who has drawn repeated comparisons to JFK, RFK, and MLK, and the one who has drawn comparisons to Adlai Stevenson, Michael Dukakis, and John Kerry. Whether Obama will win the general election depends on whether he and his campaign make sure that the right Obama shows up for the remainder of the campaign.

Obama was losing this time last year to Hillary Clinton until he changed course at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Iowa in November and started inspiring voters again in a way that only a once-in-a-generation leader can do. He lost much of the second half of the primary season as his negatives rose consistently in response to her sustained blows as he refused even to put his hands up to block them. From the time he became the presumptive nominee until the last two weeks, Democrats have been growing increasingly alarmed that they were poised to lose another unloseable election, as his campaign was once again turning Obama the charismatic leader into Obama the rambling, dispassionate, conflict-avoidant, traditional Democratic presidential candidate.

The Kerry Playbook: How to Suck the Life Out of a Candidate in Ten Easy Steps

It is time, once and for all, for Democrats to burn the Kerry playbook. For those who have done their best to forget, here are some of its key features. It is the same playbook used to guide one losing Democratic campaign after another for decades:

1. Be nice. Be positive. It's okay to take an occasional swipe, but don't remind the public regularly why they should be concerned about keeping the incumbent or his party in the White House no matter how incompetent, deceitful, or criminal their actions (e.g., don't talk about Abu Ghraib because the other side might accuse you of "nor supporting our troops").

2. If you get attacked, don't attack back. If you absolutely have to respond, start with a weak rejoinder, preferably one without any hint of masculinity, like "If that were the case, I would find it very disappointing." Show as little emotion as you can when responding to attacks. Never express outrage at attacks on your character or patriotism or strike back at your opponent for making them or colluding with those who do.

3. Assume people know who your candidate is because you do and they've heard about him for months. Wait until the convention to start defining your candidate in richer detail, after he's already been branded by the other side and it's difficult to change people's minds. Don't inoculate in advance against the ideas you know will appear in early August attack books that are likely to morph into television ads around the time of the Democratic Convention or in October, particularly if their content is predictable and potentially toxic.

4. If there are elements of your candidate's life story that worry you, don't talk about them. Cross your fingers and close your eyes really tight, and hope Karl Rove won't notice them.

5. If the other side starts to define your candidate in ways that might be damaging, hold your fire, and if you have to say anything, start with, "the American people are smarter than that." If you have to take corrective measures, do so only after your polling data have shown definitively that the damage has been done.

6. If the other side predictably defines you as elite (as they have done against every Democrat for 40 years), don't respond, especially if your opponent is from a much more privileged background than you are. Find a way to mention any elite universities you've attended or slip them into images in your biographical ads.

7. Don't make any sustained effort to brand your opponent, even as he is branding you. That would be negative, and focus group participants don't like negativity. Let your opponent define both of you.

8. To prepare for debates and similar television performances, focus on facts, figures, and briefing books. Spend little or no time on nonverbal cues, like making eye contact with the audience, and be sure not to have anyone prep the candidate who has expertise in nonverbal communication.

9. When asked in debates and similar forums about wedge issues such as abortion or guns, appear as if you've heard the question for the first time, or be ready with dispassionate responses, and make little effort to connect with voters in the center who could hear your values and resonate with them if you spoke about them with conviction. Do not describe the slippery slopes on the other side the way Republicans always do against Democrats (e.g., that your opponent believes that if your sixteen-year-old daughter were raped, the government, not you and your daughter, should decide whether she should carry the baby to term).

10. If anti-incumbent sentiment is high and your opponent's party is unpopular, make the election a referendum about your candidate (the challenger) rather than the incumbent and his party.

Is this a parody of the Kerry campaign? I wish it were. It's a synopsis.

The Kerry campaign was determined to run a positive campaign against one of the most corrupt, incompetent, destructive administrations in the history of the country, which has only become more corrupt, incompetent, and destructive in the ensuing four years. It never told a story of who George W. Bush was and why people shouldn't re-elect him that would be emotionally compelling and memorable or capitalize on and amplify voters' pre-existing sentiments. (Bush was below 50 percent approval in the days running up to the election, a very dangerous position for an incumbent.) Kerry's operatives were furious when anyone said anything negative about Bush at the Democratic Convention, convinced that the American people didn't want any more negativity (a mistake that will not be repeated this year in Denver).


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: barack obama, election 2008, john kerry

Drew Westen, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and author of "The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation," recently released in paperback with a new postscript on the 2008 election.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Democracy and Elections! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Fire with Fire
Posted by: Tom Degan on Aug 26, 2008 12:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My advice to the Obama campaign would be as follows:

Don't make the same mistake that John Kerry made four years ago. When attacked from all sides with lies and half truthed propaganda, Kerry insisted on remaining "above it all". Bad move. The Dems have got to get into the gutter with these hideous bastards. It is their only hope.

As far as politics are concerned, we are now living in the age of Karl Rove. We have no other choice but to give back as good (or as bad) as we get. Make no mistake about it, we have no other choice. NONE

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
The Senile Old Bobblehead

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» A Grand Masquerade Posted by: Last Chance
» Who died and made you Queen? Posted by: itzamirakul
» RE: A Grand Masquerade Posted by: TagsNOLA
How about telling the truth?
Posted by: topbrick on Aug 26, 2008 3:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It might work....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How about telling the truth? Posted by: Last Chance
» Ain't it the truth Posted by: socialpsych
» LOL.. yeah, me too. Posted by: Prophit
for what it's worth, here's what I would advise...call the spoilt rich boy for what he is
Posted by: Suzon on Aug 26, 2008 3:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"If you've been happy with George W Bush, you'll love John McCain. Born into the English-based aristocracy, growing up determined to claim all the privileges that the upper class thinks it deserves, McCain is prone to explode when he might not get his way. We need a steady hand in the White House, not a loose cannon. Vote Democrat, not privileged aristocrat!"

It is a class war--and not only did the aristocrats start it, they keep making it worse!

"National security"? Measure your own security against the security of the aristocrats?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're free to believe it, but - Posted by: Last Chance
» McCain is a willing tool, Posted by: Last Chance
There is no such thing as "Foreign OIL"
Posted by: A.R. on Aug 26, 2008 4:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. There is no such thing as “foreign oil”! Get that phrase out of your mouth, out of your mind!! All oil goes to the same companies. If we started drilling today in the good old USA, China would outbid us for every barrel of oil that came up and Shell (Dutch), Esso (English) and Arco (American) and all the rest of the oil companies we are subsidizing with out tax money would sell it to them.

2. Go ahead and use the term “McBush”. It very accurately describes McCain. Go ahead and publicize the man who was a prisoner of war with McCain who says McCain should never be allowed near the “red button”.

3. Go after the media!! Point out that although they may mention Barrack more, they are mostly saying negative things.

4. Barrack needs to say he is not a Muslim, and has never been a Muslim, but he supports the rights of Americans to worship as they please, a right which is a basic right of ALL Americans and is preserved in the first ten Amendments to the constitution.

5. Obama needs to put out copies of the “Bill of Rights” with his picture on the back and say “McBush wants to take these away from you!”

6. Democrats need to demand all Diebold voting machines be scrapped and switch to paper ballots or none of the rest of the campaign will make any difference. Those machine can be set with negative numbers of from 10 to 1,000 so that many votes have to be entered for a candidate before their votes start to reach a positive number. In close elections, in most precincts, negative numbers of only 100 or 200 can make the difference between a win and a loss.

7. UN observers in other countries consider a 2% or 3% difference between exit polling numbers and voting numbers to be a valid indication of a rigged election. In both the Kerry and Gore campaigns, there were differences of 10% and 12%. No matter how good Barrack Obama is, he can’t beat Diebold.

8. NO ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINE CAN BE MADE 100% SAFE! THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN OUTLAWED LAST YEAR AND THEY MUST BE OUTLAWED NOW!! PAPER BALLOTS PLEASE!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Democrats Posted by: Last Chance
Obama can't feed 'The Angry Black man' fear
Posted by: Purple Girl on Aug 26, 2008 4:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Too many Americans still have an irrational fear of people of different color.
Regardless of the fact far more terrorist attacks have come from Our own homegrown white males, then any other demographic-OK bombings, Atlanta, Unibomber,Unitarian church attacks...
Not to mention most serial and Mass murders are ususally white guys.
Regardless of the Intent of the New Yorker, portraying Michelle as a 'Black Panther' and Barack as a 'Muslim extremist' only reinforced these gutteral fear reaction..How many of these folks do you think actually pick up the magazine an dread the article. How many even bothered to listen to the opinions of pundits- they saw the characiture and it validated their misconceptions- 'A Picture's worth a thousand words'.
So Obama has little choice, He must 'Walk softly', be the 'Carrot' the lure
But he has got himself a 'Big Stick'- Biden!
Biden can not only go directly after the scum who have screwed this country up- he's spent years fighting them,But he can go after these 'White Folks' who's Racist idea's have helped to keep these Criminals in Office.
He can point out how they have been swindled, conned and used.He can explain and complain about the "Good Ol' Boys' who stole these folks values and concerns and twisted them to decieve them and thus perpetuate the Corp agenda- which has screwed them too.
This segment of society will only listen to another Pissed off White guy to explain how they are being screwed.
Hopefully, the Obama campaign will let this Pitbull off his chain and let him 'get 'em'- right by the balls!
Good Bad or indifferent when it comes to REAL 'Straight Talk' Biden wrote the book!
Go Joe Go!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Are the Dems really the lesser evil?
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 26, 2008 4:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats are not the "lesser evil;" they are an auxiliary subdivision of the same evil. To understand the political system, one must step back and regard its operation as an integrated whole. The system can't be properly understood if one's study of it begins with an uncritical acceptance of the 2-party system, and the conventional characterizations of the two parties. (Indeed, the fact that society encourages one to view it in this latter way, is perhaps a warning that this perspective should not be trusted.)

Any given piece of reactionary legislation is invariably supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats. Does this show that the Democrats are "less evil?" If one focuses on the noble efforts of the few outspoken dissenters, it's easy to feel that the Democrats are somewhat less evil. But in the larger picture, Democrats invariably submit to what Republicans more ardently promulgate, & the entire range of official opinion thereby shifts to the right. Thus the overall function of Democrats is not so much to fight, as to quasi-passively participate in this ever-rightward-moving process. Just as the Harlem Globetrotters need their Washington Generals to make their basketball games properly entertaining, Republicans need the Democrats for effective staging of the political show.

The Democrats are permitted to exist because their vague hint of eventual progressive change keeps large numbers of people from bolting the political system altogether. Emma Goldman once said, "If voting made a difference, it would be illegal." Similarly, if the Democrats potentially threatened any sort of serious change, they would be banned. The fact that they are fully accepted by the corporations and political establishment tells us at once that their ultimate function must be wholly in line with the interests of those ruling groups.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's amazing. Posted by: Cybershaman
How People Vote
Posted by: The_Curmudgeon on Aug 26, 2008 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To me, the single most important thing for Obama and his campaign to remember is people vote with their gut and their heart, not their head.

In other words, no matter how strong the intellectual arguments are in favor of voting for Obama-Biden, focus on the emotional reasons. That's how every decision made by every person every day gets made.

Too often, politicians on the left fall into the trap of approaching voters as rationale, sentient, human beings and lay out detailed arguments - especially in speeches and "town halls" - supporting their view. Too often, they fail to reach people as a result.

Alas, the GOP and right wing have become masters at touching the heart and gut with their lies and distortions that no amount of five point plans can counteract when a voter steps into the polling booth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How People Vote Posted by: FrameOfReference
Disagree
Posted by: robchapman on Aug 26, 2008 5:09 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Westen bases his argument on the premise that John Kerry lost an unloseable election based on his ineptness as a candidate.

Is Mr. Westen old enough to remember the President's enormous popularity in 03?

Does Mr. Westen remember the massive and demoralizing GOP victory in the 02 Congressional elections?

Bush, yes Bush, not Rove, not Cheney, put together a team of electoral geniuses who used his first term to register voters, recruit candidates, bring in money and define issues to favor the GOP.

Kerry basically destroyed the edge that four years of intense, federally funded campaigning created for the President and the GOP.

That we are not today talking about the permanent GOP majority is a testament to Kerry-Edwards and energy as campaigners.

Parties do not win elections by rhetoric as Mr. Westen would have us believe.

Parties win elections by mobilizing their voters, recruiting good candidates, raising money, defining issues and most importantly by inspiring the trust and committment of the voters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Disagree Posted by: Cybershaman
» Oh-Oh! Posted by: BCcovers
» RE: Oh-Oh! Posted by: Cybershaman
In my opinion
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Aug 26, 2008 5:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sen Obama needs to be assertive. Yes, as an African-American male he does walk a fine line, because if he shows too much anger white people will interpret it as "angry black man" syndrome. That said he can not afford to look as though he can't defend himself because that will be interpreted as "he can't defend us" so he's weak! No, he is going to have to speak the truth, forcefully, and show why this country with all of the issues facing us cannot take 4 more years of McSame!

Why we need to restore our moral standing in the world! Why we need to confront climate change and tackle healthcare for all and infra-structure to allow more Americans the opportunity to find work!

This is the time for democrats to reclaim the moral high ground and stop procreating the process of fear!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rope a dope
Posted by: solrev on Aug 26, 2008 6:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama said he was different from day one. Yet all I hear is the wise guys saying, here is how you have to play the political game. Obama spent enough time on the south side, where only the police wear flak jackets, to learn a few games. Obama knows that if you want to make something happen, and you hear it all the time, you have to win the hearts and minds of the people. He played a nice rope a dope on McCain and let Michelle blow the elitist game out of the water without sounding like a politician. Those negative ads that McCain was making hay with; all of sudden seem like ads for Obama as viewed by a bunch of stupid Americans. Those crowds are there because he is a champion of the people “one of us”. Do not tell them who you are let them see who you are, you will be known by your works. If Clinton can destroy that divide and conquer game, which she will because Bill was a master of the rope a dope, the McCain campaign will have to start over at this late date. People will start to look at real issues and not personalities but you have to win the personality game first. While the pundits will scream where are the details. We the people, the stupid ones, know the devil is in the details, just put us on the right path. Show us the way to go home. I heard one of the fox fools say last night “he proved he is a good man and has done a lot of good things, but is he ready to be president”. This coming from the party with values. Have a little faith; a south side black man playing dozens and Bill Clinton reeling them as usual, that will be something you only get to see once in your life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Repubican Party is a CRIMINAL Organization
Posted by: Bob Horn on Aug 26, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are up against a criminal organization that will lie, cheat, steal and kill to make sure the White House is occupied by a former C student that doesn't read sociology, anthropology, philosophy, history or poetry. The Republicans will not allow someone to win but we may win anyway. If we win we will have to win the way Sherman won in Atlanta. We are in what increasingly looks like a civil war. Obama's campaign will have to be tougher and meaner than any Democrat has ever been if it is to win. Expose all that is wrong about McCain and make him unacceptable to 90 % of the public to win by even 1%. It can be done but mean and tough words are needed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fight back or else . . .
Posted by: agbfpmt on Aug 26, 2008 6:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AMEN!!! Most simply and sadly put: nice guys DO finish LAST in politics!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, except rollcall isn't a "stunt"
Posted by: hansennancykay on Aug 26, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I resonate to everything Dr. Weston says, everything but calling Hillary's rollcall a "stunt". In fact it could help Obama, and secondarily, it marks an historic event that so many men seem unable to resonate to: the furthest advance a woman has ever put toward the Presidency. Why does this give so few men any sense of happiness and pride for our country, and for its women?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NIce
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Aug 26, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well said. very good article indeed!

RD
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It Is Not Going To Happen
Posted by: thebeerdoctor on Aug 26, 2008 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The corporate controlled democratic party is incapable of addressing the real issues. Dividing between the war and the economy, for example, is ridiculous, because it is this insane war that is wrecking the economy. Barack Obama will not step up to the plate and say something about the need to put Bush and Cheney in jail. Like the first woman Speaker of the House, such divisive politics is "off the table".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It Is Not Going To Happen Posted by: Last Chance
The DNC/DLC are not as committed as they like to pretend
Posted by: boing007 on Aug 26, 2008 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'When I started writing this piece two weeks ago, like many Democrats, I felt like I was watching a bad sequel to the election of 2004. Just as the Kerry campaign let the flip-flopper charge fester, the Obama campaign let the Internet smears designed to paint him as foreign, Muslim, dangerous, and "other" persist for over a year before even mentioning them publicly. Once McCain had secured the presumptive nomination, not only did the Obama campaign fail to begin branding him, but it implored progressive donors not to fund any independent expenditure organizations (527s) that could have done it for them, essentially unilaterally disarming the left just as Rove protgs were beginning to nest in the McCain campaign. As the newly infested McCain campaign began attacking Obama relentlessly, he and his entire campaign team waited to respond until they saw severe damage in the polls.'

Sometimes I think that many of the people who run the Democratic Party really don't care if they win or lose the Presidential election. Most of them will still have their day jobs after the election is over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama needs to connect with voters - what does that mean?
Posted by: PaulC on Aug 26, 2008 7:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, what are voters feeling? Anger, frustration, disillusionment, fear for their future.

How do you "connect" with those emotions? By having a "happy" party? By sounding like a policy wonk?

No, of course not. Obama needs to show passion - passionate but even-tempered outrage, the eloquence of the righteous, not the eloquence of the smug.

You cannot show passion without confronting the reality that something has gone dreadfully wrong. And of course it has, which means it is not a hard sell.

Nothing is more emotional than economic insecurity, except loss of life itself. A politician who advocates change without showing himself to be on the same page emotionally as the actual citizens living that pain is going to be seen as another fake fatcat playing the masses for personal gain.

This is all about credibility and Obama has been failing the test over the past couple of months.

The first thing Obama should do is fire the political advisers who have been feeding him bullshit and get someone with a clue. Someone real.

peace,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

arby speaks
Posted by: rickb on Aug 26, 2008 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All Republicans believe in "trickledown economics". That's the one in which the rich make wise decisions and investments via divine right & intervention and their oh so righteous investments make them richer while a little of the money does "trickle down" on the vast majority of us. In fact, the Republicans have been working hard for some time to turn our country into Mexico where Mexican's have been living under "trickle down economics" for centuries.
In the US, the poor people are called poor....In Mexico, the poor people are called peons.... hmmmmm??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: arby speaks Posted by: Romans1
» RE: Actually... Posted by: Cybershaman
Zero chance that this system can be fixed
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 26, 2008 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is zero chance that our system can be fixed through the officially-approved mechanisms. Whether overtly recognized or not, there’s a war going on — the US ruling class against all the rest of us. It’s essentially a class war. The rulers want you to remain a Democrat, because the D’s are a ruling-class institution, whose job is guiding the Dem half of the populace in paths that are safe for the rulers. To remain a Dem voter, and to swallow whatever slop the party dishes up, is to passively assent to this arrangement.

Therefore, your primary focus should be on resisting & criticizing the system, not on adapting yourself to it. You should be talking with your friends & family about the very real things that are wrong. You should be trying to make whatever contribution you can to elevating political consciousness. Accepting the slop of the Dem Party is the opposite of all that: it deadens political consciousness, & only makes your enemies stronger.

Voting for candidates only works when there are decent candidates — but that’s not our situation. We betray ourselves if we fail to recognize that.

Well, looking at it historically, the “solution” has to be a break from the officially-approved mechanisms. It must have the form of a broad movement based on the interests of the bottom 80-90% of the population, rather than on the interests of the top 1%. It has to be what they call “radical” politics — something that big business and the media are definitely not going to like, any more than they like Kucinich or antiwar protestors.

The 2 parties are really just a mechanism of social control. They’re not a way for “the people” to express their will; they’re a way for rulers to control the people — partly by making them believe that they (the peeps) have some say (which they don’t). Building a movement to oppose this takes time. But its sine qua non is political consciousness — the type that socialists understand & try to cultivate; and that the big-business parties & media try to suppress & eradicate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Screw Kerry,Using a rich loser formula is definately a No-Win Deal
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 26, 2008 8:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we've been using this,Kerry,formula since before Kerry,it's a wonder we ever got anyone in office. Since both party's are basically the same,I guess we get what we pay no attention to.
Mr Obama has a great plan for the country. The problem is 'Walking their Talk'. If they actually do waht they say they will,America will become a better nation. If we stick to the 2011 end to the Iraq War and then resend troops to Afghanistan,we've lost. We created the mess in mesopotamia so we really need to have respectful dialogue with these folks. We made promises twenty years ago we've never backed. This cost us great amounts of credibility in the region,supporting petty dictators did'nt help much either. To even come close to getting positive dialogue with these nations we'd better own up to the great mistakes in judgement we've made it the past and work with them,honestly, to correct them.
Giving people the flush toilets,in house electricity and paved roads we promised.
To get Mr. Obama into the oval office,he should dump the 'Kerry model' pronto. As far as I can remember no one has even gotten ahead by using losing gameplans over and over. We have the chance to be more than the first white nation that elected a person of color. We
can be the first nation that actually made right the wrongs of past administrations. Be
yourself Barak. You did a lot for the poor in Chicago,keep that going. It won't score you many points with the wealthy set so screw them,they helped create the mess we're in with their unchecked greed. Stay focused on the Poor and Working Classes. A strong foundation is far greater than the current Top Heavy,trickled on,social mess we have that hold no respect for the backs of the workers that made them the money they'd rather keep than share. Maybe when you take the Oath of Office,you could declare a 'State of Emergency
in Public Health' and get everyone healthcare
five minutes into you Presidency. That would make you the best President we've ever had.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Give Obama a Copy of This Article!
Posted by: iolanthe on Aug 26, 2008 8:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, yes, yes. Running against one of the worst administrations, one of the worst crime gangs, in all political history, Our Guys keep giving it away. :-(

I already see Obama becoming as carefully focus-grouped as Kerry, Gore, and Clinton (major reason I didn't support her.)

I cringe each time I hear him becoming more smoothly "centrist" (i.e. careful and noncommital).

Stupid America *loves* the Republicans' crackhead anti-reality Certainty. Why don't we Dems/Progressives emulate *that*? We are in a far better position to be certain of ourselves. *WE* haven't been wrong about absolutely everything for the past eight years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too Late
Posted by: Romans1 on Aug 26, 2008 9:36 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama already went vactioning in Hawaii. He also already went, hat in hand, to Europe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No! Hat in HAND? Posted by: Beck
We Only Need One
Posted by: oregoncharles on Aug 26, 2008 9:50 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kerry provided us with the clinching argument against supporting right-wing Democrats:

THEY LOSE.

A vote for Kerry was a wasted vote, even if your sole purpose was to get rid of Bush, because

HE LOST.

Gore didn't technically lose; he just let it be so close it could be stolen. With no excuse whatsoever.

Hey, you might as well vote for someone you actually support.

www.runcynthiarun.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Oh bullshit Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» You certainly implied it, though. Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: He may be rational, but... Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Lame Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Oh yes, the Democrats Posted by: oregoncharles
you're fucking funny
Posted by: droscify on Aug 26, 2008 10:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First you say gore and Kerry were'nt good enough candidates to win... maybe true... then you lose all credibility telling us to suppport a "better candidate" cynthia mckinney. Not to be an asshole, but you need to wake the fuck up. Your little self satisfied addition to that 1% of the vote isn't going to do anything in the real world. yeah, maybe nadar, mckinny, and barr should be allowed in the debates, But in lieu of that you might want to think about actaully dedicating your vote ot something achievable.. its called pragmatism and even though its not perfect it actually works. grow up

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lame Posted by: oregoncharles
mycuz
Posted by: mycuz on Aug 26, 2008 10:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is time for the dems to step up and stop being the party of wimps. "Impeachment is off the table" WHY???? Until the democratic party steps up and attacks McCain on his war mongering they might as well concede the election now. This election will be won on one issue and that is Iran. As long as McCain keeps selling the threat of a nuclear power that Iran is trying to become, and the dems let him get away with it just like the WMD threat which didn't not exist. The nuclear threat from Iran does not exist. However like all good democrats Obama is trying to run on the "bread & butter issues" that have lost every coampaign since Ike v. Adlai. The republicans sell fear, and that is what wins elections, Eisenhower sold the red menace and Bush sold terror, terrorists and terrorism. The republicans and middle america vote emotionally and the democrats vote intelectually. Guess what wins out in the voting booth????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BA
Posted by: mnstra on Aug 26, 2008 11:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article and thoughtful. My one guess as to why the Dems. are running the same type of campaign that lost for Gore and Kerry, is that the Republicans are pulling their strings.The democratic party has become a complaint based reactionary entity. It seems to be unable to present a clear vision for our future. On the other hand, the Republicans have a clear agenda Pure dictatorship.Obama must stop reacting and be more responsible and proactive to get even close. Mc Bush is clear about its message--oppression
I will vote for Nader anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama Needs To Express Our Anger
Posted by: johnyradio on Aug 26, 2008 1:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
millions of americans are furious about the destruction and crimes perpetrated by the bush administration.

obama needs to show that he is a voice for our anger.

http://picnictoimpeach.us

[« Reply to this