Campaign Strategies

[Reginald McGraw]

Here in Maryland, both the gubernatorial and senate races are being contested with the following sledgehammer argument:

Dem: <Republican candidate> IS BUSH!! (Literally...http://www.ehrlichisbush.com/)

Rep: Bush who?

Is this happening in other locales to this degree?

[RottingCorpse]

Yeah. I think so, though VA's race has been more of "Webb hates women!" "Allen is racist!"

George Allen, you'll remember is the current senator who got in trouble for calling some Indian dude "Macaca."

James Webb is a GOP turned Dem, and a total shitheel from I've gleaned.

I'll be writing in somebody, probably Satan.

[nacho]

Sad to say that the 2006/2008 Dem strategy will be exactly that, Reggie.  "We ain't Bush!"  It's why we might as well just give up, really.  Once again, the Republicans will come in with a stronger win -- at least for 2008 -- simply because, by summer 08, everyone will stick a screwdriver into their eye when they hear whatever the rambling equivalent of "not Bush/he is Bush" will be.

06, thankfully, will be the backlash year.  The midterms are less about strategy and more reflective of the people, so you get slightly different results.  But the tone set by both the parties is what everyone will have to shudder and swallow in two years.

[fajwat]

George Allen, you'll remember is the current senator who got in trouble for calling some Indian dude "Macaca."

George Allen Insult Generator:
http://www.slate.com/id/2150347/nav/tap1/index.html?g=1&zsacategory=GeorgeAllenInsults

I'll be writing in somebody, probably Satan.

Vote Green!!

[fajwat]

So today Dupont Circle was covered with Democrat volunteers carrying clipboards and saying this line to all pedestrians: "Help the Democrats take back Congress!"

I turned to the volunteer who heckled me and said with a huge grin, "Congress belongs to the people.  Green Party all the way!"  She looked nonplussed at my thumbs up sign.

Seriously, though, I'm upset by monopolies, duopolies, cartels and even more so when they're as dysfunctional as our two major parties are.  One of these parties "take back congress" just smacks me upside the head with really bad logic.  It isn't theirs.  They can't have it.  They're renting it from us and they've always been bad tenants.  They had their chance two years ago on the same issues they're expecting to win on today.  Sure, events and public opinion have changed but our leaders should've been fully capable of forming today's winning opinions years ago.  (Of course, the Green party did.)

[Cassander]

Why can't the Dems get together some broad plan to unify them all besides the anti-bush one?  get together a few centrist planks (cutting wasteful spending, boosting health insurance rates, creating jobs), tie it up in a nice "We represent individuals, not corporations" bow, and throw all their weight behind it?  Why don't they steal a page from the winners' (republicans) playbook once in a while?  Instead they keep clinging to this anti-GOP stance.  And this is a stupid metaphor, but it's like when one person is watching another person play a video game, and the person playing just keeps failing over and over to clear a stage.  So the person watching gets fed up and just starts saying, "let me try, I bet I can do it."  They don't really have the confidence that they can do it, they're just tired of being bored and frustrated.  Even if they followed my suggestion and threw together some easy-to-swallow broad-reaching approach it doesn't mean they have to follow it.  They can switch it up as much as they want.  But if they really want power, they're going to have to do some attractive lying like the republicans do.  It's obvious that America just refuses to see the truth that the Bush administration's policies and actions have had a trickle-down effect (oo!) throughout almost all the official undertakings of our government.  They just don't want to believe that one party could fuck things up that badly. 

Seriously, though, couldn't some "Contract with America" approach work?  It's all about marketing.

[fajwat]

Why can't the Dems...Instead they keep clinging to this anti-GOP stance.

That's part of what made the interaction interesting.  We were both anti-GOP but she didn't like me for it.  The Dems have to win with a positive message/hope/vision/goal/etc.  Heck, even just the action item of holding war crime hearings against current officials would be *something* to vote for, even though it'd really be an extended form of voting against.

And this is a stupid metaphor, but it's like when one person is watching another person play a video game, and the person playing just keeps failing over and over to clear a stage.  So the person watching gets fed up and just starts saying, "let me try, I bet I can do it."  They don't really have the confidence that they can do it, they're just tired of being bored and frustrated.

Shut up!  That's not stupid; that's a great metaphor!

And the pages I'd like to see them steal from the GOP playbook are the ones about energizing your extreme radical members -- in this case, why not mobilize the atheists?  Seriously.  If hate politics are OK, let's just get all the atheists on board by claiming we'll tax all religious organizations like every other business -- starting with Pat Robertson's 700 Club.  Then we can take "Under God" back out of the pledge of Allegience, legalize gay marriage (and call it Marriage)....

It'd take a couple of years but I think a working strategy could be built around mirror images of many GOP stances.  But their stances lately have engaged their far-from-center freaks.  I'm a far-from-center freak on the other side and I'm really fucking jealous of all the attention their freaks got.

[Cassander]

i've got no stats, but I'd say a good percentage of atheists are already spiteful and tend to vote.  Besides, you can't take the risk of alienating the blacks (baptist) and hispanics (catholics), when they're such a big part of your base. 

[fajwat]

A lot of those same religious blacks are very honest people who are pissed as hell at the hipocrisy of the megabig business "churches".  And really, just taxing religions like any other business means that anything regular businesses can deduct is still deductible.  That homeless shelter in the basement?  Deduct it!  It won't hurt all churches equally.  Not by a long shot.

[Cassander]

it wouldn't be the details of it that turned them off.  Few churches have actually seen any faith-based initiative money, but plenty of Christians were just turned on by the idea. 

[fajwat]

...which has now soured in churches who have seen the overall lack of effect in hard hit areas.  Sure, First Baptist down the street got $Xk to take care of little Johnny but he was fine until Bush cut Johnny's Head Start program.

But no -- I'm saying remove the religious exemption to taxes.  A bit different.  And anyhow, beside my point.  My point was we could radicalize and include our lefties and make the Dems much more fun and exciting than just "not the guy messing up at the controls right now."  Because everyone messes up at the controls, but at least the GOP manages to try to sound like it stands for something.

[Reginald McGraw]

I'm saying remove the religious exemption to taxes.

Because separation of church and state only needs to go one way?

[fajwat]

I was saying it as an example of energizing leftie radicals.  Not necessarily a good one, but it is an example of the kind of tactic the GOP has been using.

Although....  treating them like any other corporation hardly seems like it's interfering with the church.  It probably is  but I haven't bothered to think it through since it was just an example and not necessary to my main point.

[Reginald McGraw]

Ah well, I jumped the gun there then.  Sorry about that.

[fajwat]

I mean, seriously.  If campaigns have to go negative to win (and maybe that's true, I dunno) the left should do it like the GOP does -- manufacture unnecessary negative issues and campaign on them.  Don't bother to attack the candidates, attack their values, their lifestyles, their beliefs.  Flag burning -- there just *has* to be a dozen liberal equivalents to flag burning amendments.  Keep your hands clean of the filth of fisticuffs with candidates, just attack the concept of a Republican.  Make Conservative a dirty word. 

That's my main point.  And yeah, it's at least 2 years past its prime but I think it's still doable.

On the other hand, I'd rather they campaign on positive issues.  But when they need to go negative, use this strategy instead of "Gimme Congress!  Gimme money to take back the White House!  It's my turn!  It's my turn already, damnit!"