SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: LindyBill who wrote (70891)9/16/2004 11:56:33 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793778
 
A SKEPTICAL VOICE ON KERRY'S NEW TEAM, FROM ARKANSAS [09/16 11:21 AM]
KERRYSPOT

Kane Webb, assistant editorial page editor of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, writes in the Wall Street Journal today (no link):

I'll never forget wandering through downtown Little Rock on Election Day in '92 and spying Carville and Stephanopoulos in... a locally owned, hole-in-the-wall of a pizzeria. They could have been Brad-and-Jennifer at Spago. Folks mobbed them, and at least one camera crew recorded every cheesy bite.
But that was then. This is Kerry-Edwards '04. That was "It's The Economy, Stupid." This is . . . well, what is this?

The absence of any kind of consistent message is one reason why John Kerry has called for reinforcements. But can Carville and Begala and Greenberg and all the other Clinton all-stars save Kerry from himself? Here's how two veteran political consultants answer that question: "It has always been our belief that consultants don't win elections; candidates do."

Want to guess who's talking? It was Begala and Carville, writing in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in December 1992. The headline: "Who wins the election? It's the Candidate, Stupid." Yes the old Clinton hands are getting the band back together, but the problem is, the lead singer is still John Kerry.

On the surface, the return engagement of Carville-Begala "For One Show Only!" smacks of political desperation. A Hail-Mary heave of a staff shake-up. What with this being football season and Arkansas being football country long before it was Clinton Country, let's continue the gridiron analogy: It's like a head football coach changing offensive coordinators a week before the opener. Never a good sign...

The times have a-changed, too. Back in '92, Begala and Carville benefited from a near-perfect political storm: (a) an example of what not to do in the still-rank Dukakis campaign; (b) an incumbent opponent they could style as out of touch and with all the charisma of, well, Kerry; (c) a robo-candidate in Clinton; and (d) a message. Actually, two messages: The first Clinton team had a message specific to the campaign itself (It's the economy, stupid) as well as a broader message aimed at swing voters who wondered if the Democratic Party had drifted too far left (the New Democratic message)...

In short, Arkansas, of all places, was a political plus: appealing to Blue America in a kitschy strange way and seeming down-home familiar to Red.
Kerry is from Boston. Of that, at least, we're sure. But his hometown barely provides him a sense of place, much less ballast. He's still windsurfing for a message, a theme, a bio that doesn't end in the Mekong. So enter the Clintonoids stage not-to-far left to save the day.

"I think Carville and company can help them sharpen the focus, simplify the message, put things in terms ordinary people can relate to," says Gene Lyons of Little Rock, a longtime Clinton-watcher and syndicated columnist. "They need wit. Very badly. Those guys have it." But even the world's greatest gag writer needs a frontman who can deliver the lines. Because a celebrity political consultant can't be a celebrity unless his client can be, too.

Very interesting analysis. Webb also dismisses the theory that the Clinton team has signed on with Kerry to sink him to set up Hillary's run in 2008. He thinks it is a simpler reason: ego.

IS KERRY LOSING WOMEN? CHICAGO TRIBUNE THINKS SO [09/16 11:12 AM]

The Chicago Tribune reports that Kerry is losing women's support, in a story headlined, appropriately enough, "Kerry losing women's support."

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Teresa Conway is hardly a by-the-book Republican.
Four years ago, she supported then-Vice President Al Gore. But since casting that Democratic ballot, she married, had two children and has gradually become a devoted supporter of President Bush. She doesn't mind parting ways with the Republican Party on abortion and gay rights, explaining: "We really can't get into those things until we are safe."

Of all the challenges that Democrat John Kerry faces in his presidential campaign, perhaps none is as critical as building a decisive advantage among women voters.

In the past month, the president has started whittling away at a gender gap that has long provided an essential lifeline to Democrats running for the White House. Less than seven weeks before Election Day, strategists from both parties say there are a growing number of suburban, independent-minded voters who believe Bush would do a better job securing America.

It's politically impossible for a Democrat to win the presidency without a strong majority of women. As the race tightens, Kerry is struggling to develop the double-digit margins that propelled the candidacies of Bill Clinton and even Gore.

"There are Sept. 10 people and Sept. 11 people and I'm a Sept. 11 person. It scared the life out of me," said Conway, 31. "I'm not one of those hard-core, all Republicans, all the time, but I don't believe there is another man alive that could run this country better with respect to our safety."

That is precisely the sentiment the Bush campaign is seeking to spread among married suburban women, who form the largest bloc of undecided voters. On a recent morning here, Conway drove from nearby London, Ohio, to hear Laura Bush deliver that message at the Clintonville Women's Club.

In light of this, it's really surprising Kerry hasn't taken more of a "I will keep you safer" tone and talked about his instincts to protect his family. I'll bet Zell Miller's speech resonated a lot with these types of 9/11 moms.



To: LindyBill who wrote (70891)9/16/2004 11:57:32 AM
From: Glenn Petersen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793778
 
Matt Drudge is reporting that Rather's ratings are imploding nationally. Courage, Dan.

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU SEPT 16, 2004 11:42:09 ET XXXXX

CBS EXECS CONCERN OVER VIEWERSHIP PLUNGE; RATHER RATINGS FADE IN MAJOR MARKETS

CBS executives on both coasts have become concerned in recent days that Dan Rather's EVENING NEWS broadcast has plunged in the ratings since the anchor presented questionable documents about Bush's National Guard service.

NIELSEN numbers released this week show Rather fading and trailing his rivals in every Top 10 city, other than San Francisco, with audience margins in some cities running more than 6 to 1 against CBS!

Executives fear many voters inclined to vote for Bush are now switching off Rather.

"The audience appears to becoming polarized," a top CBS source said from LOS ANGELES on Thursday. "Rightly or wrongly, we're being perceived as 'anti-Bush,' which I do not think is fair to Dan, who is a fine journalist... of course we do not like to see the ratings coming back the way they are this week."

In Philadelphia, the nation's #4 market, Rather pulled a 2.6 rating/5 share on Tuesday night against ABC's 13.3 rating/23 share and NBC's 4.0/7.

In Chicago, Rather hit a 2.3/5 to ABC's 9.2/20.

CBS trailed ABC by more than 2 to 1 in Los Angeles.

And in the nation's top market, New York, Rather finished not only behind NBC NIGHTLY NEWS and ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT -- but also pulled less audience than reruns of the SIMPSONS, WILL & GRACE and KING OF QUEENS.

Rather finished dead last in New York during the 6:30 pm timeslot among all broadcast channels tracked by NIELSEN on Tuesday.

Developing...

-----------------------------------------------------------
Filed By Matt Drudge
Reports are moved when circumstances warrant
drudgereport.com for updates
(c)DRUDGE REPORT 2004
Not for reproduction without permission of the author