Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats: Get out the vote, not the gloat (No, the media isn't biased...)
Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 7/18/04 | Matthew Miller

Posted on 07/18/2004 2:31:20 PM PDT by Fintan

 





 

Look at the lines at the Michael Moore movie! Look at Bush's approval rating slip below 50 percent! Listen to the respected Democratic congressman who, when I asked how he thought the election was shaping up, said: "It's over."

It's scary but true: Democrats have entered the Gloating Zone. And this is before the convention gives the ticket a bump that will really go to its head.

Yes, President Bush is beatable, but this is hardly the same thing as having been beaten.

For most of the country, and especially for that sliver of Americans who apparently still have an open mind (and who therefore decide who wins), the campaign hasn't even begun.

Candidates always tell their supporters that complacency means death, but in this case it's truer than usual.

Take the economy. John Kerry and John Edwards will still be able to say as November approaches that Bush has the only record of job loss on his watch since Herbert Hoover. But, the fact is, the economic outlook is much better than it was a year ago. With Bush able to claim more than a million new jobs in the last year, things can plausibly be cast as moving "in the right direction."

To insist otherwise lets Bush tar Democrats as dour "pessimists," a slur that must poll well or the President wouldn't have adopted it as his stock "the economy stinks" rebuttal.

What's more, the record budget and trade deficits - the true crippling legacies of Bush's first term - appear to have no political bite at all. In 1992, Ross Perot made the red ink a national crusade and swung the election to Bill Clinton.

So far, Kerry seems to have judged that opening the deficit can of worms requires more candor than he'd like to offer voters just now. As a result, the absence of a Perot-style figure this year means Bush may pay little price for his mammoth irresponsibility.

Next comes Iraq. Democrats seem to welcome bloody news as proof that Bush's days are numbered. But wherever you stood on the war, this much seems irrefutable: By November, Iraq will have had four months of very brave Iraqi faces running an Iraqi government. Iraqi leaders will be asking U.S. troops to stay. Iraqis will be planning an election a few months hence with U.N. help.

John Kerry will rightly say Bush has followed much of his advice in moving things to this point. But saying you got the President to move faster in the right direction may not seem very compelling when you're standing next to the President who has been doing the actual moving.

Bush will turn to Kerry in the debates and say, "I'm confused - do you now wish you had voted against ousting Saddam Hussein?"

Kerry's answer - whatever it is - may play further into the flip-flopper trap that Karl Rove has laid for him at a time when Bush will be arguing for steadiness.

There's more. Political pros say I'm wrong about its likely impact, but it seems plain that come fall we'll see big GOP ad buys that say, "Even as he led a global war on terror, George Bush broke the gridlock to add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare, and passed a historic education reform with bipartisan support."

I know Democrats have good critiques on all this, but if you're a swing voter in front of your TV, it may still sound pretty good.

I'm not saying Democrats don't have great material with which to frame the debate on their terms. But people who've predicted cakewalks recently have a habit of facing a comeuppance.

That's why Bill Clinton is right: Kerry should campaign as if Iraq were stable, the economy were humming, and Osama had been caught.

At this point, most people have no notion of Kerry's affirmative agenda. Some of this is unfair (and the media's fault). Kerry's health plan, for example, is the most interesting and ambitious domestic-policy proposal in years, and he's put real money behind it.

But the rest remains a blur.

The only sure thing is that this election will be close, and probably ugly. As they head toward their convention, Democrats need to cut out the gloat, and fight for every vote.


Matthew Miller is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. Reach him at www.mattmilleronline.com.





TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: kerry
Kerry's health plan, for example, is the most interesting and ambitious domestic-policy proposal in years, and he's put real money behind it.
 

Huh?????


1 posted on 07/18/2004 2:31:22 PM PDT by Fintan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Fintan
cut out the gloat, and fight for every vote

Pubbies would be well-advised to do the same.

2 posted on 07/18/2004 2:35:04 PM PDT by GVnana (Tagline? I don't need no stinkin' tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

Kerry's health plan, for example, is the most interesting and ambitious domestic-policy proposal in years, and he's put real money behind it.

real money? whose? when?


3 posted on 07/18/2004 2:36:12 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

I would just point out that this is an opinion piece, and therefore charges of "media bias" are irrelevant.


4 posted on 07/18/2004 2:37:40 PM PDT by ScottFromSpokane (Re-elect President Bush: http://spokanegop.org/bush.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

"That's why Bill Clinton is right: Kerry should campaign as if Iraq were stable, the economy were humming, and Osama had been caught."

Sure he should, Bill Clinton IS right (Bill Clinton is a political genius, too bad he just uses his talents to score booty, excuse my language I cleaned it up as much as I could). The problem is the only plank in the platform left then is "give us more of your money so we can skim off our vig and give the rest to the underserving poor and their handlers"


5 posted on 07/18/2004 2:40:03 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan
At this point, most people have no notion of Kerry's affirmative agenda. Some of this is unfair (and the media's fault). Kerry's health plan, for example, is the most interesting and ambitious domestic-policy proposal in years, and he's put real money behind it.

Yes, I saw this pap in his interview with Russert; paid for by repealing the tax cuts. When Tim pointed out while doing the math, that this money will fall well short of paying for his plan, Kerry replied with something to the effect of, I have ways of raising the money, vote for me and find out what it is. When Tim pointed out, again doing the math, that it will take well over four years to raise the money, Kerry conceded it will probably take 10 years to fully implement the plan. Kerry is a boob. But 45% of the country will vote for him, based on nonsensical and unfulfillable promises like this one..

6 posted on 07/18/2004 2:40:37 PM PDT by cardinal4 (Its noteworthy that the two biggest shills for the left are Michael Moore and Al Franken..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

What policy?


7 posted on 07/18/2004 2:43:08 PM PDT by jmstein7 (A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottFromSpokane

It's true, it is an opinion piece, but the author still cranks out the dem's talking points - sure, things are looking good on the economy, Iraq is becoming soverign, blah, blah, blah, BUT... and there's nothing of substance which follows. I think the charges of media bias still apply.


8 posted on 07/18/2004 2:43:18 PM PDT by Theresawithanh (BUSH/CHENEY 2004!!!!!! FLUSH THE JOHNS!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fintan
The insider power players in DC are convinced JFnK will roll to victory. However, he remains a very unlikable figure and both Iraq and the economy are moving in the President's direction.

I still think the election goes down to the wire with W pulling out another very narrow victory.

9 posted on 07/18/2004 3:01:37 PM PDT by comebacknewt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan
Listen to the respected Democratic congressman...

There's a respected demonrat???

10 posted on 07/18/2004 3:04:50 PM PDT by E=MC<sup>2</sup> (kerry promises universal health care, and if he were elected, those left alive would ALL need it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E=MC<sup>2</sup>
There's a respected demonrat???

Zell Miller.

11 posted on 07/18/2004 3:08:17 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear ( "Lady Snuggles of the Lethal Yew" Ense et aratro!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Theresawithanh



Matthew Miller is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. Reach him at www.mattmilleronline.com.


The Center for American Progress is a wholly-owned think tank of the Clinton DNC, masquerading as a counterpart to such groups as the American Enterprise Institute.


12 posted on 07/18/2004 3:10:08 PM PDT by maica (Hitlary says; "We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fintan
"...only record of job loss on his watch since Herbert Hoover."

I forget, just how many U.S. sky-scrapers were destroyed by militant terrorists during the first year of ANY OTHER PRESIDENT'S first term??

Impact on the economy estimated in the hundreds of billions! Sheesh.

13 posted on 07/18/2004 3:10:28 PM PDT by Thom Pain (Quisling - from Vidkun Quisling (1887-1945), a synonym for "traitor")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

Whose? THK's Stepmoney? His own (hah!)? And, with medicare and social security as examples, this is going to be HIS and TH-Kerry's health plan, too? When was the last time ANY of these people went to a public health care clinic? Or used an HMO to get a referral? Where will research $$ go, and how will research contracts be let--to the biggest campaign contributors? Will there be research, or will people move to island countries bought for the purpose of avoiding socialized medicine? Will illegals be covered? Will caps be placed on malpractice, or will malpractice be elimiated entirely? Will doctors be able to practice medicine, or paperwork? Do we mark the correct limb to work on with permanent marker, or do we even get to see the surgeon prior to the surgery? What about the hospital food, which, in some hospitals is good enough now to draw people in--or will we all be fed from the stock of government cheese and other staples?

You get what you pay for. We have the best because we pay for it. Through the nose, yes, but you pay--and you will pay under any proposed system, too: maybe with the wrong limb or medication, and certainly with less trust in the physician assigned to you.


14 posted on 07/18/2004 3:15:50 PM PDT by combat_boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottFromSpokane
I would just point out that this is an opinion piece, and therefore charges of "media bias" are irrelevant.

Well, here in SC our local Charleston paper runs the Ap stories unedited. They have some one who "would like to hear from you on matters of newspaper policy, fairness, and accuarcy." I sent email:

I noticed the article you carried (actually you printed it, the AP wrote it) the other day about Whoppi Goldberg being censored for her remarks at a NY fundraiser for John Kerry. Apparently she lost her job as a spokesperson for Slim-fast because Slim-fast did not want her crude, gutter remarks associated with their product. Of course censor carries the implication of government action, and the AP and it's writer know this, and if they don't then they are are in the wrong business. Your editors should have caught this, but they chose to relay misinformation. I don't know if your editors are lazy, or just not smart enough. But what struck me about that article was the fact that a day or two before that, your paper ran an article (gee, from the AP again) that talked about the controversy of things said at the fundraiser, but lo and behold it did not mention what was the most controversial aspect of it - Whoppi Goldberg's remarks. Why, the story you published did not even mention her by name, or the fact that someone had done what she did. Did you (the AP) not know she was there and acted a certain way? If so then you live in a box, because I knew about it the next day, as did many others who have turned to other sources than the partisan press. Please tell me why you continue to subscribe to the AP when their stories are either incomplete, wrong, or biased? Biased I say? I remember months ago when a woman was arrested accused of spying for the Iraqis. Your story, (even if the AP writes it, it is your story if you choose to run it) loudly proclaimed the fact that she was a cousin of Karl Rove, a member of the Bush Administration. You just happened to not mention that they had never met, he was a distant cousin. You even forgot to mention that she had previously worked for 4 congresspersons, all democrats. Selective news, but why? Please tell me why. Please, please, tell me why.

15 posted on 07/18/2004 3:23:16 PM PDT by feedback doctor (Socialism, the opium of the intellectuals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: feedback doctor

Good letter. Did you receive any kind of response (even a form-letter postcard stating that they had received your letter)?


16 posted on 07/18/2004 3:45:12 PM PDT by Prov3456
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Prov3456

Not yet, just sent it a few minutes before I posted it here.


17 posted on 07/18/2004 3:49:21 PM PDT by feedback doctor (Socialism, the opium of the intellectuals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: feedback doctor
"...he fact that she was a cousin of Karl Rove, a member of the Bush Administration..."

Geez...Andrew Card, Andrew Card!

The libs love it when we make sloppy errors like yours.

Do your research before giving libbo journos ammo to use against us.

Geez...

AV

18 posted on 07/18/2004 3:50:16 PM PDT by Atomic Vomit (Have a look: http://www.volcanicfishermen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

The media is biased.


19 posted on 07/18/2004 3:55:30 PM PDT by F.J. Mitchell (I drove up behind a horse trailer today- at first glance I thought Kerry & Edwards were in town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4; Fintan

<< .. 45% of [Voters] will vote for him, based on nonsensical and unfulfillable .... >>


Forty-five percent of voters will vote for him because they come from the bottom half of the left hand side of the Bell Curve.

FRom that below-average-intelligence 50% of the population too darned stupid to know its being lied to -- and/or too mean-spirited and/or greedy to care.

Those among us, that is, that comprise the "DemocRATS" base.


20 posted on 07/18/2004 5:34:10 PM PDT by Brian Allen (Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? -- Galatians 4:16 -- So mote it be!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson