Dick Morris knows what to do
 

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...3/182908.shtml

You know I think he is correct. We all know GWB by now, love him or hate him, but not many people know Kerry. The left has been running the 'anyone but Bush' campaign since day one, and I think its best to counter with "Kerry? You have GOT to be kidding." Kerry was picked not due to anything great about him, but the fact that he could 'beat Bush', and I think the best way to counter it is show what kind of man Kerry really is.

Its about character stupid :D

I'm not sure "prodigal son" "absent from the nat'l guard" "failed businessman" "big oil's hands in his pockets" bush is really suited for a battle of character.

Aside from the usual tripe you listed.

Bush says something he means it and does it.

Kerry won't take a stand on taking a stand.

And when he doesn't mean what he says he stonewalls anyone audacious enough to question him.

I remember when he said he'd find out who outed valerie plame.
I remember when he said he would be a uniter, not a divider.
I remember when he said he was a compassionate conservative, when actually he is neither.

Besides the usual tripe is what elections are all about and also what the repub's campaign against kerry will consist of.

P.S. i agree kerry is a chickenshit on some things, but he is no more chickenshit than your man bush.

To go briefly back on topic, negativity might backfire like it often does. If Bush goes negative, Kerry will try to elevate the debate and show that Bush is only doing it because he has no record to run on. It's not like Bush can claim he's perfect or anything. If Bush goes negative he will in effect be saying: "I may not be perfect, but look at this guy!" I didn't think incumbent presidents ran as the lesser of two evils, but when your first term gives you lemons...

Negative has worked against Bush so far and it may well be the best strategy against Kerry. Whatever he chooses to do he needs to start early and hit hard. I think Morris is right on as far as the need to define Kerry for the public. Right now he's just the last man standing in a Democratic race that portrayed too many slightly different shades of the same argument punctuated with obvious inconsistencies in candidates' stands.

I'm not a big fan of negative campaigning but, unfortunately, it seems to be what works right now.

Negativity won't hurt Bush. Half of America already thinks he's an a-hole anyhow. Those who like him think he's "tough", those who hate him think he's a jerk and a liar, and so on.

Will it help? I dunno. Negativity will just drop the number of people at the polls, and it's already gonna be a close election, so it might well.

All he needs to do is say Kerry fathered black babies. It worked for Bush in South Carolina.

Kerry in '04.

On a side note, the candidate is now required to appear in all ads his campaign pays for, including negative ones. It is thought that this will make campaigns less negative by requiring candidates to attach their persona to their negative ads.

Bush is doing it right. He is starting by using positive ads targeted at his base. He is neck and neck with Kerry in the polls and if this type of campaign works, and people get bored with Kerry's schtick he won't have to go negative too soon. If it doesn't work, he can go negative and always fall back on the "I tried a positive campaign, but my opponent went negative so I had to respond." Also, as Scipio noted, they must "approve" any ads so I think Bush will generally stay positive or on message and let "independent" groups do negative camaigning for him. Besides Bush as plenty of money to blow on advertising.

And by the way Dick Morris is a political genius and a complete slimeball. He will help whomever he sees as the winner. Right now he thinks Bush can take it, so he will fall into the Bush Camp. However, if it looks like Kerry is going to take it, he will miraculously end up supporting the Senator.

The sad part is he is so good at what he does that Kerry or Bush will welcome his advise.

Stop it! STOP IT! We're agreeing far too often now. I'm beginning to question my beliefs or think I've stumbled into the Twilight Zone. :)

Yeah, it is a little scary. Actually, I think we are both realists. We don't see the world as simply black or white. I think we acutally are trying to get to the same place, we just don't agree on how to get there. :)

And you do it again! ;) I think you're right on the money in your analysis.