Kerry courts republicans, independents, shifts campaign pitch

[ringmastery]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48488-2004May22.html

Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) has begun targeting swing voters and disaffected Republicans in an effort to expand the election battleground, a strategy that includes emphasizing centrist themes on the campaign trail while privately reassuring liberal constituencies he is committed to their core issues.

After watching and sometimes wincing at a clip of himself on the evening news in California earlier this month, Kerry has tried to adjust his campaign pitch by toning down the rhetoric and dropping some of his more bombastic sound bites from the primary campaign. His stump speech now includes a measured appeal to independents and "non-Bush Republicans" and the claim that he is more conservative than the president when it comes to budget deficits and respecting the Constitution.

Kerry aides have been talking about investing money for advertising in additional Republican-leaning Southern states, including North Carolina and possibly Virginia, that most analysts consider strong Bush country. Kerry is also intrigued with the idea of putting an unmistakable bipartisan stamp on his candidacy by appearing to woo a Republican such as Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) as vice president, or at least signaling his intention to tap Republicans for key Cabinet posts, according to some aides.

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) said four Democrats not part of the Kerry campaign have asked whether he had any interest in joining Kerry's ticket. Hagel said no, but, in an interview Friday, applauded Kerry's interest in creating a bipartisan government. McCain, too, has repeatedly ruled out becoming Kerry's running mate, though the two share a dislike for the Bush administration. Kerry will name his vice president in July, according to a Democrat familiar with the selection process.

Kerry's effort to adjust his message also represents a strategic necessity for another reason. A top Democratic strategist, who requested anonymity to discuss private data, said internal polling shows that Kerry is still viewed as a Massachusetts liberal by a large number of independents and some Republicans who express a willingness to vote for a Democrat.

[Arianrhod]

1. Courting the center is not a bad thing in itself.

Clinton did that, and won. But I hope Kerry regains some of the fire he earlier borrowed from Dean. It's quite possible to court moderates with talk of genuine conservative values (I share some myself), and still pound * with the complete and utter failures that have occurred under his incompetent "command leadership". The Dems need to drive home to the people the fact that the country is under the control of a man who is not under control. I don't see how doing that would turn away a moderate voter; certainly a moderate, by definition, would desire moderation? By pointing out *'s extremism, we might bring the center one more step to the left.

[girl gone mad]

2. I think Kerry has a lot to gain..

by pointing out Bush's anti-conservative record. Clinton ushered in an era of more fiscally conservative Democrats. I know many people who vote (R) primarily because they believe in "smaller government" and balanced budgets. Bush has not represented these people. Kerry could potentially win the more reasonable ones over, or at the very least keep some of them from going to the polls for Bush.

Bush thinks he was elected by God, and I believe he thinks God is going to supply America with money like manna from Heaven.

[Arianrhod]

5. I agree.

Kerry is not my choice by a long shot, but if he can draw enough votes away from * so that even rigging would be difficult, I'm all for it.

I'll register my (once again) legal dissent later. :)

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

3. The "Kerry republicans"

Kind of like the Reagan Democrats. He's courting people who vote Republican based primarily on economic issues. Sure, they're still anti-abortion, anti gay marriage, etc. but those aren't the driving factors behind their votes. These are white middle-class people in places like Ohio and Indiana. They probably work white collar jobs in corporate America or consider themselves to be small businessmen or entrepreneurerericators. He's going to try to offer them safe harbor, by going moderate on a range of social issues. These are people who would vote for Bush in any normal election, but these are not normal times. Bush *should* have these guys wrapped up, but he doesn't. There are two reasons for this:

1) IRAQ
2) The worst economic record since Hoover

So Kerry is going to try to reassure them that a vote for him is not a vote for rampant socialism & massive government & naked people in the streets.

[salonghorn70]

8. Kerry Republicans/Reagan Democrats

This is a very good comparison. The Reagan Democrats held together until 1992. I hope Kerry Republicans can last at leat that long. It might mean two or three more presidential wins.

[checks-n-balances]

4. I hope Nader and/or his supporters will understand this...

Otherwise, they'll be pounding away the "not a dime's worth of difference" theme again.

I wonder if he would even be running if he (and his followers) understood the realities of political campaigning & elections.

If they don't understand what Kerry is doing, that's the only problem I see with this approach. Maybe his campaign has already considered this factor.

At any rate, hope it works!

[Nashyra]

9. What is so damn difficult to realize

that this is now about winning the election? What the fuck is so hard about realizing that the candidate is going to have swing to the middle. On another post so many Dean supporters are trashing Kerry. Dean made a powerful speech at the Vt convention and he was right, Dean is a powerhouse Thank God he is stumping for Kerry, same with Clark and with Edwards. These former candidates are the ones that should be out there raising the roof and the money from their former supporters, they are the ones energizing the base, the candidate is now in the position of trying to WIN votes, the most amount of votes. Politics is a whoring position to be in, but we have to "get In" to make the changes. Thankfully Dean is so much smarter than some of his supporters, I say some because I met alot of Dean and Kery supporters in NH volunteering while volunteering for Clark. In a field of 10 candidates there can be only 1 winner, news flash it's Kerry, if we trusted our own choices so much to work so hard for them and became so passionate about them why can't we follow their lead and do the same? I think that might be a key to winning an election.

[Radical Activist]

11. Why is it so difficult to realize

that you don't have to sell out and go to the middle if you can inspire more of the Democratic base to vote. There are many ways Kerry can get more African-Americans and single women to show up on election day in large enough numbers to make the tiny fraction of moderate swing voters irrelevant. Kerry had to decide whether he would do that plus win back Nader voters, or go to the middle like Gore did. It looks like we know what he chose.
Four more years of Repub-lite. Wonderful.

[TankLV]

13. And don't forget, we are a more divided nation than ever before.

Kerry can say anything he has to to win - I hope he acts just like bunkerboy - stay true to your base - and governs with little regard to some non-existant "middle".

There is no "middle" there. That's been proven to be a falacy. It is not worth it to betray the base. If you loose the date that got you to the prom, then don't be surprised to walk home alone.

You don't see bunkerboy reaching out to liberals and democrats from the democratic wing, do you?

This stinks to high heaven. But we shall see come November.

I hope it works - we've GOT to kick these thugs and war criminals out.

The time for bipartisanship was right after 2000 - and you all know what happened since.

Let THEM make the first 1000 moves towards bipartisanship and prove they're more loyal to our country than the repuke party!

[salonghorn70]

10. Nadar and Political Reality

I don't think there is any connection as far as Nadar goes. I think it is a desire for the publicity that he receives.

[Texican]

6. A Neo-Con

Bush is no Conservative and Kerry needs to really hammer home that fact. Bush should not be getting real conservative votes. He and his owners want perpetual war and total government control of everything. If he would make that point over and over I believe that he might be onto something.

[leesa]

7. Same old shit! Another Republican candidate.

[incubus]

12. ...What about libertarians???

...Fiscally conservative, socially liberal. I'm libertarian and Bush has shown me little to support him. But, I haven't a clue to what Kerry stands for. Kerry needs to focus and not wander back and forth. In VA. Bush will get the electorate, so my vote here will not change anything. Anyone that can stop the partisan fighting, will be an improvement. Kerry has to take a stand on the issues, and soon...

[EndElectoral]

14. I don't like this at ALL

Will Kerry alienate more liberals? He's betting that liberals are so disgusted with Bush they'll vote for him even if he tows a more conservative line. Personally, I think its a mistake especially with Nader in the race.

Its OK to focus on fiscal responsibility, but why is that considered a conservative issue. They're the biggest spendthrifts in history. It's about where that money goes that's at issue.

Conservatives are attacking Kerry as "weak on defense", a "flip flopper", "a Massachusetts liberal", "a phony veteran who abandoned the war in Vietnam". That's about it.

Well, Kerry has become caught up in this nonsense. He's got to get out the positives, on what he's done for (a) the environment, (b) education (c) the defense budgets and weapons and dollars for real veterans and soldiers he has voted for (e) health care (d ) the park service, the arts, new technologies, etc. (e) and he must, must, must, must show he is for the worker not business in free and FAIR trade. He must hit hard on this issue.

Then he must attack the flip flop issue. I beleive he's done well on the vietnam ad character issues. He needs to paint the compelxity of issues rather than the Black and White simplicity in which Bush likes to paint them. That running a government effectively is not a list of simple platitudes but takes real thought, and debate over a myriad of issues which require collaboration and compromise. We are not a dictatorship in which whenever the President doesn't get what he likes he signs an executive order. He needs to show that he is not the divisive one i nthis campaign, but someone who understands and respects the function of congress and doesn't try to mislead them.

He can attack Bush without saying his name if he emphasizes the positives. He cannot let Bush set the damn agenda, and try to appear more conservative to get a few middle of the road votes. It's the wrong tactic. He should be embracing morality, decency, the core family values behind liberalism, while at the same time championing fiscal responsiblity and true security, not continual war.

He may gain a few conservatives, but Nader will get more votes or some liberals won't vote particularly youung ones. I don't want people to say, what's the real difference between the two candidates. It shoudl be marked, not well there's slight differences. It's a risky, risky strategy this lure in conservative approach.