Al Saunders, Democratic Adviser
Of course as everyone should know Al is the offensive genius behind the revitalized Redskins offense. Nearly 500 yards in each of last two (winning) games.
The Democrats should have gone on the offense six months ago with three themes: we are against corruption; we are against "staying the course" in Iraq since that means no new ideas, strategy, or leaders; and we are against tearing down social security or other necessary elements of a fair society. As to the first and second the Democratic leadership explicitly rejected the advice and as to the third they couldn't organize around it. But now all these themes have been delivered to the voters anyhow, because the Republicans have been caught red-handed in their:
(1) nauseating pedophilia and its repugnant cover-up by the top dogs in the House (each of whom Dems should ask to resign),
(2) tragic failure to have preemptively attacked Osama and horrifying cover-up of their own negligence, and
(3) brazen announcement of a continued pursuit of undoing the frayed safety net for all Americans. Most recently Treasury has talked this way; President Bush has never stopped talking this talk.
The Democrats over the next 30 days need to embrace the three themes now, as they did not do in the past, and promise moral reform, military wisdom, and a responsible commitment to the principle that we are all in this together. Come on folks! If you can't win this election, you should give up this line of work.
I find a promising omen in the Woodward book's release. He's burned his bridges in the WH and will shift to the large pool of disgruntled professionals in military, intelligence, and diplomatic roles.
King Rat has left the ship of state.
October 2, 2006 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al Saunders' offensive scheme is built on sending a lot of receivers out to catch passes. Al is not a genius when he doesn't have great offensive tackles.
You know what an offensive tackle is, don't you. He is the guy who protects the quarterback.
The Democratic party is full of quaterbacks wanting to throw the ball long. It doesn't have many offensive tackles.
We are already seeing an incredible onslaught of negative Republican advertizing. We need people blocking those attacks. That means we all need to promote our candidates the best way we can. When the Republicans blitz, step up and block. Talk to your friends about the negative Republican ads. Defend your candidate. Send your candidates all the money you can.
Ron Byers
October 2, 2006 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice metaphors (except that, in reality, Al Saunders scheme is run a healthy Clinton Portis thirty times opening it up for Moss). But I think the Dems problem for five years have been ball control. Whether the result of Coach Rove’s attacks or the media conceding to his game plan, we have been on defense for five years. I’m not hopeful. If the Dems cannot fight against shredding the constitution, as happened last week, they cannot fight. They need a new quarterback.
October 2, 2006 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets face it, the Democrats issue too many intentional passes, can't hit a free throw, and are always slow at the start of the race. We need some good young pitchers, a couple of 7 foot centers, and, most of all a driver with quick reflexes. That should hold us til we find a good closer.
Hoppy in Sacramento
October 2, 2006 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Individualized personal attacks for personal failings. The 'Publicans ARE going to do it. The Dims need to overcome their aversion to it. One more revealtion and Allen is a goner; please oh please let there be one more piece of trash out there ready to land on his doorstep. All the 'Publicans must answer for Foley, it is now the party of pedophilia. Just keep up the presure....
October 2, 2006 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
October 2, 2006 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting away from the analogies, I think the implicit message of Hundt's post is that HOW you win is also important.
If you push a message of some sort - any sort - and win, then when you win, you have the implicit permission of the electorate to push the agenda implied by that message.
If you win simply because the other party stinks up the joint, nothing there shows that the voters endorsed you to DO anything special.
Now, we're in a position where we'll almost certainly win, regardless, so the Dems really ought to push SOME sort of simple, broad message such as that which Reed Hundt suggests.
October 3, 2006 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink