Dean has Ace up his sleeve

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/129765p-115983c.html

Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean likes to present himself as a breath of fresh air: He won't join the cynical, insider political culture that he repeatedly describes in speeches as "Say whatever it takes to get elected."
So it was with considerable glee this week that a top aide to a Dean opponent informed me that the former Vermont governor has just hired killer gumshoe Ace Smith to gather dirt on political rivals.

The very same Ace Smith who ran "oppo research" for sharp-elbowed, soon-to-be-ex-California Gov. Gray Davis - "puke campaigns," in the words of Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"Ace certainly has that jugular instinct," says an operative who has worked closely with him on Davis' campaigns.

that would be news.

Dean campaign spokesman Jay Carson told me: "Whenever you get attacked by a bunch of Washington insiders, it's good to have someone on your side who knows them well."
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/129765p-115983c.html

Now that sounds like the type of Presidential candidate we need right now.

"It's not over 'till Arnold gropes the fat lady" —Bill Press, on MSNBC

http://www.recallarnoldwatch.org

as much as they have gone after Dean, Dean wouldn't have to do this, nor would they or this country been in such a mess.

Where were the "Bush Divers"?

popular. They are more of an opposition party to candidates who are outsiders than to the GOP. An elite countryclub crowd who just can't stand to have an outsider (without establishment pedigree) crash their party.

Just trying to inject a little humor...

If you're going to win, you're going to need to play just as aggressive and dirty as the Republicans. This is a win or lose game, there are no prizes for second place in politics.... so even if you're ahead, you keep trying to score more touchdowns.

... that the dems don't seem to play hardball as well as the repubs. if this is a sign that Dean is the kind who's willing to do that, then i say "it's about time." oh yeah, Davis has many faults, but IMHO using "dirt" on his opponents is not one of them. the "dirt" on Schwarzenegger was an important and legitimate issue. Davis if anything should have hammered harder on it. harder and earlier.

The voters don't want or respond to negative campaigns. They want issues. I think Bush gained voters with his "new tone in Washington" campaign. I know the "puke" campaign in Clai didn't work. Why are we painting our party as the negative, anti-whatever party whos only battle cry is a bumper sticker that says "Anyone other than Bush"? Is that all we have to offer? Are we so vacant of talent that we would truly vote for anyone other than Bush. (I hate that phrase, it is so defeatist)


We need to let people know what we are for and how we want to achieve it, not just what we are against. We have been throwing mud since 1998 and it seems like we are the only people getting dirty.

maybe not negative campaigns - but remember Mike Dukakis and the Willy Horton issue? Bill Clinton, draft dodger?


Why not Georgie Bush AWOL, or George Bush cokehead, or George Bush DUI?

Did you see any of this work? I didn't. I think the mood of the voters has changed. We either recognize this or get left behind. I think the public got tired of the Clinton scandals and the "new tone" idea rang a bell for them.

P.S. Bill Clinton won even with the draft-dodger issue. Thanks for making my point.

And you are not implying that there wasn't any coverage of the groping charges are you? That was planned as a Thursday surprise, executed as a Thursday surprise, talked about all weekend on every channel and still failed miserably.


If Bush stays true to the "new tone" campaign and refuses to get into the dirt, I fear the 2004 election. I heartfeltly believe a dirty campaign will serve us poorly.

worked wonders against McCain.

Image first and foremost. Then, talk about the issues, vaccuously if necessary, but always in character. Then bring up things that can hurt the opponent.

Looking at the scandals that ruined candidates and presidents, as opposed to those that didn't, it all comes down to whether the "dirt" is of the sort that tarnishes an image.

Sex scandals couldn't really hurt Clinton or Schwarzenegger, their images were too resiliant, or people expected it from them. The Enron scandal could have damaged Schwarzenegger, but it wasn't given significant airplay. Ahnold presented himself as a government outsider; showing his connections to the energy scam artist that put California in the dark would have hurt his campaign.

Image is everything, and consistency with that image is very important.

... to interpret "anyone but Bush", you just happen to pick one that is not good.

How about "nobody (who could ever be elected President) could be worse than Bush*", is that more to your liking because that is the intended sentiment and I for one agree with it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Just knowing he has hired this guy will keep the attacks down.

And if not...


BLAMMO!

candidates should be prepared for any TRUTH that Dean comes up with. I understand this is part of the game, but it better be honest.

A drunk man dosen't know what he dose, there must be loads out there to find on Bush...Some one need to do a commercial on Tom DeLay in Florida with his well dressed protestors arm raised in the air like a Nazi Storm Trooper, and didn't his croud actually bread down a door to stop the vote count.

Check out Senator Bond's campaigns. The only one he lost was clean.

... whoever came up with the wive's tale that "the low road never wins" is clearly not paying attention to what is happening in elections. Pukes have made a political comeback by using slander and innuendo and outright lies against their opponents. Get real.

As far as I'm concerned, dirt is fair as apple pie, as long as it is True Dirt. :)

Why shouldn't they know that he'll have plenty of mud to sling back at them should the campaign come to that...as it most likely will.

It backfired on Davis, because Davis didin't talk issues, and didn't give the public a reason to vote FOR HIM. Certainly Dean has more going for him that Davis. Certainly there are REAL differences between Bush and Dean so he doesn't have to do that. The thing I have liked so much about Dean is that he isn't a lessor evil. The only reason you should go dirty is if your opponant goes dirty. Otherwise it is a real drag. I wouldn't take neocon daily news very seriously though.

Famous for 'Bush Divers'

;-)

they need to bash Bu$h and they also need to tell us where they stand on the issues.

However, the candidates themselves need to avoid bashing Bu$h on a personal level. Bash his policies, bash the war in Iraq, that's fine. However, personal bashing should be the job of the Karl Rove types, not the candidate.

Just because you have dirt, doesn't mean you have to broadcast it far and wide. I would think that sometimes just a hint that you have something is enough to alter the discourse.

"Just because you have dirt, doesn't mean you have to broadcast it far and wide. I would think that sometimes just a hint that you have something is enough to alter the discourse."

True enough. If you have any doubts, recall what Larry Flynt did when Dan Livingston (R) was positioning for the House Speakers chair after Newtzie left. For those who might have missed this, Mr. Flynt declared he had some real nasty stuff on Livingston that he would make public unless he stepped aside in his pursuit of the House Speakership. After a lot of foaming at the mouth and righteous indignation, Livingston not only stepped aside but surprisingly (wink) came out with the revelation that he'd had not been maritally faithful to his wife.

Well well. All Larry Flynt had to do was say he had the dirt and voila - no more Livingston.

As a humorous epilogue to the event, I recall seeing Mr. Flynt on one of those weekend political talk shows during the whole farce, where the host said to Larry "Now, Mr. Flynt, Republicans in Congress are calling you a 'bottom feeder' for dredging up this damaging personal information on Dan Livingston. How do you respond to that?" Flynt answered back in his trademark gruff voice "Well, I may be a bottom feeder, but look what I found when I was down there!".

And he had the proof. And he never revealed it because Mrs. Livingston asked him not to.

And, furthermore, Flynt had a lot more stuff, on other people. It was never used. I have this on good authority from someone who worked on the project.

Larry Flynt is the reason Clinton served out his term.

He posed the question to the repugs "how far do you want to go with this?" I will meet you and best you.

In this article there'd be 500 DUers lined up to tar and feather John for the umteenth time.

*whistle*