How Dean should respond to the ad questioning his leadership

He should tell the press to quit crying about it. Say that it's no big deal. Say that this is great prep for the general elections and that the republicans are going to throw a lot more than a picture of Usama his way. Encourage this type of thing. The more the press tries to make it a controversy, the more air time it will receive and the more time "pundits" get to talk about the "validity" of the ad. The repubs. love it. They get to eviscerate Dean without being directly involved. Whatever Dean does, he needs to avoid complaining about it or simply saying that this is exactly what the repubs. would do.

For the record: I may or may not vote for Dean in the primary. This is simply how I think he'd benefit in his response.

he needs to avoid complaining about it or simply saying that this is exactly what the repubs. would do

Dean never misses a chance to snipe at his Democratic competitors; this is no exception. And of course he's got another BAT to commemorate the ad for all eternity. God Bless Dean for America.

Democrats are right to put Dean's name in comparison to Osama. You're so correct!

Democrats are right to put Dean's name in comparison to Osama.

Those words you put in my mouth taste just like chicken.

Dean has choices about how to respond to the ad, but he chooses the easiest -- "Bad Bush-lite Democrats! Spank them!" I just wish he could expand his act a little bit.

Equivocatio nis the new chicken.

Seriously, I edited my post to clarify. I think the ads are horrible, but I think Dean responded to them wrong. I HAVE TO POWER to express my own opinion!

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

Of course any criticism of Dean is equivalent to Dean bashing. I should be burned at the stake.

How low the bar is set these days. Quite a reflection on our party. Maybe the greens are right. Maybe we ARE just like the republicans.

... I don't even know what to say.

I don't like the "Osama" ad. I don't like Dean's response to the ad. Is that straight-talking enough for you?

You mean just recently? I think the discourse has lived at an all time low for several months, and I think yeah, you're right down there. I visit from time to time.

Which response to the ad are you referring to? Which one is Dean's specifically? Or do you mean the response of his campaign?

Attack first and ask questions later?

I'm talking about the multiple responses of the Dean campaign on the blog - particularly this one:
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002665.html

I stand by what I said in my original post before I got off track. Buh-bye.

it's one thing. To say it's Deans' response is irresponsible. But then, bar..low.

That's a new one. :D

I only saw the one where they said the world is dangerous because of Osama and that Dean doesn't have the EXPERIENCE to deal with it.

Please post the ad you described above. I'd really like to see it.

Was this OK when it was done against Cleland?

You're right Dean wasn't compared to Osama.

Impying they were one and the same.

Big difference.

Frankly, I think the original Poster here made a great suggestion... and it's too bad that Trippi is now left with the "Stamp Foot and Pout Option" after demanding that the other Democratic Candidates renounce the ad and they declined.

Face it, Trippi/Dean ended up sounding like whiners.... and fed the perception, and truth, that Dean comes up short on the Foreign Policy Department.

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

I've seen his response thus far. Yes, he compares this to what the repubs. did to Max Cleland. But it's never too late to say "no big deal." It's a great opportunity for him to build an aura of inevitability by talking about this is what he expects in the general election. He would also get to implicitly take swipes at the dems. by associating their actions with what he knows the repubs. are going to do.

I see the ads at the bottom of your post, so I hope you appreciate my post as pure strategizing and not an endorsement. I may or may not vote for Clark in the primary.

My comments are about pure strategy, as I recognize that yours are. I think you are spot on and I am frustrated that Dean (as someone I will be compelled to support if he gets the nomination) doesn't get that he is the *frontrunner*, particularly compared to the Dem. senators in the running, and he doesn't need to respond to cheap shots with more cheap shots.

I hope it's not too late for him to figure out that there are other ways to respond, and I like your suggestions. Behind my snarkiness lies my real frustration at the tone of his candidacy.

The response is on the way. Don't worry about it. Si far, Dean has really turned that ad to his advantage. Something we failed to do in 2002.

then more power to you. And to the BAT.

Apparently, SNUG.

I think if all you can see of Dean's campaign is his "attacks", then wow. Just WOW.

Of course, it's an attack if Dean is the perpetrator, but "valid criticism" if it's anyone else. I have to keep telling myself that.

:hug:

Great line: "doesn't get that he is the *frontrunner*, particularly compared to the Dem. senators in the running, and he doesn't need to respond to cheap shots with more cheap shots."

Absolutely. The others have to bloody his nose. He realizes this. His response is purely tactical, for the nomination. He wants dems. to be "disgusted" by the "republican-like" tactics of his opponents. But what he fails to see (or at least his campaign) is that he enjoys his lead because of the narrative of his being a fighter, someone who "lets it rip." So, it seems to me, complaining undercuts this narrative. He's supposed to enjoy attacks, grow stronger from them, etc. So let that happen. Again, I offer all of this not as a critique of Dean but of his response.

Dean has a great election narrative going for him. He needs to stay within the frame that he has created.

And, oooh, if I could have created a narrative for Clark and some of his responses!!!!

Thanks for recognizing the nature of my post, eileen_d.

Wait until the GOP runs ads showing Dean ranting and raving and chanting you have the power 14 times.

It works for his supporters. Are you suggesting that we don't have the power? That Dean is wrong to say we do? Have you ever been to a rally?

Even though Kerry was the first to disclaim the ad, Trippi never mentioned it.

Judy Woodruff just smeared Kerry and Gephardt again on Inside Politics by saying they are associated with those who made the ad, and never mentioned Kerry disclaiming the ad. Trippi is a jerk to demand the ad be disclaimed aand then make sure not to update the media and not mention those who disclaimed it.

Is there a link on Kerry's site where he disclaims the ad BTW?

Woodruff said that the group that is responsible for the ad includes people who used to work for the Kerry and Gephardt campaigns. She DID NOT say Kerry was associated with the ad.

what up?

I am hopeful however, that the open-minded will recognize partisan hyperbole when they see it.

The open minded don't live here.

stop by from time to time, it seems.

mentioning that they disclaimed the ad. That's Trippi's doing. Make sure that they're smeared with the association without offering their disclaimers. You know darn well that Trippi could have amended the story to include the disclaimers.

He could have done so last night, too, when he was on all those shows, and he chose not to.

Trippi is fighting fire with fire. If Kerry has such a problem with it, where does he demand the ad be pulled?

He made NO mention of the disclaimers he had demanded earlier. THAT proves his lack of integrity.

How quick to pass judgment. I usually like to meet people before I make such statements. And I've met Trippi. And he's not a jerk. But hey, however you get to sleep at night, you know?