Chicago Columnist Illinois Leader Entrepreneur Political Analyst Business Advisor Illinois Review

Ralf Seiffe writes today, "Bush’s message should not tell us to reject Kerry but, rather, why we should vote for the president . . ."

Monday, August 2, 2004

By Ralf Seiffe

While there has been no significant “bounce” for the two Johns and conservative pundits are squealing that the whole thing was fraud in the inducement, the Democrat’s convention succeeded beyond the party’s wildest expectations. For four days, the party managed to avoid revealing their real nature and in that, vastly improved their chances for victory in November. Decamping from Boston, Democrats are sure the election’s in the bag and they’ll be right unless Bush and his crew dramatically changes strategy.

Democrats believe the election will primarily be a review of President Bush’s job performance. Like any boss assessing an employee’s situation, voters will first decide whether the incumbent is satisfactorily advancing the nation’s goals and objectives. Only if they come to understand that the president is not up to the task will they look for a replacement.

Newsweek reports that even as the president’s job performance ratings are improving slightly, 53% of those surveyed said they would prefer the president take up permanent residence in Crawford. Only 43% thought he should be reelected. With this deficit, Democrat strategists have good reason to believe that the president cannot be reelected, regardless of the opponent.

So, the objective of the Beantown Blowout was to nominate the two marionettes while, at the same time, making sure they didn’t self-destruct by revealing their true nature. With a muzzled supporting cast, both did a masterful job camouflaging their real record on taxes, national security, education, abortion, gay marriage, guns and the favored policies of every other crackpot group that are the tent pegs of the party.

On the other hand, the president and his men have a big task. No president in this century has been reelected following a president who has served a full eight years. Only one, Harry Truman, came back from such fearful poll numbers. Only a few undecided voters are left to attract and they will break towards Kerry if history repeats its usual pattern. Compound this with the first term’s domestic strategy that so disappointed the Republican base that they may stay home on Election Day. Interview after interview showed the Michael Moore flick sticks.

This abundance of Republican problems is why the Boston Democrats didn’t have to rile their base and risk exposure. They are united with their themes and expectant of their ten of trillions in programs, unrevealed in Beantown, but lurking in the halls of Congress. They will work hard because they hate Bush and will work extra-hard because they appear to be impressed with their candidate’s “reporting for duty”.

These facts argue for two asymmetrical strategies for each candidate. If the Democrat managers are right, President Bush is wasting his money and resources by trashing Kerry-Edwards. The millions spent to crush Kerry is exactly the wrong strategy because it does not address the problem the president has---the “reelect” numbers.

In fact, the negative advertising may even be eroding the potential support undecided women might offer. This also helps us understand why Kerry is not advertising this month; he’s depending on McCain Money from the 527 groups to trash the president. That’s precisely the right strategy because its objective is to drive down the “reelect” number.

While Kerry is best served by a negative strategy, the president should be undertaking the opposite strategy, one that tries to improve that important “reelect” number. That means advertising the affirmative case for returning him to the White House. Bush’s message should not tell us to reject Kerry but, rather, why we should vote for the president.

The question is, will anyone believe him? The intuitive strategy is probably to move to the center, attempting to capture the undecided by promising more government. Better advice is to recall that other incumbent who overcame a popular challenger---Harry Truman. Faced with a similar “un-winnable” situation, the 33rd president went on to surprise everyone by defeating Republican Thomas Dewey. He did it by going on the offensive, proposing programs that electrified Democrats and repulsed Republicans.

Among the proposals was the first mention of national health insurance, an empty promise that’s served Democrats for 58 years. Nevertheless, from what looked like an electoral disaster, Democrats picked up nine senate seats and seventy-five house seats capturing the majority in both houses they mostly maintained for 46 years.

Bush, like Truman, has more potential for re-election---and a successful second term--- by enthusing the base than by compromising for a small slice of independents. Rather than masking the party’s conservative nature, he should expose it through invigorating proposals that will attract rabid Republicans and nauseate Democrats.

He should tell the truth about Social Security, promise to derail the Alternative Minimum Tax, make the case that educational choice is the most important thing we can do to preserve living standards and end racism. He-or maybe Dick Cheney---should declare the war in Iraq now a civil war in which we will have a diminishing role which will leave more resources for the war on terrorism. This will create the winning attitude the former baseball team owner will recognize and can exploit up and down the ticket.

Word is Bush will do just this at the convention. Hopefully that’s not too late to overcome another month of inertia and the enmity of the conventional media.

Right now, the election looks close but with a breathtaking, positive vision for a second term, it needn’t be.

© 2005 IllinoisLeader.com -- all rights reserved

Ralf Seiffe advises business start-ups and product launches from Chicago, Illinois and is a political analyst and columnist for the Illinois Leader.