Democrats Wonder if Kerry Should Stay on Careful Path

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/campaign/27DEMS.html?hp

ASHINGTON, May 26 — President Bush's political difficulties have prompted a debate among Democrats and aides to Senator John Kerry over how cautious his campaign should be on a variety of issues, from choosing a vice president to differentiating himself from Mr. Bush to responding to the turmoil in Iraq.

Some party officials say that with three new polls showing President Bush more embattled than he has ever been, Mr. Kerry's wisest course would be to take few chances and turn the election into a referendum on a struggling president. "People have won a lot of campaigns by just saying, `It is time for a change,' " said Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster.

But other Democrats warn that such a strategy entails risks of its own, banking on the proposition that Americans would be willing to fire an incumbent during war time and replace him with someone they know little about. "I don't think anybody in their right mind is going to run for president on a strategy of `people hate the other guy and that's enough for our guy to win,' " said Douglas Sosnik, the White House political director for President Bill Clinton.

and it's the right thing to do!

They don't name names...always some party officials...etc.

yeah, yeah, yeah...Kerry will not fall for it.

Name: Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster
Name: Douglas Sosnik, the White House political director for President Bill Clinton
Name: David Axelrod, a Democratic consultant in Chicago
Name: Harold M. Ickes, a former senior adviser to Mr. Clinton

And what won't Kerry fall for? You think that Democrats already have only one thought on this subject, and this article is trying to pretend there's a debate about it? The debate is obvious here on DU. If you're convinced there's no debate, then what's been decided?

when the time is right . . . that time is not now, which is why Gore was chosen to speak out instead of Kerry ("When your opponent is self-destructing, stay out of his way.") . . . but the die has been cast, and this campaign will now most certainly focus heavily on the failures and betrayals of BushCo . . . not exclusively, mind you, but enough so that the truth will get out to the American people . . . and I, for one, am thrilled at the prospect . . .

"John Kerry's advisers were surprised and annoyed to hear that Mr. Gore hollered so much, he made Howard Dean look like George Pataki. They don't want voters to be reminded of the wackadoo wing of the Democratic Party.

"They would like Mr. Gore, who brought bad karma to Mr. Dean with his primary endorsement, to zip it and go away. But more and more Democrats think it is Mr. Kerry who should zip it and go away."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/opinion/27DOWD.html?hp

Is the NYT gonna publish this article every week?

This is the perfect time to get going.

I 've came to hate so much. "The Nagourney Democrats" are always worried, unsure, anonymous and imaginary. Stop giving this shill any credence.

turf - such as Air America, Radio Left, etc. They do real, actual news reports on Bush and even do clips of his talks-his commencement speeches, so on. Then the actual talk shows themselves is anti-Bush, but basically nothing about Kerry.

I almost would know he existed by listening to our outlets.

The Republicans talk about him (negatively) much much more than we do - positively. I could rant on and on about our side giving him no free publicity, but I've got to go to work!!