|
People don't usually vote out incumbents unless they are unhappy with them, and a candidate rarely overthrows an incumbent through attacks. If the voter likes the incumbent, the attacks don't stick. If the voter doesn't like the incumbent, the attacks aren't necessary, and can backfire and make the attacker seem mean, or desperate.
Kerry has the facts on his side, he should give a preponderance to the facts, and keep attacks to the minimum. And he's right about starting slow and finishing strong. That's what Clinton and Gore both did, too.
But there is a lot of flexibility in those rules, and that's where I'd question anyone in Dukakis's race. They did not handle the reins well, even though they had the right basic idea.
Kerry shouldn't attack randomly, and not often, either. But he does have to keep the heat on Bush. Right now, Bush is creating his own heat, so Kerry just has to sit back and warm his feet before the fire, maybe inconspicuously stoke it with a stick now and then when the fire is threatening to die down. But Kerry has to be ready to lunge.
A slow start doesn't mean no start. It means at least keeping pace. So far he's playing it all perfectly, but if he listens to this guy's advice, he may miss his chances.
|