The Most Effective Political Attacks ...
This is great stuff I found in today's Washington Times (though they found it in the NY Post) ...
"The most effective attacks in politics are those that stop your opponent from campaigning in his or her usual style," New York Post columnist Dick Morris writes.
"When Democrats called Richard Nixon 'negative' in the runup to the 1960 presidential, it made it much more difficult for him to wage the type of slash-and-burn campaign that had animated his past races. When Republicans called Bill Clinton a 'flip-flopper' during his first term, it made it harder for him to reach out to all constituencies and reach across ideological barriers as he instinctually always wanted to do," Mr. Morris said.
"Now, Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, has pinned the 'angry' moniker on Hillary Clinton -- a label that will increasingly stop her from venting her partisanship as she must to get nominated.
"The genius of the Mehlman charge (doubtless drawn from focus group or survey research) is that it rings so true among those who follow Sen. Clinton closely that it seems self-evident.
"When Hillary denounces the deficit or wiretapping or drug prices or the administration's inaction on global climate change, she sounds, looks and acts angry. And the reason is that she is angry.
"Hillary takes her political positions very seriously and personally. She has a hard time seeing virtue in those who disagree with her. What others would dismiss as honest disagreements about how to accomplish good ends, she often looks at as a clash between good and evil, selflessness and selfishness, generosity and greed. (She once asked how someone could 'be a Republican and a Christian at the same time.')
"In her speeches and interviews, she has two speeds: bland and shrill."
"The most effective attacks in politics are those that stop your opponent from campaigning in his or her usual style," New York Post columnist Dick Morris writes.
"When Democrats called Richard Nixon 'negative' in the runup to the 1960 presidential, it made it much more difficult for him to wage the type of slash-and-burn campaign that had animated his past races. When Republicans called Bill Clinton a 'flip-flopper' during his first term, it made it harder for him to reach out to all constituencies and reach across ideological barriers as he instinctually always wanted to do," Mr. Morris said.
"Now, Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, has pinned the 'angry' moniker on Hillary Clinton -- a label that will increasingly stop her from venting her partisanship as she must to get nominated.
"The genius of the Mehlman charge (doubtless drawn from focus group or survey research) is that it rings so true among those who follow Sen. Clinton closely that it seems self-evident.
"When Hillary denounces the deficit or wiretapping or drug prices or the administration's inaction on global climate change, she sounds, looks and acts angry. And the reason is that she is angry.
"Hillary takes her political positions very seriously and personally. She has a hard time seeing virtue in those who disagree with her. What others would dismiss as honest disagreements about how to accomplish good ends, she often looks at as a clash between good and evil, selflessness and selfishness, generosity and greed. (She once asked how someone could 'be a Republican and a Christian at the same time.')
"In her speeches and interviews, she has two speeds: bland and shrill."
posted by Matt Lewis at 7:00 AM
Subscribe
<< Home