Rove to Democrats: Extreme Left Does Not Beat Extreme Right

Democrats,

It started out fine enough, when an anti-Bush mother-of-a-dead-soldier decided to stage a mini-protest outside of "W's" ranch in Crawford. The first few days went really well; Cindy Sheehan got a lot of press, sympathy, and gave a face to the negative side of the war effort.

Now, however, the Sheehan protest experience is rapidly deteriorating due to the hijacking of her cause by a bunch of anti-war/anti-Bush groups, which causes a strategic problem: Democrats need the money and votes from Liberal Activist Groups (yup, that's LAG), yet you also need to steer clear of them because they are a burden to your attempts to recapture the respect and dignity of the vast Moderate Majority of Americans.

Sheehan started out with a very effective message and campaign. But like fruit flies to a rotting banana, the LAGs glommed on, pimping her out to prostitute for their more divisive and angry agenda. The net result: At best, a much less sympathetic figure of Sheehan has emerged. At worst, a complete backfire of what was a very effective campaign.

MoveOn.org, Michael Moore, and other "brands" are just as unpopular with regular Americans as radical conservative groups. The difference is, the radical conservative groups hide behind a church steeple, which most people respect and utilize as part of their spiritual lives. MoveOn.org and Moore are not attached to people's daily spiritual endeavors, so these institutions don't have the same ability to gain sympathy or empathy from Americans.

It's time for tough-love with the LAGs. Treat them as they are: very important base-warming institutions. Feed them enough to keep the base warm, but do not overfeed them, because the Moderate Majority will reject their anger and venom (unless, of course, "W" screws things up even more, in which case we're likely to go back to 70's-style liberalism thriving in America).

Senator Biden is striking the right tone now on Iraq. Don't worry about presidential politics now -- focus on 2006, and go speak with him before speaking out. Get on his message, and take better advantage of the awful mess this administration has gotten itself into through blind faith and ideological hubris.

Rove to Democrats: It’s Time for Recess!

Schoolyard bully-cum-President George W. Bush always liked recess. In school, recess was the time to recover from the constant droning by teachers about liberal activist topics like biology, chemistry, and physics. It was also the time when he could put his real talents to good use: he could corral like-minded folk and bully the rest of the class by utilizing the time-tested tools of intimidation, fear, and tests of loyalty.

I'm sure you remember the schoolyard bully in grade school. Well, now he's President. And, in case it wasn't clear to everyone, he's still playing the schoolyard bully role in his current job. But instead of hiding behind teachers that turned the other cheek because his daddy was an Important Person, he now hides behind a gang of talk show and new media activists that provide him cover.

And here we are, once again, observing our Bully-in-Chief utilizing his favorite period: recess. By using congressional recess as a loophole strategy to appoint people to key positions in government -- positions designed to be approved by our democratically elected representatives -- he is once again playing schoolyard bully during recess.

Sure, most presidents use recess appointments strategically. To say that Bush is alone here is unfair. But what is very clear is that, as usual, Bush is taking an established precedent and blowing the doors off of it and magnifying his vision of consolidated executive power.

George W. Bush appointed John Bolton during recess because he could not get his pick past America's representatives in a high-profile set of hearings. So, in essence, "W." decided that Americans were wrong, and went around us to put the guy he wanted in the post anyway.

Is this "Democracy on the March?" No. It's the schoolyard bully during recess.

Rove to Democrats: Rick Santorum Needs to be Interviewed More Often

Democrats,

Oh, it was rich. More specifically, it was Rick. Senator Rick Santorum was on the Daily Show and needed to go unscripted for a few minutes.

Lesson #1: Invite dumb ideologues to the talk show circuit whenever possible.

Santorum was peddling his book ("It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good") on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, and tried to keep fresh'n'happy with Jon during the friendly debate on society.

During this friendly debate, Santorum said that while he feels that homosexuals can be virtuous people...

Lesson #2: Make sure to include Santorum's quote about gays being virtuous in independent advocacy ads during next year's PA Senate race. While I'm not so sure it will improve his gay voter turn-out, it certainly will dampen enthusiasm with cultural conservatives -- his base.

...he wants to legislate the "ideal family" which includes only a mother and father raising a child. He asserts that the very future of our society is in the balance, and that legislating the ideal family unit is the only way to keep our society healthy and successful. He went on to say that government needs to help parents get through problems in their relationships. He went as far as to say "we have to" when asked if government should legislate the ideal.

Lesson #3: Let dumb ideologues drown themselves in their idealistic rhetoric. There's nary a reason to even respond. Libertarian Republicans will wince when they find out that their dear party has been hijacked by "cultural socialists," and intelligent conservatives may decide that they don't want to vote for a mental midget to represent them.

It's all about slicing off small part of the United Republican Front that Bush assembled. In a 50/50 nation, you need to focus on promoting the alternative and at the same time, tear down the opposition. Rick has outed himself as a cultural socialist and voters need to know this so they can make an informed choice in 2006.

Democrats -- this may be your opportunity to link the moniker "cultural socialist" with the "movement conservatives." Any use of "socialist" is demeaning in today's America, thanks to the Republicans! So, in true Rovian style, utilize the work done by your opponents and use it against them. And then, tie it into an embarrassing event:

Rick Santorum - Pennsylvania's Cultural Socialist. He knows what's best for your family. Just like he knew what was best for Terri Schiavo.

Rove to Democrats: Roberts Nomination - Update on Strategy

Democrats,

After a few days, it's much easier to see the way things are turning out: George W. Bush has pulled a very strategic maneuver that has caught most people off-guard:

He nominated a Conservative that most everyone can like and respect.

This, by the way, is at once a gift (a good guy gets on the Supreme Court under Bush's watch) and a booby trap (Americans change their views of Republicans from Dick Cheney and Karl Rove to the "All-American" Roberts).

Now, if Roberts' persona would actually shift the focus of the Republican Party to one that resembled Roberts more than Rove, that would be one thing. More likely, the radical ideologues on the Right will effectively leverage this new lovable Republican Persona as a vehicle to draw more people in the party that they effectively hijacked 5 years ago.

As a result, any opposition move for or against Roberts is a tricky one, and this is exactly what Bush wants.

Here's the tough-love advice, Democrats: Make and portray the Democratic Party a party that someone like Roberts should belong to. Even though Roberts is a "Conservative," that does not mean that someone like Roberts (i.e., his persona) should not be a Democrat. The Democratic Party should be portrayed as a party that consists of "good people" with "good character" more than "people of a narrow set of liberal beliefs."

If you can embrace Roberts as a good guy who could possibly be a Democrat, you are strategically implying that Republicans are too radical and out-of-mainstream to keep him.

Does it matter what party Roberts is really a member of? No. Does it matter that Roberts might actually be too conservative to be a Democrat? No.

What matters is how you portray your party against Roberts' persona.

I've seen some liberal interest groups already beating up Roberts on cable talk shows. This is a dreadful mistake. This puts Democrats (sorry, but liberals = Democrats on talk shows) in a radical light, which is exactly where George W. Bush wants you to go.

If George W. Bush can make Liberals go nuts on Roberts, he has successfully made progress with his and Rove's "Permanent Republican Majority" initiative.

Democrats, you should embrace Roberts for his positive assets as a person, and as an American. You will upgrade the Democratic Party in Americans' minds, and simultaneously foil the Rove/Bush "Permanent Republican Majority" initiative.

Rove to Democrats: Don't Go to the Mat over Roberts Nomination

Democrats,

The John Roberts nomination for the Supreme Court is not the right battle on which to go to the mat. I know he does not represent many "mainstream" values, but his persona is very mainstream. And if we've learned anything in the last 5 years, it is that persona is just as (if not more) important as fact or policy in terms of national political messaging.

Be honest with your assessments based on your values, but do not demonize Roberts. It will backfire.

Focus on the strategic value of this opportunity: re-branding the Republican Party. Transform this nomination from Judge Roberts to Bush's "stamp" on a strange, new America that he is ushering in through his brand of Texan Conservatism.

Some talking points to help set the right tone:

"Judge Roberts is a conservative judge who does not represent my values, nor the majority of my constituents' values. I do not think Americans are really this conservative, but if this Republican President and this Republican Senate want to change the course of law in this country, it is clearly in their hands. It is up to the American people to change the make-up of the Senate if they do not want the rule of law to change from where it is today."

"Judge Roberts is a judge of character, yet his philosophy is clearly right-of-center. Unfortunately, I believe this means that the freedoms, liberties, and equalities that Americans currently enjoy will be altered in the future. But this should come as no surprise, as this is our President's philosophy as well. Nobody should be surprised about a right-wing President who pretends to be "compassionate" nominating a very conservative Supreme Court justice."

"Judge Roberts is the conservative 'stamp' on the Court that the Republican Right Wing has been waiting for. We will have to live with a more conservative court, and only then will the American people truly understand what a conservative court will mean to them. Once they find out, I predict we will see Democrats regain majorities throughout government. It's a case of 'be careful what you wish for, America. You might just get it.'"

"I no more want Roberts to be on the Supreme Court than I want George W. Bush as President, but the American people have put Democrats at a political disadvantage recently, and until we regain some majorities, I will do all that I am able to do to educate the American people on how Republicans are remaking America in their own image."

"When I think about the progress we've made as a society through a moderate, balanced Supreme Court, I think we can all take pride. I just hope that we've just ended the golden era in American's history as President Bush ushers in a new era."

"Let this be a lesson to the American voters: You do not just elect a President based on how tough he is on terrorism. You also elect someone who sets the legal tone for the next 20-40 years."

"The conservative-leaning Supreme Court already rules on eminent domain in favor of the State. I hope George W. Bush and the Republicans aren't stacking the deck against Americans even more with this conservative nominee."

Let the chips fall where they may with Roberts. Unless something heinous comes up, he'll be confirmed. Instead, use this no-win situation to begin chipping away at the Republican Brand. Get entrenched for the long-term struggle for ideas, and don't get distracted by fights you simply cannot win.

Rove to Democrats: Fight Rove with Rove

Democrats,

Recently, Karl Rove has been doing some campaigning for this "Permanent Republican Majority" project. We all know this is his project, because he plainly stated it in public.

What does this mean? It means that Karl is the brand manager for the Republican Party, and his job is to ensure that his brand is perceived as superior to that of the competition.

So, it should be of no surprise that he is smearing the Democratic "brand" with lots of rhetoric that paints his competitor as clearly inferior and not worthy of anyone's investment. As a side benefit, he gets the chorus of talk radio and cable news talking heads going bonkers and deflecting from the real serious issues at hand.

Nice move, Karl. I tip my hat to your skill.

However it looks as though Democrats were caught unprepared for these types of remarks. This is a real shame, because Dems should be doing "oppo research" proactively and coming up with these Rovian snipes ahead of time in their own think tanks. If they were doing this due diligence, then they'd already have stock responses to Karl's rantings.

Why Democrats don't see this as a brand management issue is beyond me, because that's exactly what this is. Karl is smearing the Democratic brand, and Democrats appear to have no brand manager to develop messaging strategies to counter.

Actually, they do, it's this site. But the Dems don't really pay enough mind to this advice column, do they?

OK, enough belly-aching about the problem. This site is about solutions, so here we go:

Instead of feining anger over Karl's assertions that Democrats are essentially pussies (sorry, but that's what he's saying), you need to defend your brand by using the coverage he has received for his over-the-top remarks as a messaging conveyor belt for your message you want to get out to the American people:

Talking Points:

Instead of fantasizing about what Democrats would do if in charge, Karl should focus on figuring out how to get Republicans out of the mess this administration has made of Iraq, and at home.

Democrats have a distinguished history in effectively managing wars. What's in question is this administration's ability to manage this war.

If Democrats were in charge, my guess is that we'd already have Bin Ladin. Instead, we have Saddam. Who are you more afraid of?

What you see here is the equivalent of somebody trying to save a sinking ship by blaming the water instead of trying to fix the hull.

(Ideally, Dems would have talking points segmented by "levels of legitimacy" -- where a more spicy talking point may go to Alan Colmes or Howard Dean, and the more statesman rhetoric be delivered by senators and governors. But this is very tactical stuff that I will not go into in this post.)

Notice how the first three talking points strategically insert Democrat brand identification in the response? This is the type of response that is required, because Americans need to begin believing that Democrats aren't just a bunch of sniffling Senator Durbins. They need to believe that Democrats can be trusted with America's difficult national security concerns. They need to believe that Democrats can lead. This means convincing Americans that the Democratic brand is powerful, trustworthy, and represents a vision of the future that Americans believe in.

Rove to Democrats: Stage a "Minority Report" in Early 2006

You might as well start preparing now, because it's going to take some time to organize. What's that, you ask? A Minority Report.

I'm not sure if this has ever been done before, but Democrats need to stage a media event that includes the Democratic Senators and Congressmen holding "hearings" on the Republican Leadership. This, of course, will not be any actual governmental hearing. It will be a media event that provides Democrats with the opportunity to grade the administration on a report card.

You need to start thinking what will comprise this report card, how you will grade them on these various "subjects," and how to best position the event as non-cynical and pro-American, with the intent to show the country that Democrats should rule the Senate once again.

Don't tell me why it won't work. Just do it.

Rove to Democrats: The Truth is Ugly

Democrats,

Kudos on a fine year in politics to-date. You've managed to escape the Conservative Machine and actually gain some ground in the public's eye.

The public needs to see Democrats as tough, united, and principled, because they need these traits in their Commander-in-Chief in 3 years. So far, so good.

However, these are things that are simply slipping through the cracks that you need to take advantage of NOW:

After the "Nuclear" option was scuttled by the Centrist Fourteen (kudos to McCain), the Right Wing came out swinging. Not just the leaders, but the people as well. Letters, phone calls to talk show hosts, cable TV interviews... the whole shebang...venomous rhetoric spewing disgust, anger, frustration, and downright hatred of the Republican moderates (and Frist) who didn't fulfill their radical marching orders.

Don't you see the opportunity here? The vast majority of Americans are actually moderate, and don't like this venomous aspect of our society (on either side). But right now, the truth is out... and it's ugly:

Right Wing Conservatives - the same ones that got "W" into the Whitehouse - are anti-American, unpatriotic, and civility-haters. They are truly disgusted that a compromise was reached. They are disgusted by the fact that compromise was even an option. They are disgusted by compromise. Which, by the way, is a fundamental aspect of the American political system.

What we've learned is that Right Wing Conservatives care more about their ideology than America. I think it's time to start spreading this meme throughout the country, and really put a fork in the radical right-wing movement.

Go to it.

Rove to the Next Guy: Report to the Principle Immediately

In my last tip, I outlined the belief system that needs to be the fundamental underpinnings of a political platform. Instead of racing to develop policy (as liberals love to do), let's practice some good ol' fashioned diligence and first create a set of guiding principles that will inform future policy decisions:

Guiding Principles Drawn from Beliefs

We Believe America is the Best Place for All Americans to Live, Grow, and Prosper

• America is a better country when all Americans are better off tomorrow than they are today.
  
• Americans prosper when they have good jobs, good friends, a loving family, and can afford to enjoy themselves.

We Represent Keeping America Beautiful

• Our children deserve a country that is beautiful no matter where they live, visit, or play: our land, our seas, our cities, our plains, our hills, our valleys.

We Represent Keeping America Free

• Religious freedom and freedom of religion
  
• Americans are free to chose their own individual paths in life
  
• Freedom to enjoy life as long as it's within the laws we've set for conduct
  

We Represent Fairness to our Neighbor

• The next door neighbor
  
• The next town over
  
• The next city over
  
• The next country over
  
• The next civilization over
  
• No matter what their beliefs, it's our duty to be fair
  

We Represent Real Democratic Leadership

• Take the lead in human rights and democratic values
  
• Stay aware of the world, so we can continue to lead
  
• Invest in innovation, so Americans can continue to lead the world
  
  • Continue America's rich history of world-class innovation
    
  • From Coal & Steel, to Ford, to Coke, to Finance, to Internet, to Beyond!
    

We Represent Safety and Security

• A 3-tiered Safety and Security Principle:
  
  • National Defense : Enhance military to handle insurgency wars
    
  • Local Policing/Safety: Enhance local police to handle domestic insurgencies (ie., gangs)
    
  • Health & Wellness: Enhance healthcare to protect Americans' physical safety
    

We Represent Americans Working Together

• We Americans have more common ground than differences
  
• When we unite in our common ground, we ensure success for our future!
  
• When we focus on our differences, we waste our time and energy
  

In future tips, we will drill into these principles, and explain how these will not only create a spiritual gravity that attracts voters all over America, but will also help infuse some much-needed confidence, which will then reassert itself as an attractive force. It will be the positive feedback loop required to take control of the national dialog.

Rove to The Next Guy: It's Time for a Paradigm

Next Guy,

John did his best considering who he is and how he operates. Did his campaign use the advice laid out on Kerrys Karl Rove to help them win? We'll never know for sure. For what it's worth, I did hear the term "abuse" come up in one or two stump speeches, but that was clearly not enough.

John did not immerse himself in a real strategic campaign. There was no diligence in developing the vision, mission, and goals of the campaign. The Kerry campaign was totally tactical, and based on the energy of anger and resentment. As a result, the people who were full of BushHate voted, and the rest yawned and said that they'd rather have a guy who represented something, at least, in the White House, even if he is an abusive, misleading, miscalculating, misinformed bully.

This is what happens when you're out-strategized.

The point of all this is, the opposition party needs a Rovian Strategist that not only exists (many do, including yours truly), but strategists that the party leaders respect and defer to consistency. Let's hope that the Next Guy has this level of discipline.

So, Next Guy, let's start defining the new paradigm now. Paradigm? Yes, paradigm. No policies, no plans, no positions... not yet. If people don't see an alternate paradigm, they will continue to live in and support the current paradigm that "W" has graciously defined for us.

The new paradigm needs a name, which will emerge as we define it. For the time being, let's just call it "D10" (for those of you playing at home, that's Democrat + 2 + 0 + 0 + 8)

The D10 Paradigm

Beliefs:

We Believe America is the Best Place to Live, Grow, and Prosper
We Believe in Keeping America Beautiful
We Believe in Keeping America Free
We Believe in Fairness to our Fellow Man
We Believe in America's Leadership
We Believe Americans Deserve Safety and Security
We Believe in Americans Working Together

Can any American argue with these? Of course not. That's the point -- if your core beliefs are universally agreeable, then once you communicate these beliefs, you no longer will have explain your positions. They will explain themselves, because you're going to tie each position to a core belief.

However, you cannot simply tie a belief to a position. You need to generate a set of guiding principles that are based upon your beliefs. The next tip will take us from beliefs to principles. Stay tuned.