Bob Casey needs to set the agenda. His primary campaign was based solely on his name recognition and his "bold" assertion that "I'm not Rick Santorum". No one is excited about Bob Casey -- half of Casey's support is only an anti-Santorum vote.
Worse for Casey, in most polls his favorables are no better than Santorum's!
How can that be?
This is the guy touted by Schumer and the DSCC because he scored so many votes in his three hundredth run for office in 2004, and Santorum is supposedly the most despised member of Congress. But Bobby Casey's favorables in Pennsylvania aren't any better than Santorum's?! In the latest Quinnipiac Poll, Casey's favorables were actually below Santorum's (Casey 25/Santorum27).
With Casey's favorables so low and with half of his support available to any box of rocks that runs against Santorum, the "sure thing" that the DSCC is counting on could quickly become ugly.
THAT'S why the frontrunner here needs to step up, take Santorum's challenge, and debate his butt ten times all over the state. Casey needs, first, to prove he can do it. There are people out there -- many of them -- like me, who don't think Casey has the intellectual wherewithal to stand toe-to-toe with Santorum. He needs to prove us wrong.
Casey needs to do it, second, to define himself. Isn't it pathetic, the guy has run for statewide office some five times in the last nine years, yet Pennsylvania voters say they don't know who he is and can only give him low approval ratings. To win this race he has got to be seen as more than "not Rick" to most people.
Third, he's got to do it to establish the argument. He keeps saying that Santorum is wrong because he voted with the President 98% of the time. This is bad strategy for a few reasons.
Bush isn't on the ticket. He is running against Santorum, who has served two terms as US Senator in Pennsylvania. Does he think that Pennsylvania voters expected Santorum NOT to support the President?
It is an easy charge to make when Bush's numbers are low, but Bush is leaving in two years (at the most) -- Pennsylvanians are choosing someone who is going to be around through the NEXT President.
Casey has got to make the argument that Santorum needs to be fired because his policies are bankrupting this Country -- because the Republican ideology hurts the middle class and ignores the lower class. He needs to argue that the Republican policies are strengthening corporate America at the expense of the worker. He needs to show Pennsylvania how Democratic ideals are at the heart of every success that this Country has had, socially, economically, and in foreign affairs. He needs to develop a positive message on how he intends to bring specific ideology to play to strengthen the middle class and to strengthen America's standing in the world. He needs to convince voters that, regardless whether Bush is there, having Santorum in office will continue to hurt us.
Casey needs to frame the argument in those terms, so that the voters will, by election day, go to the polls WANTING Casey -- not just looking to dump Santorum.
He can do that by accepting the call for many debates across the Commonwealth -- in all those places he avoided during the Primary, and more.
If he does that, and if he succeeds, he will also help other Democrats -- like Pat Murphy, Chris Carney, and Joe Sestak, who are all in tough but winnable races to replace Republican House members. He'll do that by promoting the Democratic ideology for its own value -- not simply because it "isn't Republican".
As every salesman in the world knows, the strongest selling point of any product is its inherent quality. Casey needs to sell Pennsylvania on the inherent quality of the Democratic product. If he continues to run against Bush, he is telling the voters that you want us only because we aren't them. THAT campaign builds no brand loyalty. (It may very well explain why, despite running for statewide office every other year for the last decade, Casey only has a 25% approval rating and 46% who say that they don't know enough about him yet!)
AND, it ignores the unthinkable -- that Bush recaptures enough momentum by November to negate the entire campaign. It is unlikely and remote -- but, considering the extent of the harm if it should occur, a strategy based on the assumption that it will not happen is, bluntly, stupid.
Worse for Casey, in most polls his favorables are no better than Santorum's!
How can that be?
This is the guy touted by Schumer and the DSCC because he scored so many votes in his three hundredth run for office in 2004, and Santorum is supposedly the most despised member of Congress. But Bobby Casey's favorables in Pennsylvania aren't any better than Santorum's?! In the latest Quinnipiac Poll, Casey's favorables were actually below Santorum's (Casey 25/Santorum27).
With Casey's favorables so low and with half of his support available to any box of rocks that runs against Santorum, the "sure thing" that the DSCC is counting on could quickly become ugly.
THAT'S why the frontrunner here needs to step up, take Santorum's challenge, and debate his butt ten times all over the state. Casey needs, first, to prove he can do it. There are people out there -- many of them -- like me, who don't think Casey has the intellectual wherewithal to stand toe-to-toe with Santorum. He needs to prove us wrong.
Casey needs to do it, second, to define himself. Isn't it pathetic, the guy has run for statewide office some five times in the last nine years, yet Pennsylvania voters say they don't know who he is and can only give him low approval ratings. To win this race he has got to be seen as more than "not Rick" to most people.
Third, he's got to do it to establish the argument. He keeps saying that Santorum is wrong because he voted with the President 98% of the time. This is bad strategy for a few reasons.
Bush isn't on the ticket. He is running against Santorum, who has served two terms as US Senator in Pennsylvania. Does he think that Pennsylvania voters expected Santorum NOT to support the President?
It is an easy charge to make when Bush's numbers are low, but Bush is leaving in two years (at the most) -- Pennsylvanians are choosing someone who is going to be around through the NEXT President.
Casey has got to make the argument that Santorum needs to be fired because his policies are bankrupting this Country -- because the Republican ideology hurts the middle class and ignores the lower class. He needs to argue that the Republican policies are strengthening corporate America at the expense of the worker. He needs to show Pennsylvania how Democratic ideals are at the heart of every success that this Country has had, socially, economically, and in foreign affairs. He needs to develop a positive message on how he intends to bring specific ideology to play to strengthen the middle class and to strengthen America's standing in the world. He needs to convince voters that, regardless whether Bush is there, having Santorum in office will continue to hurt us.
Casey needs to frame the argument in those terms, so that the voters will, by election day, go to the polls WANTING Casey -- not just looking to dump Santorum.
He can do that by accepting the call for many debates across the Commonwealth -- in all those places he avoided during the Primary, and more.
If he does that, and if he succeeds, he will also help other Democrats -- like Pat Murphy, Chris Carney, and Joe Sestak, who are all in tough but winnable races to replace Republican House members. He'll do that by promoting the Democratic ideology for its own value -- not simply because it "isn't Republican".
As every salesman in the world knows, the strongest selling point of any product is its inherent quality. Casey needs to sell Pennsylvania on the inherent quality of the Democratic product. If he continues to run against Bush, he is telling the voters that you want us only because we aren't them. THAT campaign builds no brand loyalty. (It may very well explain why, despite running for statewide office every other year for the last decade, Casey only has a 25% approval rating and 46% who say that they don't know enough about him yet!)
AND, it ignores the unthinkable -- that Bush recaptures enough momentum by November to negate the entire campaign. It is unlikely and remote -- but, considering the extent of the harm if it should occur, a strategy based on the assumption that it will not happen is, bluntly, stupid.
No comments:
Post a Comment