If I can, I am going to repeat the truth as often as the misinformation is repeated.
There was an item Winning 101 – – Brown worked the basics in the Worcester T & G.
I know this is starting to get repetitive, but here is my response to this one:
Well you are right about Scott Brown going back to the basics. That is exactly what Martha Coakley failed to do.
She assumed that people understood the reasons and the rationale for the stimulus spending and the health care plan. She assumed that she had to go negative on Scott Brown. I kept sending her emails to stop the negative and go back to basics, but she didn’t listen.
When the economy is nose-diving, no individual in his or her right mind would boost their spending and their investment on factory capacity when they need to horde their reserves in case of Armageddon.
The only entity that can take a countervailing stance against the decline is the federal government. It must invest its spending on useful projects that assume that this is not the end of the world. This requires deficit spending.
After the economy is righted and the private sector is functioning again, then the Federal government can start to run surpluses and pay off the debt it ran up during the recession.
This simple explanation would show that an immediate cut in federal spending would be a disaster. It would also show that our children will not be paying off this debt for generations.
Without even mentioning Scott Brown, she would have shown why two pillars of his campaign were disastrous mistakes.
Remember, that the Clinton administration was able to run surpluses with policies that the Republicans said could not work. It took the Republicans and George Bush to reverse the Clinton policies and show us what really wouldn’t work.
As a practical matter, there is no reason why the presumptive leader in a race has to run against the underdog. You just need to keep explaining what you want to do and why it will be good for everybody.
If you start running against the underdog, then the focus shifts to his message, away from your own. You have just given up on your greatest advantage. As long as you stick to what is right with your ideas, the underdog has to keep focusing on your message. This is really what Winning 101 is about.
Of course you have to adjust your explanations to make sure the electorate sees why an attack on your plans is wrong. However, you don’t even need to mention the other candidate. Just keep selling your ideas. Do not assume that everybody knows just because we have spent two years on these topics. Memories are extremely short. That is why we go back to the basics.