SwiftVets.com

[Guest]

Longtime Democratic insider Tony Coelho lashed out at the John Kerry
presidential campaign, characterizing it as a campaign in chaos. With yet
another appointment of a former Clinton administration staffer to Kerry's
team on Tuesday, Coelho argues the problem is worsening.
"There is nobody in charge and you have these two teams that are generally
not talking to each other," says Coehlo, who ran Al Gore's campaign early in
the 2000 presidential race. As Coelho and other detractors see it, there is
a civil war within the Kerry campaign.
Sen. Ted Kennedy's former staff members, Mary Beth Cahill, the Kerry
campaign manager, and veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum are at odds
with recent additions who served under President Clinton.
"Here are two groups that have never gotten along and have fought, and it is
a lot over money," says Coehlo. "Because in the Democratic Party the
consultants get paid for the creation and the placement of [advertising].
Republicans only pay you for the creation."

Coelho, a former congressman who served as House majority whip for the
Democrats from 1987 to 1989, does not question any of the Kerry staff's
sincerity in wanting to unseat President Bush. But his comments highlight a
longstanding battle within the Democratic Party for national campaign
control.

"In 1988, Dukakis: Shrum is involved. In 1992, Clinton: nothing to do with
Shrum. They don't want Shrum in any way," Coelho says. "In 1996, they do not
want Shrum in any way. In 2000, Gore doesn't want Clinton people. We go
forward, 2004, all of a sudden it's the Shrum/Kennedy people."

And Coelho adds that the Kerry campaign staffers "are in serious trouble
now, so they want to bring in the Clinton people."

The Democratic scuttlebutt has long been filled with concern over Shrum's
losing streak. He remains 0 for 7 in presidential elections, from George
McGovern to Michael Dukakis to Al Gore. When Coelho resigned as chairman of
the Gore campaign, Shrum, in large part, took the reins.

The Kerry campaign insists this is not the case; it says Mary Beth Cahill is
still in charge. But last week, the appointment of strategist John Sasso as
a senior adviser began to belie such claims.

Calls and e-mails to Cahill and the Kerry campaign were not immediately
returned.

"What I'm looking for is a Karl Rove and I don't know where our Karl Rove
is." Coelho says. "I think Sasso is a Karl Rove. I'm very high on Sasso
because I don't think he plays Machiavellian games. I think he very
sincerely wants to win. I think he is very big on Kerry. And I think he's
tough enough to say, 'Goddammit, come together.'"

Sources inside the Kerry campaign say the Democratic nominee was fuming that
his advisers told him to ignore charges by the Swift Boat Veterans for
Truth. The group claimed Kerry lied about his war record and betrayed fellow
veterans by testifying to Congress about alleged atrocities committed by
U.S. soldiers.

The Kerry campaign was slow in countering the Swift Boat charges, the
allegations persisted and Kerry's bad August ensued.

Kerry led most polls leading into August. By the second week of September,
President Bush had come back and now has a four-to-seven point lead over
Kerry, depending on the poll.

"Our problem here is a national message," Coelho says. "What is it that we
[Democrats] are? If you go to Kerry, that's a disaster because the candidate
should not be involved in solving disputes or the creation of his message.

"You need a [campaign] boss, somebody who says 'Shut up, we are going to
work this out.' Not someone who can go around to Kerry, and that's Shrummy's
forte," Coelho continues, speaking of Shrum. The Kerry campaign has over the
past week refuted speculation that either Shrum or Sasso are running the
campaign.

But in a sign of how seriously the Kerry campaign is taking its dive in the
polls, a trio of ex-Clinton staffers has come aboard recently, including
former Clinton press secretary Mike McCurry who signed up on Tuesday. He
joins Joe Lockhart, another onetime Clinton press secretary, and Joel
Johnson, the former president's legislative strategist.

The call for the Clintonistas, in McCurry's view, illustrates that Democrats
are circling the wagons.

"Democrats are sort of coming out of places where normally they might sit on
the sidelines," McCurry says, "because there is a strong sense that we
really need to get in there and try to help, because it is an important
election."
McCurry emphasizes that he is not in charge. "I'm not pretending that I'm
taking any major strategic role," he continues. "I think they've got too
many gurus in that campaign. I'm going to be a road guy and help out and
make sure Kerry's as good as he can be."
McCurry defends the Kerry camp and says he doesn't think they got off
message in August. "I think Bush got on message," he says.

"I think [Mr. Bush] had a much better August than he had had prior," McCurry
adds. "So I think part of this is a reaction to the fact that [the Bush
campaign] sharpened up their operation and had a good convention on their
side. We just have got to do our bit, on our side."

McCurry's addition followed a call this past weekend from campaign manager
Mary Beth Cahill.
"I said I would think about it," McCurry says. "And then when I talked to
Lockhart and said, 'What's your assessment of what you really need?' it was
pretty clear that he could use the help. And he's a guy that has been there
for me so I wanted to help him."
McCurry was quick to speak of himself as a deputy, not the sheriff. Though
Coelho questions Cahill's ability to run the campaign, he does not question
her managerial ability.
"She's basically a C.O.O, and a very good one. I think she's a very
effective administrator," Coelho continues. "What McCurry represents is
further chaos because McCurry's not in charge. If they were telling me that
McCurry's in charge, then I'd feel better. I'm not sure he's the right guy,
but I'd feel better."

Of Shrum's role as adviser, Coelho says "I'm not anti-Shrummy here. What I'm
saying is that you need to have someone in charge and I think Sasso's
capable of it."

"If [Sasso] is in charge then Goddammit, say it and stop having the
speculation of who's in charge because that's worse," Coelho says. "It also
starts to impact in regard to the whole image of leadership. If someone
can't control a message in a presidential campaign, how are you going to be
a good president?"

By David Paul Kuhn
©MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Admin note: Please include a link to a legitimate source when reproducing non-original content in this forum. Thanks

[Knighthawk]

Oooooooooohhhhhhhh............Sounds like trouble in paradise
_________________
Regards,
Brian

Beware of the lollipop of mediocrity! Lick it once and you'll suck forever.

If guns kill people, then I can blame misspelled words on my pencil.

Knighthawk's Pictures!

[neverforget]

Except Harris poll of likely voters now has Kerry leading 48-47.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB109526872487418642,00.html?mod=todays%5Ffree%5Ffeature

I'm bothered that Kerry could now be in the lead.
_________________
US Army Security Agency
1965-1971

[RobD]

One poll means nothing, if all the polls start to trind toward Kerry then there is a problem. All polls are weighted differently by each polling company as they guess how many Dem and Repups are out there. If the same 1000 people are polled by 5 different polling institutions you will get 5 different results. Therefore polls are only good for seeing trends and right know it seems the trend is eather towards Bush or holding steady with Bush up in almost all of them.
_________________
6 Year Navy

[GiveMeFreedom]

Trust Gallup, more that these "no name" pollsters:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm

Here for the state-by-state showdown:
http://www.gallup.com/election2004/showdown/
_________________
-------------------
GiveMeFreedom
http://www.anysoldier.com
http://www.operationac.com
Support our Soldiers!!

[neverforget]

Thanks. I also know www.tradesports and Iowa Futures show Kerry going in the tank, and those people are betting with their money.
_________________
US Army Security Agency
1965-1971

[Polaris]

Harris is a bad poll. First it uses an interactive method which means the respondants are self-selecting. That makes the poll garbag right there. In the second place, both in trends and numbers the Harris poll has been consistantly off.

Don't believe it.
_________________
-Polaris

Truth is Beauty

[Steve Z]

There's always a danger in believing the results of just one poll--who knows how it might have been manipulated? A few months ago, there was a flap over an L.A. Times poll that had Kerry leading by 7 points, but the poll internals showed that Bush had a higher percentage of Democrats than Kerry had of Republicans, and Bush led among Independents. It turned out that their sample had 10% more Democrats than Republicans, whereas the overall electorate has about equal numbers from each party.

Although it's easier to run a poll by calling random phone numbers nation-wide, the Presidential election is a game of winning states. Right now, Kerry is in big trouble in state polls: Bush is leading in every state he won in 2000 except NH, and in a few states Gore won in 2000. Bush has a big lead in OH, once considered vulnerable--several polls show Bush leading WI and PA, which Gore won in 2000, and one poll showed Bush even leading in NJ. Florida is a question mark with all the hurricanes, but SBVT can make a difference there with all the military bases in FL.

It seems like the CBS memo forgery is hurting Kerry, because people are probably getting the idea (without it being proven yet) that a Kerry supporter planted the false CBS story, and voters don't like liars. It smacks of "dirty tricks" like Watergate.

I believe that the SBVT attacks on Kerry's Vietnam record and his anti-war activities indirectly incited the Kerry campaign to retaliate by trying to attack Bush's National Guard record, and since this had already been an issue in Bush's two campaigns for Governor in Texas in 1994 and 1998, and in the Presidential campaign of 2000, this was old news to the voters, who didn't really care. In their zeal to find some "new" revelation, someone played a clumsy hoax, which has backfired on them.

Now Kerry is both struggling to defend his Vietnam record and being implicated in a fraudulent attack against the President, while Bush is campaigning on other issues and not talking about Vietnam. If Kerry starts to make a comeback, the SBVT could start running ads about Kerry's betrayal of the troops or meeting with the enemy, shortly before the election.

Kerry is in trouble...it will soon be time to finish the job.
_________________
The traitor will crater!

[mr_mechanical]

Harris is about as credible as Dan Rather.