About a week and a half ago, our esteemed commenter FrankSkeffington wrote an exhortation to respond in kind to the onslaught of negativity from the Healey campaign. FS called it the “Kitchen Sink Strategy”:
… [L]ets throw everything we have at Kerry Healey and drive her already pathetic favorable/unfavorables into the septic tank. She will tear Deval apart and we’ll rear her apart. Her negatives are a lot higher than ours and Deval has a softer cushion with his high favorables.
And essentially, I agreed. But I admit Jon Keller’s commentaries did indeed give me pause: Why would you give up the “silky smooth”, hopeful rhetoric that had gotten Patrick this far? Why ditch the strategy of the previous 18 months?
Well, the last couple of weeks are reminding me never to doubt my instincts, and never to doubt some guy (or girl) on the internet who goes by the handle FrankSkeffington. Keller doesn’t get it, and his howls of derision are becoming more and more incoherent: So what is it, Jon — should Patrick not strike back? Should he not attack the Romney/Healey record with the same vigor and intensity that Healey attacks Patrick? Does it not matter enough?
Keller is ignoring some critical lessons of history: The vigor of one’s response to an attack is a critical test of 1. persuasive power, 2. the seriousness with which one takes the campaign, and 3. whether one has a backbone of softwood or steel. This is something that Democrats have learned, ruefully and thoroughly, from countless lost elections that should have been won, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. And indeed, anyone who believes in fair play and good faith collaboration must be prepared to effectively deal with those whom do not. For all of his sophistication and long experience, Keller seems to sound more like a Kool-Aid drinking Deval groupie than anyone here, swooning over the “silky smooth” oration — but ignoring the dangers of non-response to the Healey onslaught.
Former Patrick aide Dan Payne had a great summation of the standard, weak Democratic response:
In campaigns I know, for Kerry and Mike Dukakis, there’s a pattern to how Democrats react when attacked. It’s 12-step process: 1) I can’t believe (opponent) is doing this. 2) I won’t dignify it with response. 3) People won’t believe it. 4) Press won’t let them get away with it. 5) Press is letting them get away with it. 6) People are believing it. 7) I didn’t do anything wrong. 8) If it looks like I did something wrong, it’s because other side is distorting facts. 9) Let’s not panic until we see poll. 10) Don’t let anyone see these poll results. 11) If they’re going to cheat like this, find something on them. 12) Let’s attack them. Note: Republicans skip first 11 steps.[my emphasis]
Furthermore, for the Patrick campaign, “the kitchen sink” approach is nothing other than the real record of real elected officials, nothing more and nothing less. As for health care, public safety, the Big Dig, the economy, education, energy — should these not be discussed with the same vigor and intensity as the most lurid negative ad? When a candidate responds to the real issues with less intensity and emotion than his opponent expresses for phony ones, the public gets the message that maybe the real issues don’t matter that much to the candidate. And when the candidate doesn’t fight back to personal attacks, it seems like he can be bullied. Plainly, neither of these describe Patrick:
The Big Dig is billions over budget but it took a human tragedy before paying the administration paid attention. Now we learn the administration is under federal scrutinity for misleading the public. If i had her record on the big dig, I’d change the subject, too.
Let’s talk about leadership experience. In government and business I have managed thousands of people, across multiple continents. Kerry Healey has not. . . If i had kerry’s record on leadership i’d change the subject, too.
Let’s talk about crime. Let’s talk about crime honestly. I’m the only one in this race who has sent anyone to prison. I’m not a criminologist. I’ve represented victims. My family have been victims. I don’t need to be lectured by anybody.
Keller needs to stop fanning himself in shock, SHOCK! that it ever came to this. The “kitchen sink” is just the real record of the last four years. It matters. We act that way here, and so does our candidate. The future of the Commonwealth is worth a fight, and we never expected anything different.
any commentary from Keller on the rally today. But I really hope he was there. The guy who gave the speech today — that’s the guy we’ve been backing for months.
It WAS a great speech — but the next step is to take each item listed and translate them into a series of fair — but TOUGH ads discussing the Truth About Healey.
<
p>
For example, let’s take Deval’s point about the Big Dig. Pull together in an ad a picture of the Inspector General’s report concerning the dual responsibility of the Mass Highway Department and the Turnpike Authority to inspect the tunnels and a clip of Healey saying that the information was kept from the administration. Somewhere put up the Herald’s headlilne about the SEC investigation concerning investor fraud and ask the simple question from Watergate: What Did She Know and When Did She Know It?
<
p>
Similarly, let’s have an ad showing Healey’s votes concerning not letting non-profit agencies know whether they were about to hire sex offenders. Include the names of other boards to which she was appointed and what percentage of meetings she missed.
<
p>
Let’s also have an ad about the affordable housing panel to which Romney appointed her. Point out the number of persons who have moved outside of Massachusetts in the same period and ask just what has this panel done over the past four years.
<
p>
You get the picture. There’s plenty of material to show why Healey is running away from her record. Let’s use it.
If we jump in to a mudfest, then the people we gained through our positive, negative free campaign will check back out. Keller is right on this.
I think it’s possible that Healy wants a mudfight. Our biggest advantage is positivity. Maybe she wants to negate that very advantage.
The Patrick-Murray campaign won’t deviate from their message of positivity and hope. The second they do that, the Healey campaign has more fodder to attack them and the base gets shaken.
<
p>
What I would like to see is a better response to numbers 4 and 5 above… the press printing the Healey attack dogs’ messages.
<
p>
Why is it that I have been reading Tim O’Brien‘s name about 6 times in every Boston Globe story on the campaign in the past three weeks?
<
p>
I want to see Deval’s communications team have someone in 24-hour contact with the Globe, with the Telegram & Gazette, with the Herald, the Cape Cod Times, the Lowell Sun, the Patriot-Ledger, etc. etc. I want to see an even amount of quotes from the Deval team as the Healey team.
<
p>
I don’t blame the Globe for printing the attacks. I do see an opportunity for us to improve our rapid response, however.
<
p>
For the next 23 days, can the Patrick-Murray Communications team send out rapid response talking points to town co-ordinators, precinct captains, and those on the media team email list?
<
p>
Time to flex the full muscle of the machine that has been built.
You should send your suggestion to the campaign directly.
I sent a letter to the editor of the Globe and their reporter, Levenson, complaining about he-said, she-said reporting and passing along all of these ridiculous O’Brien quotes uncritically and without any attempt to verify them. It’s totally ridiculous.
The last few days of the campaign have had the perfect tone. Deval and Company know what they are doing. I am looking for how this gets translated into TV spots. I am sooo longing forward to this week’s debate.
<
p>
By the way…with her excellent spot on behalf of Deval Marth Coakley deserves everyone’s support here as well. I am proud to have both their lawn signs side-by-side.
and a good point. I think that this thing is going to come down to GOTV. Healey will not stop, she’ll spend every frickin’ penny on morphing Deval into a criminal, she’s got nothing else to go on.
<
p>
In the end, it’ll depress voter trunout. Deval has not had a problem with unifiying his party this year. And he’s got the grassroots to call on to get the voters to the polls. So let’s do this for our guy. He’s the best I’ve ever seen, it’ll be a privilege to exhaust myself senseless for this campaign.
<
p>
See you out there.
He was in a filthy mood and I got it all on tape. Don’t worry about the tone, guys. Deval has the rare gift that he can rip his opponent to shreds but still has enough substance and credibility to give the audience the impression of an overall upbeat and positive message. He’s a pro, he’s got finesse, class and he knows what he’s doing. Trust.
<
p>
There was no “check back in” rhetoric today at the Common. Today it was rally the troops and take it to Healey’s door.
<
p>
What’s the deal on the debate Thursday night? Is it going to be broadcast anywhere other than WBUR?
<
p>
I saw The Duke and Kitty at the rally today. They attended just like all the rest of us. In the crowd holding a sign. They looked so sweet, she held his hand while they made their way out, pausing for photos and handshakes.
Deval Patrick is choosing the right way.
<
p>
Kitchen Sink would mean just throwing everything at Healey–the equivalent of what Healey’s strategy has been all along.
<
p>
By eschewing that path Patrick has kept the option of responding on his terms. Which he has now done–and how!
<
p>
Consequently the entire campaign reenforces his basic narrative–that he is running on hope against cynicism. More than that, now Healey’s entire campaign reenforces that exact frame.
<
p>
Keller’s response is incoherent precisely because he treats all possible responses to Healey’s gutter campaign as equivalent if not identical.
<
p>
He is right that Patrick’s fundamental strategy precludes the kind of negative campaigning that is Healey’s centerpiece. But he’s dead wrong that Patrick can’t fight back ethically without doing violence to his image, his base, or his system of power.
<
p>
I add that by letting Healey cast the first stones (to a point that had many of us looking on in horror), Patrick has both demonstrated generosity of character and give her plenty of rope. He can now be very tough as long as he is also fair; meanwhile Healey is self-inflicted-damaged goods.
Criticizing your opponent’s positions on the issues and criticizing them on their past record of governing is campaigning. Attacking a person personally and misleadingly, as the Healey campaign has done in the past few weeks, is campaigning in the gutter. It is the gutter campaigning that has so many people angry. It is the gutter campaigning that turns people off and stops them from taking part in the democratic process. It is the gutter campaigning that we all should be concerned about and be against, including Mr. Keller. It is the gutter campaigning that Deval Patrick will not be engaging in, as he showed yesterday at the rally on the Commons.
I think I understand the problem you have. It’s one we all face on a daily basis. If you rely on the papers and watch MSM long enough, you lose sight of what is and isn’t real. Deceptive ads, lies, distortions, innaccuracies and just plain shoddy reporting might lead one to believe that Deval is something other than what he represents. Turn off the tube, throw the papers in the recycle bin and go do some GOTV. Listen carefully to Deval’s speech. Watch the faces of the people in the crowd because Deval was standing there speaking for them after listening to them for the last year and a half. That’s who he is, and that’s who he has been since day one.
…Deval threw everything at Kerry Healey, except the kitchen sink. No wonder Kerry Healey wants to change the subject.
<
p>
Except for a few flashes of rhetoric in the debates, Deval had been way to low key in telling the voters why they should fire the incumbent (which she basically is). After the LaGuer/Killer cop stuff, it was clear the Patrick camp needed to get much more aggressive against the record and lack of accomplishments of Kerry Healey. The Patrick campaign has and need to continue on this track.
<
p>
Admittedly my original post may have been a little on the aggressive side, about tearing Healey down. But given how slow Democrats react to attacks, sometimes a jolt of high intensity is needed. (And his family had not yet been dragged into it.)
<
p>
In my mind, the folks who still advocate a “positive” campaign either did not hear or did not like yesterday’s speech. Yes, Deval said he’d remain positive and the overall tone was. But he threw some elbows and showed his supporters and swing voters that he can fight. And we do want a fighter as Governor. How the hell is he going to govern and not be a puppet to the Legislature if he is not a fighter?
<
p>
So in terms of “going negative” we don’t need to run ads about Sean Healey’s tax break–we need (as others above wrote) tough ads that amplify some of points Deval talked about yesterday with regards to Kerry Healeys record.
<
p>
If so, voters will be going into the ballot box saying, “No wonder Kerry Healey wants to change the subject.”
I don’t want to see Patrick’s campaign going “negative” but I don’t see calling out Healey’s failings as LtGov “negative”, per se.
<
p>
The difference between negative and positive is not what you say about your opponent, it is what you say about yourself.
<
p>
An ad that goes on an on about what your opponent has done wrong, that’s negative. Note that Healey’s ads don’t even mention Healey, they only focus on Deval and why he’s bad. That’s negative.
<
p>
An ad that says “here’s what my opponent has done wrong, AND here is what I would do that is better”, that’s positive.
<
p>
Patrick’s speech was positive not because it failed to discuss Healey’s bad points — it nailed her right on. It was positive because those nails were only supporting background for the main point which is: you should vote for deval because he’s a leader who can bring change.
Frank, you mention Mr. Murph. He’s the pawn that the Healey camp no doubt fears most because he isn’t an in-law, he isn’t a cousin, he isn’t an unrelated criminal defendant; he’s her husband. If Deval’s internal polls begin to show it closer than they are comfortable with, you betcha you’ll begin to see his name thrown around. Anecdotally, I have heard some horrible, awful things about him as a person and a businessman. Making those public would bring Deval’s camp to the level Healey’s reached with the Sigh story. Not saying it shouldn’t happen, and not saying it won’t; just saying that’s what would happen. “What does it say about your character, Kerry, that you would sleep in the same bed as a man who…”
<
p>
There’s no doubt that Deval’s research team has this in their arsenal and are itching to get it out (they’re the people who love this stuff, after all, since they get paid to find it).
<
p>
We’ll see what happens…
In case you aren’t paying attention… perhaps you are still cowering under the bedsheets… the press for Deval has been uniformly positive and the rally appears to have been a huge success.
<
p>
Look, Deval Patrick isn’t the fighter you are used to: he’s not Mike Tyson who takes a whole heap o pain and just keeps coming. That’s the GOP paradigm: hit your opponent hard, take the pain and make sure that you are the one left standing… That’s not the only way to fight.
<
p>
No. If you’ve ever seen the younger Muhammed Ali fight it’s like that… floating like a butterfly, stinging like a bee. Never ever letting the other guy know that their tactics, all the while schooling them. Kerry Healey has some lessons coming to her… Deval Patrick is giving talking lessons, walking lessons and, pretty soon, he’s going to give her some fallin down lessons.
<
p>
Deval has successfully, adroitly, turned the momentum to his advantage. With Bill Clinton in town today, that momentum only picks up. The only thing to do is to wait for it… and not let Healey get to you. He has shrugged off the mud and it has splattered back at Healey.
<
p>
In case you need it spelled out for you: The Deval Patrick campaign is winning. They show the greatest leadership potential in not panicking and calmly meeting every crisis… That’s pure gold. That’s what you want in a leader.
<
p>
The absolute worst thing to do is to panic and to give your opponent the least hint that they have ANY effect.
But I’m not sure to whom you’re saying it. Also, it would be useful to define “panic.”
<
p>
I’m addressing it to the person who wrote the following:
<
p>
“For all of his sophistication and long experience, Keller seems to sound more like a Kool-Aid drinking Deval groupie than anyone here, swooning over the “silky smooth” oration — but ignoring the dangers of non-response to the Healey onslaught.“
<
p>
Panic is a pretty common word. I didn’t think I’d have to define it here or anywhere.
<
p>
But since you asked, in this context I would define ‘panic’ as unthinking reaction characterized by a obvious misperceptions and with a flailing and adrenalized compulsion to retaliate: anybody who mistakes Devals position as weak, his actions as ‘non-response’ and who counsels ‘the kitchen sink’ approach (meaning, I take it, to viciously slug it out toe to toe until only one person is left standing) is, IMHO, panicking.
between the kitchen sink and the garbage disposal.
<
p>
I did notice one differece at the rally. The ralling calls were for the word “No” not the “Yes” or “Yes We Can” I have seen in the past. That it seems is a subtle and appropiate change of direction.
<
p>