The Dems' Foley playbook

By

The Hotline Blog carries an interesting description of the playbook Democrats seem to be using on the Foley affair. No actual sources are names, but party committes are referred to, so I assume that some concrete evidence beyond inference from actions is involved. Here are the basic elements, but the entire post should be read. 

 1. Pay no heed to the distinction between the e—mails and IMs.

 2. Enlarge the wedge between House leaders.

 3. Be aggressive about how Dems will —— and are —— protecting children.

 4. Choose unimpeachable spokespeople to be their public face.

 5. Deride the Republicans for incompetence.

 6. Bring up Terri Schiavo's case and compare the heated GOP attention back then to their allegedly lax attention to the welfare of their pages.

 7. Compare what the GOP leadership says about Foley with what Republicans said about Jack Abramoff

 8. Use the Foley cash. Already, the DSCC wonders why George Allen didn't immediately return the Foley

And here's what the post says the Dems hope to accomplish:

1. Republicans will flinch before they try and use "values" as a cudgel. Can this NRCC ad against Brad Ellsworth be run in this environment?

2. Democrats now have a new way to respond to the Republicans when they go negative: "They're just trying to distract you from the scandal."

3. GOP candidates will be thrown on the defensive, generally.

4. Link House candidates —— and not just Reynolds —— to the sense that that the GOP was hesitant to investigate or even poke around into Foley's life because they didn't want to jeopardize their majority.

This is utterly cynical of course. We are discussing electoral politics after all. It may work, but the scandal may not sustain continuous srcrutiny. See point 1 at the top.

Hat tip: Clarice Feldman

Thomas Lifson  9 03 06

The Hotline Blog carries an interesting description of the playbook Democrats seem to be using on the Foley affair. No actual sources are names, but party committes are referred to, so I assume that some concrete evidence beyond inference from actions is involved. Here are the basic elements, but the entire post should be read. 

 1. Pay no heed to the distinction between the e—mails and IMs.

 2. Enlarge the wedge between House leaders.

 3. Be aggressive about how Dems will —— and are —— protecting children.

 4. Choose unimpeachable spokespeople to be their public face.

 5. Deride the Republicans for incompetence.

 6. Bring up Terri Schiavo's case and compare the heated GOP attention back then to their allegedly lax attention to the welfare of their pages.

 7. Compare what the GOP leadership says about Foley with what Republicans said about Jack Abramoff

 8. Use the Foley cash. Already, the DSCC wonders why George Allen didn't immediately return the Foley

And here's what the post says the Dems hope to accomplish:

1. Republicans will flinch before they try and use "values" as a cudgel. Can this NRCC ad against Brad Ellsworth be run in this environment?

2. Democrats now have a new way to respond to the Republicans when they go negative: "They're just trying to distract you from the scandal."

3. GOP candidates will be thrown on the defensive, generally.

4. Link House candidates —— and not just Reynolds —— to the sense that that the GOP was hesitant to investigate or even poke around into Foley's life because they didn't want to jeopardize their majority.

This is utterly cynical of course. We are discussing electoral politics after all. It may work, but the scandal may not sustain continuous srcrutiny. See point 1 at the top.

Hat tip: Clarice Feldman

Thomas Lifson  9 03 06