The Return of the Wimp Factor (Part III of Why Dems Lose Elections They Should Win)
The importance of the wimp factor is not necessarily thatevery Democratic candidate should come out on stage chewing red meat andgrowling loudly. It is instead mostevident in the way in which the candidates respond to challenges. It is the political equivalent of facing upto the bully on the playground. It ispartly my thesis that undecided voters will look to how the candidates respondto negative challenges during the course of the campaign. Often, it is less about the nature of thechallenge than it is how the candidate responds. At an instinctual andintuitive level, voters look to those episodes as a window into the characterof the candidate.
These examples should help to crystallize the concept.
Wimpy Moments in Democratic Campaign History
This may be a painful exercise, but I think it will beworthwhile to look back at some recent and memorable moments of wimpiness exhibited by Democraticpoliticians.
Without being cruel to what appears to have been a good man,poor Michael Dukakis will forever serve as the prime example of how to be awimp and lose an election.
This idiotic photo op was created to try toovercome his wimpy image in part created by the ridiculous flap over hisresponse to the hypothetical question about his wife being raped and whetherthe death penalty should be imposed. The tank incident was such a distillation ofhis campaign that it is a prime entry in his Wikipedia page.
This photograph is a graphic reminder that you cannotovercome the wimp factor by how you dress or by photo ops (but you can beportrayed as a wimp based on how you dress). The point is, the fundamental attitude and actions of the politician willdetermine whether he/she is viewed as a wimp.
After that election in 1988, in talking politics withfriends, I would label such episodes as a "Dukakis moment." Unfortunately, they have been more numerousthan they should.
Dukakis himself had several (hence the reference). The tank episode was simply the most amusing.He was subjected to many unfair and scurrilous attacks. The undisguised racist "WillieHorton" ads are but one example. The entire Bush senior campaign seemed tobe based on a steady challenge to Mr. Dukakis’ figurative manhood, perhaps inpart to defray the voters from looking at the “soft†persona of Bush senior,especially contrasted to Reagan’s.
Infamously, Dukakis was asked what he would do if his wifewere raped and should the death penalty be imposed on the perpetrator. Presumably, the question was designed tochallenge him over his beliefs that the death penalty is unfair and should notbe imposed.
He fumbled the answer. He gave a dispassionate and perhaps even overly thoughtful response, buthe appeared cold and inhuman doing it. No matter how one thinks he should haveresponded, it is undeniable that his response to that challenge revealed a"wimp factor" to the American public and he was blitzed in theelection.
John Kerry, to our lasting regret, also failed the wimptest. It is sad, even amazing, that a genuine war hero could be turned into a wimp (especially compared to a "deserter" opponent), butindeed that is how his handling of the “Swift Boat†attacks made him appear. Itis ironic also, because many primary voters had voted for Kerry because of thatwar record, under the belief that he could not be made into a wimp. As it turnsout, Howard Dean was probably the non-wimp in that race.
In a too typical Dem response to such tactics, Kerry tookthe “high road†and would not “dignify†the attacks with direct response. Thatwas the equivalent of walking away from the schoolyard bully. If he hadresponded with an angry and passionate rejection of the attacks, he would havemet the challenge and faced down the bully. He was actually being given a greatchance to revive his war record as part of his response and to remind voters ofhis own personal courage.
He also could have taken the opportunity to decry theimplication of the attacks that his fellow soldiers were “cowards†too. Thoseattacks were not just on him, but on every member of his crew. He should havebeen indignant and angry that his crew was impliedly included in the attacks onhim.
Another example, in years past, was the failed primarycandidacy of Edmund Muskie, a front-runner in the primary campaign. He was thesubject of some GOP dirty tricks, and in his response, he cried. End ofcandidacy.
In the next installment, I will look at how and why the Wimp Factormakes a difference in general elections.
Comments