Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Blagojevich campaign's anti-Topinka commercials work but could use some more numbers to work better

I like the Blagojevich campaign's current 15-second commercials about the gubernatorial campaign. They are substantive, punchy and not anything like the way-over-the-top, unfair attack ads that the Oberweis campaign ran against Topinka.

The Oberweis campaign just ran commercials with Topinka polkaing (polka-ing?) with George Ryan and then just lied by saying "Topinka ordered staff to work on political campaigns" -- an unwarranted lie without any real attribution that ought to be illegal. Why didn't Oberweis get more flak for those?

On the other hand, Blagojevich's commercials are substantive, fair, issue-oriented but aggressive. There are two of them.

The first is about Topinka's opposition to an assault weapons ban, one of the gun control advocates main goals and a fiercely fought legislative battle every year (with the exception of this year, where a 'gun truce' has been imposed by the legislative leaders to avoid the bloody trench warfare of gun bills on third reading). Treasurer Topinka argued that the definition of an assault weapon is nebulous enough to potentially include a rolling pin, and the commercial makes her look a little silly. Playing off one of her primary campaign themes of "Thinka Topinka", the commercial's tag line is "What's she thinking?"

The Blagojevich campaign has laid out these commercials on a separate website at www.TopinkaWatch.com which is a nicely transparent method of being accountable for a 'negative' ad campaign.

I think that's a very strong commercial and message.
The other commercial isn't so strong, and it's taken me a while to figure out why I think it doesn't resonate as well.

The second commercial is about Topinka's support for the "Bush tax cuts" that lowered the marginal federal income tax rates and the capital gains tax rate. The most important tax cut in terms of lost revenue to the federal government (helping to create that $400 billion annual deficit, which gives China more power over us every year since we can't pay our own bills) is the tax cut on the highest incomes. Until 2001, the tax on income above $300,000 was 39.6% and because there are ever-more very high incomes, that generates a ton of money. After Bush took over and the GOP Congress secured control, the top tax rate was cut to 35%. That's the biggest deal of the Bush tax cuts and the dumbest cut, because anyone earning more than $300,000 can afford to pay the roughly 40% while the rest of us can't afford the higher cost of everything else when the government is broke (less student aid for college, less renewable energy, less support to state and local governments, etc.).

That message isn't easy to convey. The commercial calls it the 'millionaire's tax cut' because, in combination with the repeal of the estate tax and the cut on capital gains, the people who make more than a million dollars get tens of thousands off their federal tax bills. It's a stupid policy that panders to the base of the GOP (rich people and those who think they will be) and should be reversed. But it's tough to communicate in 15 seconds the reality of the federal Republican economic policy of forcing regular, working people to pay more money while enriching the wealthy.

The commercial also lays out a great wedge issue: the minimum wage. This is a great issue for Democrats and a horrible one for Republicans, because most people know it's absurd to expect someone to make a living on $6.50 an hour (Illinois' minimum wage). Very few Republicans support raising the minimum wage, while very few Democrats oppose it. Topinka called the latest proposal "a giveaway plan" and the Democrats have proposed raising the wage to $7.50. (Some Republicans rightfully question why we don't just raise the minimum wage to $7.50 before the end of the 2006 legislative session, but hey, it's good to have an issue....)

Why doesn't the message about Bush's millionaire tax cut resonate as much as the minimum wage or the assault weapons ban? I think the answer lays in how Republicans talk about taxes.

I saw on C-Span some Republican candidate talk about an uber-consultant's (I think it was Grover Norquist or perhaps Karl Rove) axiom on taxes: never mention a number. Republicans talk about cutting taxes generally. They don't talk about which taxes they want to cut and how much money people will make based on their actual income levels. If they did that, it would be very clear that the wealthy get the money while the rest of us get Chinese-financed debt and diminished public services.

That suggests that Democrats should always talk about numbers when we talk about taxes. Blagojevich (and every other Democrat) should always talk about the Bush tax cuts for income above $300,000 (to the extent it helps to remind Illinois voters about federal policy that Topinka presumably still supports).

And a coda: it also means that progressives who want to stop cutting higher education and stop condemning kids in poor suburbs and rural towns to crappy schools that shut down at 2 in the afternoon and extend the school year to 200 days need to talk about a 5% state income tax to fund this investment, instead of our current 3% income tax. Now that we know Blagojevich is against a 5% income tax, and that we'll need a veto-proof majority in the General Assembly to pass a 5% income tax, we need to clearly and consistently make the case for a 5% income tax (and not just a vague idea of 'raising state taxes'). Let's talk about numbers!

[I'm pulling a Fritchey and directing all comments to my blog at www.djwinfo.blogspot.com so I don't have to check them both.....]

11 comments:

Bill Baar 6:15 AM  

I can't imagine min wage being a wedge issue.

Especially in the burbs where I think this election will be won or loss.

I think Ira Silverstin got it right when he said this election in the hands of Fed investigators and the only real issue education and tax swaps.

JBT should be looking at what Romney is saying on educatin. He makes sense.

Anonymous,  6:48 AM  

Ah I love how you Democrats ramble on because your guy is behind.The voters do not want your guy to be governor after 4 years of lying and inept management.Free give aways and negitive ads and he has slipped to 6 points that should tell you something.

Anonymous,  7:55 AM  

Dan --


there was no gun truce this year. While Emil may not have decided to call gun bills, the Speaker sure let gun stuff out. The semi-suto ban laid around for months and was set to be voted on. Why else send amendments to Exec so they can get to the floor?

It's not our fault that the sponsoir decided not to call the bill becuse he did not have the votes.

But the ad is corny and pushes the repub base into Judy's corner. while some have wondered about Judy's position on guns, blago just help make up their mind for them.

The decision to run the ads down state is also helping her with those crossover voters who Blago lied to four years ago.

Blago and company have decided to try and nationalize the elections becuse he is doing so poorly. 4 polls in a row show the Gov below 50% and losing. The last one taken after the ads began airing.

If after 4 years, Rod has to shore up his base, he's got problems.

Todd

Anonymous,  8:55 AM  

I agree with Todd, these commercials have the effect of shoring up and consolidating Judy's base after what Dan accurately describes as over the top primary attack ads.

Dan Johnson 10:13 AM  

Hi Todd: I'll defer to you on whether there has been a gun truce or not, but that's what I've been told by non-combatants. I don't see how these ads help Topinka. They accurately describe her positions on issues that a majority of voters disapprove of. (Because if voters didn't disapprove of her positions, can you imagine the Blagojevich campaign pushing them? Say what you want about the Governor -- he's got the most sophisticated campaign team in the state). I'd really like to see any poll that suggests a majority of Illinois voters disapprove of an assault weapons ban -- or even better, any poll that shows that swing voters disapprove of an assault weapons ban. If Topinka runs on more access to assault weapons, that would be a good thing for Blagojevich. I don't think these commercials are aimed at the base; I think they are aimed at suburban women. And I think they are hitting the mark.

Anonymous,  10:53 AM  

Blago's commercials are working. They are working the mute button on my remote control. Keep spending that cash Blago.

Anonymous,  4:34 PM  

Dan,
Do you think Blago will distance himself from Victor Reyes and HDO before November? Will Topinka do TV commercials or use HDO as an issue against Blago?
Rick

Anonymous,  7:27 PM  

Dan --

If you call 9 amendments to a gun ban in the House some sort of truce, get a new dictionary.

Rod is trying to attack Judy with women, agreed. But it aint' working. Rod has to work harder at driving a wedge beteen Judy and women becuase a large number of them relate to her.

Thus it makes it harder for the typical attacks one would make on a male opponent stick on a woman with women.

Rod's people are stuck on the old polling of guns. if it worked so well, why hasn't the DNC taken back the US House yet? last year the Clinton gun ban, which cost them the House, expired. No retribution.

Average voters may poll that they would support a gun ban, mostly becuse they think the guns being talked about are MACHINEGUNS -- they are not.

But they don't vote guns at the top of their list. They most opften votes education, taxes and other issues first. However, gun guys vote gun first or second when in the booth.

it is similar to the fact that most people think congress is currupt, except for their congressman. The people that care, are on our side of the issue. Look at the lack of tracktion the major media has been able to produce on the issue. After thew Trib editorial I talked to several legislators. The only calls they got were from our guys who read the editorial.

Guns will play a part in the upcoming election. And Rod will be on the recieveing end of the worst of it.

one AFL poll shows 30% of self IDed dems voted for Bush over Gore becuse of guns. When you can cut into your opponents base like that, they gots prblems.


Todd

Dan Johnson 11:08 AM  

Rick, I don't think HDO or Victor Reyes is an issue for anyone. Todd, I was thinking of the Senate about the gun truce. I think the main reason the DNC hasn't taken back the House is that Republicans are far more ruthless about redrawing congressional maps that Democrats are -- see Texas, Colorado and Georgia where Republican state legislatures made their congressional maps more Republican while no Democratic legislature has done the same thing. And on guns, I think you're underestimating the pull that gun control has for suburban women. You may be right that those living south of Springfield are very anti-gun control, but those living north of I-80, especially women, are very friendly to gun control measures. If Topinka is perceived as supporting the anti-gun control agenda, it's easier to paint her as a right-wing Republican rather than a moderate Republican.

Anonymous,  3:56 PM  

HDO is an issue because it deals with the culture of corruption and the hypocricy of Blagojevich. It may go deeper than that if the Feds get involved.

Anonymous,  6:53 PM  

DJW,
How are Victor Reyes and HDO not an issue for anyone?

HDO and specifically State Senator Munoz are recipients of campaign donations of the ring leader of a 8 person (at least) Heroin ring run out of the Department of Water Management connected to the Columbian cartel. The indicted drug trafficer is George Prado who is a member of HDO, gave money to HDO and Senator Munoz (at the coincidental timing of promotion) and worked with the father and brother of Senator Munoz as a hoisting engineer (A base pay of $30 an hour with no education and with overtime $75,000 to $100,000 a year) A drug dealer, politics, money, heroin. Serious corruption.

Victor Reyes is "Co-schemer A" in guilty pleas, proffers of immunity and indictments with HDO all over them including former Streets and Sanitation honcho Al "the Troll" Sanchez. Please read (you can do it online) the Federal government documents of the Sorich/Slatter indictment, Santiago proffer, Angelo Torres guilty plea, Donald Tomczak plea agreement. Fixing jobs, violations of Shakman, money for jobs, fixed tests, sex for jobs, nepotism.

Last but not least HIRED TRUCKS, Angelo Torres a former (maybe current) gang member with no education nor management experience (nor contracting or procurement or trucking experience) gets a $80,000 year job in charges of the HIRED TRUCKS program. He takes bribes and gets trucking companies contracts who do no work and are connected to organized crime creating a loss for taxpayers and safety hazards. Merely read the dozens of articles in the award winning Sun Times expose. Hired Truck money went to HDO, Senator Munoz, State Rep Acevedo. Angelo Torres's wife was the campaign treasurer to Senator Munoz campaign committee. Angelo Torres is cousins with Munoz's wife. Torres and Munoz have a religious tie through baptism in Spanish called compadres. Hundreds of millions of hired truck dollars, tens of thousands of bribes, tens of thousands of political contributions.

Rod Blagojevich did nothing about any of this. In fact he said HDO was like H20 (assmudily water)
Rod Blagojevich has given HDO members jobs. Rod Blagojevich has given Victor Reyes access for his clients in lobbying (recall Al Ronan, Swanson, Stu Levine---Victor is worse) Victor Reyes represents the pay to play system.

HDO is a huge issue for Blagojevich and will blow up before November. But Rod is smart enough to distance himself.

  © Blogger template The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP