November 28th, 2009 • 3:00 amTarryl vs. Dr. Reed = Tarryl TKO

After reading this post, I’m pretty certain that Maureen Reed isn’t a serious challenger. Listen to this worn-out spin:

“Bachmann claims her rally is to remind Congress of the town hall meetings over the summer, but those meetings were orchestrated by insurance companies opposed to meaningful reform from the start,” said Jason Isaacson, Reed’s campaign manager. “Michele Bachmann shouldn’t be defending her political contributors who have reaped billion dollar profits last quarter; she should be focused on helping the hard working families and small businesses of Minnesota’s 6th District that need health care reform now.”

That’s dreadful communications. I could’ve written that in my sleep. For that matter, I could’ve done better had I written something during a drunken stupor.

Based on this and other statements I’ve read by Dr. Reed’s campaign manager, I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that Mr. Isaacson isn’t ready for primetime in terms of communications.

First, Isaacson used the discredited talking point about windfall profits being reaped by evil insurance companies. No less a conservative schill than the AP refuted that talking point:

The AP’s Calvin Woodward ran the numbers. Not surprisingly, the numbers tell a substantially different story:

Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.

Making a 2 percent profit isn’t obscene, though it’s becoming rarer every day that President Obama’s policies are in place.

Next, let’s turn things around. If Mr. Isaacson insists that Rep. Bachmann “shouldn’t be defending her political contributors”, then let’s insist that Dr. Reed follow the same rules. What’s good for the goose, right?

Finally, Mr. Isaacson’s use of the astroturfing claim is preposterous and it’s projection. The Democrats are the astroturfers. (That’s what the SEIU is, for example. Ditto with their myriad of community organizing organizations.)

Democrats haven’t learned that villainizing insurance companies, while it’s a great way to rally their base, is the surest way to drive independents away in even bigger numbers. The price they’ll pay for winning their party’s endorsement and/or primaries is steep.

Chalk Mr. Isaacson’s sterotypical rant to frustration. He’s got to know that Tarryl getting a bunch of campaign dollars from the unions and from establishment politicians’ PACs is putting the thing out of Dr. Reed’s reach. After fighting hard and doing a pretty nice job fundraising, it can’t be pleasant to see Tarryl announce her candidacy, then swiftly pick up one endorsement after another.

At the end of the day, though, it’ll be accurately said that Dr. Reed’s team just wasn’t quite ready for primetime. It’s as simple as that.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post Comments RSS Feed Post Comments RSSTrackBack URI 1 Response

  1. That Mr. Helmsley at UnitedHealth sure is a selfless benefactor of those needing healthcare. His wealth was a simple fallout from his dedication to being a benefactor of the human race. It was not at all a priority in his life to build a fortune out of the health insurance game - racket - whatever you might call it.

    Sure. Reed is wrong about the Helmsleys of the world.

    Tell that to the public, sell it to the public, if you can. My guess is it’s a hard sell.

    And they contibute to Bachmann because — come on Gary, you can finish the sentence, honestly and all.

    Comment by eric z. • 28Nov2009 @ 10:21 am





Categories