One of Morris’s first moves was to launch an ad blitz in the summer of 1995 sixteen months before the election. The issue: crime.
Clinton seamlessly blended talk of gun control with support for more police, a both/and strategy that eludes Democrats today.
Morris’s strategy became known as triangulation, written up in this November 1995 Lloyd Grove column.
This positioned Clinton above the fray, distinct from unpopular Gingrich Republicans AND the Democratic left. washingtonpost.com/archive/lifest…
The biggest sign of the positioning Clinton would adopt during the campaign came during the 1996 State of the Union address, when he declared “The era of big government is over.” Clinton endorsed a balanced budget and got it done in his second term.
At the same time, the president and his surrogates continued to distance themselves from their party’s soft on crime image.
Here’s Hillary Clinton talking about “superpredators” on January 28, 1996.
Clinton’s positioning on crime and immigration would be unthinkable for a Democrat today.
Consider this clip from his 1995 State of the Union, where he talks about the need to stop illegal aliens, saying they take jobs and social services from Americans.
The signature of the Morris triangulation campaign was a series of “micro-initiatives” to pitch Clinton to culturally conservative voters concerned about the decline of traditional values.
In February 1996, Clinton came out for school uniforms in public schools.
And Clinton endorsed a V-chip installed into TV sets to allow parents to block violence and smut.
V-chips were included in the 1996 Telecommunications Act he signed into law, which also banned Internet porn (this provision was later struck down by the courts).
The biggest legislative accomplishment of 1996 was welfare reform, an issue pushed relentlessly by the Republican Congress.
A Stick. In. The. Eye. to the left and yet another example of Clinton swiping an issue from out under the Republicans’ noses. politico.com/story/2018/08/…
Dick Morris’s strategy would outlast Morris on the campaign.
During the Democratic convention, his affair with a prostitute was revealed, and he resigned.
But Clinton’s remaining advisers stuck with the plan, concluding why fix it if it ain’t broke? latimes.com/archives/la-xp…
In the dead of night of September 20th, just weeks before the election, Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, establishing marriage as between a man and a woman for the purposes of federal law.
While Clinton didn’t go out of his way to tout DOMA with a huge bill signing ceremony, his campaign bragged about it in stealth ads on Christian radio.
Audio was so hard to come by it was only uncovered by @KFILE in 2016. cnn.com/2016/10/10/pol…
@KFILE The election was effectively over long before Labor Day. Clinton held a consistent lead over Bob Dole, the Senate majority leader, and then the oldest major party nominee at 73.
Clinton drove home the age issue with his slogan, “Building a Bridge to the 21st Century.”
@KFILE Clinton’s early ads against “DoleGingrich” were brutal. His attacks hit on normal Democratic themes like abortion and GOP budget cuts, but then pivoted towards his support for proto-Republican ideas like balanced budgets and tax cuts.
Another ad hit Dole from the right for raising taxes. “35 years in Washington, 35 years of higher taxes.”
Many of Clinton’s fall ads were a carbon copy of Ronald Reagan’s “Morning in America.” In this ad, Clinton leads off with a promise to lead the country “toward a future where government is smaller.”
@KFILE And this one has become a favorite in recent years, particularly Clinton’s proposal for a death penalty for drug kingpins, positioning that Josh Gottheimer begged Nancy Pelosi to adopt after the “defund the police” fiasco in 2020.
@KFILE Here are some stills from that ad.
@KFILE Clinton was successful not only for achieving a huge electoral victory, but for the broad coalition he put together. There was no education polarization among whites either time he ran and he did well in big chunks of rural America.
@KFILE A Pew survey late in the campaign revealed Clinton’s strength: He unified all parts of the Democratic Party, who acquiesced to his moves to the center, while fracturing Republicans, including “economically squeezed populist conservatives.” pewresearch.org/politics/1996/…
@KFILE Many of the conservatives who voted for Bill Clinton in 1996 switched to Donald Trump in 2016, especially in the Midwest.
It’s why MAGA remembers Clinton more fondly than other Democratic presidents.
@KFILE The Clinton '96 strategy has fallen out of favor lately, a victim of Internet fundraising, ideological sorting, and the strength of primary electorates.
But I think the success of this approach is timeless, and if an incumbent president ran with it today, they would slay.
@KFILE Clinton '96 was peak Median Voter Theorem. Relentlessly seize the middle ground and swipe your opponents' issues to Hulk-smash them politically.
It's why Clinton ended his term as the most popular president in modern times and survived impeachment.
@KFILE Democrats and Republicans both could learn a lot from 1996 and consistently ask: WWWJCD?
But Biden won't do it, as shown by his walkback of "illegal," because The Groups are just too strong.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵 A few quick notes for posterity to close the loop on those interminable polling error debates from before the election that have now seemingly been memory-holed. From our final MI/PA/WI surveys...
We were seeing much the same issues as @Nate_Cohn was with raw samples coming in much more pro-Dem across the board.
Without weighting on recall vote, MI & WI would have been Harris+ high single digits.
@Nate_Cohn .@Nate_Cohn highlighted the reasons not to do recall vote, which I'm sympathetic towards, but imo there's no way not to do it in states with no/minimal party data on the file, like MI & WI.
PA didn't change w/ recall vote because party reg data is so robust.
In an age of extreme partisan polarization, you’ll never get one candidate up by double digits in a way that tells the other one it’s hopeless. It’s always “just a standard polling error away!”
When average leads never get above 5 points it’s super-easy to gaslight people by pointing to one showing a 2 point race and then comparing it to this other one showing the same before the debate.
A 5 point gap today is the same thing and as hard to recover from as 15 points in the old days.
But leads within 5 are almost always “within the margin of error.”
Trump should skip doing some swing state rallies in order to attend every UFC event between now and November to remind young nonwhite men that there’s an election happening.
Yard signs can help in local races.
For every Karen we lose, we pick up two Julios and Jamaals
Why is Biden focusing more on his base than swing voters?
A polling experiment finds some answers.
At first blush, Biden appears to have a higher ceiling than Trump. 43% say there's ZERO chance they'd vote for him, 48% for Trump.
For months, we've been asking people to rate their likelihood of voting for Biden or Trump on a 0-10 scale. We then compare the answers to come up with an alternative to the traditional head-to-head ballot, assigning voters based on their probabilities.
This nuanced view of intensity shows why Biden had an upswing in the polls: voters totally committed to him (Biden 10, Trump 0), went from 22-23% of voters to 27-28% starting in March, matching Trump's hardcore group.
Before, there was probably doubt Biden would be the nominee.