I think you mean "undecideds break for the challenger", not "incumbents".

Thanks.

My question is what qualifications does Joe Trippi have to be this purported top-level political strategist and commentator? If he were so good, whey did Howard Dean, his man, only win one primary?

This guy seems to me like Ron Reagan, Jr. That is, someone out of their element and simply riding real or imagined coattails (Ron, of course, besmirching the name of his father).

I've heard that concept before ace, but can't remember where. Might have been Barone or Sabato talking to Brit Hume. And yes, when I heard it the context was that guys like Morris are taking the "rule" out of context by applying it to a Presidential race where it doesn't apply.

True "undecideds" generally split in the same direction as the rest of the electorate. That concept is incredibly anti-climactic, but it has panned out in almost every campaign for which I've worked.

Trippi may be basing that on 2000, when it was accepted as common wisdom that the late breaking news of Bush's DUI caused most fence-sitters to vote Gore instead of Bush.

Karl Rove said the exact same thing on Brit Hume's show last week. So it must be true.

It is an historical fact -- undecideds in Presidential campaigns have almost always broken towards the incumbent. I think there are only two instances of them breaking toward the challenger and that was when the incumbent held such a huge lead (Nixon 1972) etc that undecideds made no difference in the race. I'll take the hits for the Dean failure but I have been doing this for 30 years and I am reporting historical fact not making it up like Morris is want to do.

And just for the record -- don't learn the wrong lessons from Howard Dean's campaign -- it was a miracle that we made it as far as we did. No insurgnet campaign has ever gotten as close to the nomination as we did. Did I make mistakes? Damn right I did. There has never been a mistake free campaign in history either.

Thanks for your post
Joe Trippi