-- BACKGROUND: Report on Linda McMahon on CNBC's Kudlow Report.

By Chris Newth, PWTorch political analyst

Former WWE CEO Linda McMahon's CNBC interview highlighted an important aspect of her campaign's direction - a deep focus on the economy. It's a skillful stroke of disciplined political foresight. Her deft strategy shows great thought, right down to the deliberate choice of interview on cable's biggest business news channel.

With that said, people shouldn't kid themselves. Appearing on "The Kudlow Report" provided her an open platform. It was a softball interview with a conservative-leaning host that largely let Linda promote her views while downplaying most of the legitimate criticism she receives.

Kudlow did ask the obligatory WWE question, but swiftly moved on to other issues. The questions asked, the phrasing of said questions, and the tone with which Kudlow asked them granted Linda a friendly pass, especially when he said that he didn't understand what Blumenthal meant when referring to McMahon turning an election into an auction.

That aside, some important points emerged - points that explain McMahon's growing traction in Connecticut. The opening of the interview featured a question on McMahon's stance on fiscal issues, particularly jobs.

The topic itself is perfect for her, and it defines the larger scope of the mid-term elections as a whole. In order to win, each party has to focus on different issues. Republicans need to continually pounce on the economy, jobs, and the national debt. Democrats, on the other hand, need to re-energize the base and confront Republicans for socially questionable stances that may scare independents away. Democrats should also be touting their accomplishments and warning voters against Republican policies that they feel got the country into this economic mess in the first place.

The political tide has already shifted in favor of Republicans in 2010, a historically natural byproduct of electing a new president and lingering dissatisfaction about the state of the economy.

During McMahon's interview with Kudlow, Linda stated, "We're just in an environment of uncertainty for small businesses. I think Washington's created the perfect storm." She then cited the Healthcare mandate, cap and trade, and tax increases as "looming" threats. Her political vocabulary is dead on. As a Republican, she has her talking points down. Healthcare and taxes are keywords that shake the conservative base, and the term "looming" evokes fear.

In terms of political performance, McMahon hit her target. Nothing sounds better to the general public than talking up the importance of small business. Unfortunately, Kudlow neglected to point out President Obama's new focus on the small business bill, which would establishes a lending program to encourage banks to loan more money to small businesses. Banks that meet certain qualifications would be able to borrow money from Treasury so long as the banks use the money for small business loans. It would also eliminate capital gains taxes on various small business investments.

Kudlow didn't ask about the bill, and McMahon was allowed to discuss small business without any indication of her position on the particular legislation that the President is pushing - which Republicans are largely against.

Continuing the theme of economic distress, McMahon stated, "Everybody's frozen. They're just afraid to move forward; they're just not going to do it." McMahon actually points out the exact reason for Democrats's fiscal political beliefs. The problem for Republicans is that the Bush tax cuts have not yet expired, and as McMahon noted, people continue to be financially frozen regardless.

That gives Democrats fuel, and if they are smart they would use it to fight back against the charges that McMahon is hurling. Economics teaches us that GDP is comprised of four areas: consumption, investment, government purchases, and net exports. That basically leaves three primary sources for spending: consumers, businesses, and government. As McMahon notes, businesses and consumers are not spending. Democrats should be backing up their policies with the argument that government needs to spend in order to keep the economy from completely tanking.

McMahon's economic strategy is not new. Besides dodging the more controversial WWE questions thrown at her, she's done a fine job staying on message. Just take a look at her website to see first-hand her clear-cut strategy. When you click the "Top Issues" link at the top, you'll notice her political brilliance in list form. The first three categories include: Economic Growth and Job Creation, Fiscal Discipline, and Bailouts. That's perfect. You'll also notice what she's not focused on. Way at the bottom she briefly lists her stances on abortion and illegal immigration.

The fact is that the country still feels the negative effects of a depressed economy, and they may turn to Republicans for an alternative. Republicans have to capitalize on that, and Linda McMahon is currently experiencing a fruitful boost in poll numbers thanks to her concentration on the topic. Meanwhile, Democrats have to discredit that argument and point to the issues during President Bush's presidency that led to the eventual financial collapse in 2008. They also have to place a spotlight on social issues where Republicans may lose independent voters, such as the 14th Amendment debate.

As for Linda McMahon, she has the right idea and seems to be making all the right moves. Her focus is good, her campaign commercials are polished and effective, and she shows poise and professionalism when being interviewed. The fact that a Republican is performing so well in the Nutmeg State either means that McMahon makes a very strong politician or Democrats are in for a rough year.

The likely answer is a combination of both, but the biggest mistake Democrats are making is underestimating McMahon as the "wrestling candidate" instead of attacking her on substance, where - in Connecticut - they are more apt to succeed anyway.

We suggest these recent related articles...

10/5 WWE Raw Hits & Misses: Natalya vs. Paige, Owens vs. Cara, Stephanie McMahon, Sasha Banks, Xavier Woods

COLLECTIBLES COLUMN: The History of Foam Hands in Pro Wrestling

9/28 WWE Raw Hits & Misses: Kane's Split Personality, Divas Revolution, Heyman & Big Show, Reigns vs. Wyatt