Why can't the Dems come up with a strategy?

[John21]

I'm really at a loss to explain what the Democratic strategists are thinking. Don't they realize that by calling GW an idiot they're also calling everyone who voted for him an idiot? And by calling the war in Iraq idiotic, don't they realize they're calling everyone who supported it an idiot?

Whether you think GW or the war is idiotic, it doesn't seem to require that much common sense to know that offending the people you want the support of is not a very bright move.

They had an out with this entire issue, that would have allowed the Americans in favor of Bush and the war to save face, but for some reason, maybe pride, maybe arrogance, they chose to ignore it.

The simple strategy would have been to say that America and our troops have done their job and now it's up to the Iraqi people. Basically, spin it into a victory. Yet they continue to attack the very people they're hoping to convert to their view.

In my opinion, the Dems have missed a huge opportunity to advance their cause, but the Republicans have noticed it. The spin coming out of the White House is it's the Iraqi people's problem. And a few more instances of the Iraqi government interferring with and redefining our military's rules of engagement, will be all the reason GW needs to justify a withdrawal.

All I'm saying is that nobody likes being called an idiot, and nobody likes being told they were wrong, and most Americans don't like being told they lost - yet the Democratic strategists seem to be doing exactly that.

Why can't they just say: like most Americans the invasion of Iraq seemed necessary at the time; we got rid of a tyrant; established a democracy; and sent a very clear message that any regime that in anyway supports a terrorist attack on Americans will be destroyed. That's all the American people need to hear.

It just seems like they're more concerned with being right, than doing what's right for the American people.

[hmkpoker]

For Democrats, failure is not an option.

It's a mandate.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
the invasion of Iraq seemed necessary at the time; we got rid of a tyrant; established a democracy; and sent a very clear message that any regime that in anyway supports a terrorist attack on Americans will be destroyed. That's all the American people need to hear.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying Democrats should lie to the American people?

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the invasion of Iraq seemed necessary at the time; we got rid of a tyrant; established a democracy; and sent a very clear message that any regime that in anyway supports a terrorist attack on Americans will be destroyed. That's all the American people need to hear.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying Democrats should lie to the American people?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a question of lying, as much as choosing to highlight the areas that people agree on, and not focusing on the areas where people disagree.

[nicky g]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, spin it into a victory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not enough people are stupid enough to buy this to make it a useful strategy.

The Democrats are faced with a problem that someone did something so stupid and destructive that the resulting situation is more or less impossible to fix. They are left trying to find a sensible solution to an impossible situation and naturally can't come up with or agree on much. This paradoxically makes the idiot who caused the problem and keeps claiming his latest useless plan will help "turn the corner" look better than them.

As I said in another post, no plan is better than continually following the plans of the person who caused the mess and keeps making it worse.

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, spin it into a victory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not enough people are stupid enough to buy this to make it a useful strategy.

The Democrats are faced with a problem that someone did something so stupid ...

[/ QUOTE ]

The continual references to 'stupid' is my point. There is absolutely zero effort being made to come up with any positives.

Even if they have to go to extremes to find a positive to focus on, it will do more for their cause than exclusively emphasizing negatives.

[bisonbison]

The democrats don't need to campaign on a national strategy. It's not a presidential election.

However, given that half the GOP has defected from Bush on the war, I wouldn't say that its the dems that lack a coherent message.

[nicky g]

I'm not a Democrat if that's what you're insinuating. I'm not from the US, and I have very little time or respect for the Democratic establishment.

That said, I can't believe you are serious about "trying to find something positive" in the Iraq mess to focus on. It would do little for their cause, given that it would mainly boost the people who carried out the war, and would be a completely ridiculous and disgusting exercise given the horror of the situation there.

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]


That said, I can't believe you are serious about "trying to find something positive" in the Iraq mess to focus on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well one positive is that the U.S. will probably never become a victim of any form of state/reigime sponsored, or in any way connected to, or supported, attacks. It is almost a certainty, that if a group of Iranian linked or supported terrorists were planning to attack the U.S. the Iranian government would do everything in their power to prevent it from happening.

So even if you conclude that after a few thousand American civilians were killed in the 9/11 attacks, and the USA went on full-blown monkey-tilt and killed a few hundred thousand people and toppled a regime with marginal links to the terrorists - a message was still being sent.

Do we win any morality prizes for the message - no. But in the real world, where Machiavellian tactics rule, the Mid-East rulers got the message.

It's not pretty but it's effective - we don't worry about Omar Kadafi any more.

[CharlieDontSurf]

no message was sent other then we are retards who got our asses kicked in Iraq by a bunch of sunni's and shiites.