Message Management: Democrats need a unified political strategy on Iraq

[Thom Little]

Having argued with tedious frequency for the proposition that the United States needs to look for ways to head for the exit doors in Iraq, I'm naturally heartened, in some ways, by a recent uptick in anti-war sentiment among the Democratic Party's leaders. Nevertheless, advocacy of withdrawal within the liberal community has long been bedeviled by a fairly vicious case of what I like to call the "pundit's fallacy" -- assertions that the key to electoral success is for a party or political leader to adopt the writer's policy preferences. In their December 12 issue, for example, the editors of The Nation argue that "Democrats must recognize, as Murtha has, that by putting aside politics and doing what is right for the country they will not only establish their party as the alternative that is needed; they will isolate the Administration and create a space where sensible Republicans can join a new bipartisan drive to get this country's troops out of the Iraq quagmire."

The basis for this proposition is the view that "the public has turned against the war." It's an admirable sentiment, but it involves a pretty hefty dose of wishful thinking. The public has turned against the war in the sense that stable majorities now, rightly, view the war as a mistake and the administration's selling of it as deceptive. But opinion on forward-looking policy questions remains complicated. As pollster Mark Blumenthal's excellent examination of the available data shows, poll results on these questions are highly influenced by how questions are phrased and alternatives framed. The Iraq debate, in other words, should be winnable by an anti-war party, but it's also losable. These are treacherous waters, and while Democrats shouldn't be cautious about speaking out on the war, they need to be careful in their political strategy.

.......

To revive his political fortunes on the war, Bush has settled on a clear and reasonably effective plan -- frame the debate as a choice between victory and defeat. Hence the White House's latest propaganda document was labeled a "National Strategy for Victory on Iraq," while The Weekly Standard's hackish and absurd blog has labeled the opposition "SurrenderCrats." Liberals need to reject this frame. The American people are tired of the war, but are not prepared to accept defeat by an insurgency that genuinely involves loathsome and evil characters. Nor is there any reason for the frame to be acceptable. Jihadi goals in Iraq are wildly unrealistic irrespective of American policy, and credible cases have been made -- most recently by Nir Rosen in The Atlantic -- that withdrawal is the best hope for stabilizing the country.

Instead, DNC Chair Howard Dean last week blundered right into the White House trap by proclaiming victory unattainable, rather than arguing more sensibly that the administration's definition of victory as something like the indefinite continuation of the war is perverse and wrongheaded.



http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10722

[Carolab]

1. Matthew is entitled to his opinion.

He just happens to be wrong about Dean. The war IS unwinnable.

[madfloridian]

2. Hope he blunders some more myself.

I thought it was a good idea to get all the plans out there. Hey, by next week, all the party folks who want everything proper will have it all hushed again.

Trust me, wait and see.

Maybe he will blunder again on some other topic while the righty Dems sit twiddling their fingers....and soldiers and Iraqis keep dying.

The most important thing to the righty Dems is to shut Dean up....

Hey, today one Democrat totally agreed with him on Iraq..then he criticized him for saying the very same thing.

Go Howard, keep blundering.

And someone will reply to me and say how dare I say such things, and I say it is not hard at all.

[madfloridian]

3. And I get firsties here.. I call them "twiddly thumb Democrats."

Have I no shame? Have I no decency? Nope, I don't.

Tired of the twiddly thumb Democrats.

[Mass]

4. The subject is too important to ask that there is a unified message,

given that this message forces everybody towards a solution that criticizes Bush, but does not take any stand on what should happen.

We should on the contrary wear as a badge of honor the fact that we are ready to discuss about the different solutions that are possible in an open debate.

Each time I see "political strategy" linked to the Iraq War, I feel mad. It is not about politics. It is about helping get the troops out in a way that do not force us to come back later.