'Democrats shouldn't be too critical of Chimp' -- Agree or Disagree?

[Sparkly]

Heavy emphasis on the war against terrorism could backfire for the Republicans, particularly if things get worse in Iraq, southern Lebanon, or in dealings with
Iran.

But Democrats could also overplay their hand by being too harshly critical of the president.

"At any point, there could be a rally-around-the-president effect if there's another terrorist incident, another big arrest, or if — God forbid — we're attacked again," said James Thurber, a political scientist at American University.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060908/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_terror_analysis;

What do you think? Do you agree, or not?

[Chimichurri]

1. This is DLC speak. Pure bullshit.

The dems must become the opposition party and hammer away all of Bush's deadly mistakes. That's what people want. When the republicans, a few months back, started using the talking point about how if the dems are elected they'll impeach Bush, it backfired on them. the people were like - hell yeah impeach him. So they immediately stopped using that rhetoric.

[rpannier]

2. Disagree

For some reason this always seeems to be the suggestion given to the Dems.
Don't rock the boat too hard or it may backfire.

I'd rather be the f**king angry left that has backbone, then the cautious, wary left thats been getting its ass kicked for the last dozen years.

James Thurber can take his advise and cram it with walnuts!

[Deep13]

3. What's "too critical" for this idiot?

He has done exactly nothing right since assuming office. If we could have planned ahead of time how to screw up the world beyond repair, it would not have gone better than it did.

[Karmageddon]

4. You can't POSSIBLY be "too" critical of that asshat.

No matter how critical you are, life isn't long enough to cover everything there is to criticize.

[Totally Committed]

5. That's DLC Code Bullsh*t Speak.....

Why is this 'faction' of the Democratic Party so gawddamned afraid of pissing off the Republicans?

It can't be because they truly believe it'll lose us elections... we did it their way and lost not only the elections but our pride as well. Ask yourselves that question. Think about it.

Is it a failed policy or collusion? You decide.

TC

[meow2u3]

12. Two words: campaign contribution

Why is this 'faction' of the Democratic Party so gawddamned afraid of pissing off the Republicans?

The DLC get their campaign funding from the same sources as the Reeps: the very same corporations that hire those million-dollar lobbyists to buy legislative favors like the bankruptcy bill and other anti-consumer and anti-labor laws.

[Totally Committed]

23. I agree... The question was rhetorical, but your answer is righteous!

And, that is something that needs sot STOP... NOW.

TC

[KKKarl is an idiot]

6. That is our problem

They republicans keep using the same rhetoric: "the democrats are week on national security". They all beat the same drum over & over again. We need to keep giving the same message to the people as well. The "war in Iraq has nothing to do with terrorism". Do not fear to give the message.

[blondeatlast]

7. What lovely objective reporting--some great facts yahoo has there!

It's an opinion, pure and simple.

OTOH, we need to approach the criticism with care.

Big difference between

"Bush did nothing about 9/11 even though he was warned"

and

"Bush did nothing to involve national security and law-enforcement agencies after the "Osama determined to attack in US PDB..."

It puts the opposition right where we want them--on the defensive.

Edit: We need to keep in mind that we must win the fence-sitters. We don't have to move to the center to do it, but we must show that there is a difference between the neo/theoCons and the Democrats.

[lwcon]

8. Let's stop being afraid of our own shadow

I wish I could find that great political cartoon where two donkeys see an elephant head mounted on the wall and one says "It could be a trap!" (A link to it would be much appreciated)

Hit 'em hard, I say.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[intaglio]

9. To quote an altogether wiser James Thurber

You might as well fall flat on your face as lean over too far backward

[Brotherjohn]

10. There'll only be a rally around him if people choose to rally around him.

And that should only happen if he deserves it (not holding my breath here).

What happened after 9-11 (not so much short term, but after a few months), and especially after Iraq, was not so much a "rally" around the president as a fearful public caving in to his every related, and unrelated, whim.

[Stinky The Clown]

11. Bullshit

I was listening to Brian Lamb/C-span this morning. Used to be there were rational right wing asshats calling in. This morning they were all truly loons. I mean around the bend nutcases. For example, there was some guy from PA who says he saw two of the 9/11 hijackers at his local convenience store (run by 'foreigners'). He was clearly the same guy who you see on Main Street flapping his arms in a harmless but seemingly psychotic rant.

My point is, the only people still supporting the asshats are other asshats. We'll NEVER get through to them. But we CAN get to the one's who were weaker in support.

[Dob Bole]

13. No, they should stay critical and work to associate every GOP candidate

with him. We could try to let up and play nice, but this is politics: the GOP isn't going to let up, so why should we?

No political attack has ever really 'backfired' anyway, if you think about it.

[Telly Savalas]

34. The attacks need to be broader though.

Labelling GOPers running for House and Senate seats in November as "Bush Republicans" is a good idea, but by 2008 the smarter ones will being doing a pretty decent job of squirming away from such associations. The presidential candidate will likely be a self-proclaimed "maverick" like McCain or Hagel, or perhaps a governor who can really distance himself/herself from Bush. If they're really desperate at that point there's an off chance they'd go with a "moderate" like Romney.

This struggle isn't about just one man, but rather the bankrupt ideology of the GOP (and the right-wing of the Democratic Party for that matter). If the focus is too much on Bush, then we have to start again at square one when the guy moves from the newspapers to the history books.

[RangerSmith]

14. I don't think you can be too critical of bush...

I think you can be too personal and use terms like Nazi that can definitely backfire with moderates and non-religious conservatives.

His use of it right now is backfiring and only helps the Dems.

[IChing]

15. I agree or there might be another anthrax attack

:sarcasm: :evilgrin:

[ConservativeDemocrat]

16. Absolutely, I agree...

with the critique, but for an entirely different reason.

People. In 2 1/2 years there will be NO President Bush to kick around. But there still will be Republicans who were his enablers running for office. If all we do is to blame Bush, every even remotely savvy Republican will put rhetorical distance between themselves and him. And they can win with that.

So stop saying "Bush screwed up the country". Say "Republicans screwed up the country".

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HannibalBarca]

17. Crticise as much as possible

..thats what I say.

[riona]

18. *'s constituency - no matter what

[gulliver]

19. Enthymemes are our friend.

The presumption that something is wrong with Bush is established in most people's minds. Therefore, we don't have to be shrill. We can understate our criticism or act as if Bush's unworthiness is presumed fact, and we will still be golden.

Example,

"Bush wouldn't have been able to screw up so badly without a compliant, bought-and-paid-for Republican Congress."

That is much more powerful, IMO, than just saying "Bush screwed up." It is double-barreled and leaves no opening for a rejoinder. Just saying Bush did this or Bush did that doesn't score very well rhetorically.

[primative1]

20. Hammer him until he breaks .....

The guy is certifiable. Most people know that without doubt. The few that havent figured it out by now never will. Rally around the a-hole worked in '01 before people got to know him so well. Anything bad happens will be to his detrement, not credit.

[crim son]

21. It doesn't matter where we focus our attention.

He's a failure on all fronts, period.

[bunkerbuster1]

22. We should keep our powder dry!

Let's not upset anyone or come off like we're confident. Let's not hurt anyone's feelings.

Weakness is strength!

now where's my kool-aid...

Seriously, that was a kind of sloppy afterthought at the end of an article that's damning of Bush. Ferget it.

[Ignacio Upton]

24. In other words: regress back into 2002-style etiquette

And we all know what happened in the 2002 midterms when the political etiquette was "don't criticize the President." Gephardt and Daschle will let you know how that turned out for them. I'm sorry, but if another attack happens on his watch (God Forbid!), I will not drop everything and blindly support him again, and in light of Iraq and Katrina, I don't think that Bush will get 80%-90% approval. It will be about 60% at worst. He's lied too much and fumbled too much.

[ekwhite]

25. It's not enough to criticize the president

We have to criticize his supporters. We have to make the case that it wasn't just Bush, it was also the arrogant lying b*st*rds in Congress.

[Eurobabe]

26. Bullshit ditto

They need to be harsh on the WHOLE ADMINISTRATION.

[CarlVK]

28. What complete horseshit!

And ys it reeks to me of old-time DLC talk. Ooohhhh I cannot WAIT till we are rid of these bastards. I'm tired of having to fight with one hand tied behind my back.

[alvarezadams]

29. Actually, I agree

The chimp is a lame duck. It is important to show that the problems are due to his PARTY'S errors in judgement and misguided ideology.

If Dubya was to end his reign on a very poor note, do you think that the GOP will wait an instant to repudiate him?

[windbreeze]

30. I don't notice them playing nicely....sooo, why should we?

I want to see Dems get downright SHOW ME SOME DAMNED BACKBONE critical....and put it to work "kicking the shit out of them" in all races...no more mr nice guy...we can play nice after we win...come to think of it....isn't one of the reasons we lose, because we are seen as wimpy? so then that tells us what to do....get rid of the wimp...(and IF we're attacked again...let's check out our own very carefully, before we lay it at someone else's door)..<like Iran>
windbreeze

[JerseygirlCT]

31. There is no such thing as "too critical of chimp". nt

[Awsi Dooger]

32. Absolutely agree

We waste time, money and don't optimize our chances in November if all we do is attack. Newsflash: the opinions of Bush are locked in place, and very low. We're not telling anyone anything by criticizing Bush. Seriously, can you imagine a housewife who is an apolitical type being impressed or swayed by a negative ad regarding Bush or Iraq?

I swear, it's like we intentionally search for the worst handicapping possible. The reason we have the generic poll lead and the edge in individual races is due to negative impression of Bush and the GOP. To put us over the top we need to emphasize our favorables and the so-called lesser issues. Yeah, the economy is a lesser issue. it's incredible we actually believe that, and aren't emphasizing it more. Then we'll be stunned when the post election polls indicated Americans voted based on their daily lives and not what they see on the TV screen.

We thrill to be envious of the GOP playbook and pretend it's best for us. Meanwhile, the white suburban female who decides our fate is not impressed with negativity. Every survey indicates that. They want emphasis on things like education, health care, economy and jobs, and if we don't provide it along the way we won't get the gender gap, and therefore the necessary victories.

[ShortnFiery]

33. Dear Leader is a War Criminal who Lied us into an Illegal and Immoral

war. Over 100,000 Iraqis and close to 2700 American Soldiers lost their lives because George, Dick and Rummy had to get their WAR ON. :grr:

We are not critical enough until we begin Impeachment and then Criminal Charges against this Executive branch - from HELL! :grr: :puke:

[No Exit]

35. Strongly disagree!!