Has the White House already won the politics around "the surge?"
With the House preparing for a massive three day debate starting Monday over "the surge," I got to wondering, is it too late?
The Republican efforts to stall the Senate referendum were successful enough to delay any such debate until after the newsmedia had reported that "the surge" has begun.
Now that "the troops are on the ground" the politics have changed. That doesn't mean that Bush's escalation is necessarily any more popular, but I do think it changes the footing of the debate. Instead of opposing an unpopular Bush policy that is coming, that they can stop, the Dems will now find themselves speaking against a policy that is ongoing.
I'm not saying don't do it, I definitely think they should, but the underlying dynamic feels different now. You know?
(Also: I think the House strategy of automatically assigning 5 minutes to every congressman is brilliant tactically. If a Republican Congressman doesn't use their time, they are open for attack. If they do use their time, they have to politically dance between the Bush position and public opinion.)
The Republican efforts to stall the Senate referendum were successful enough to delay any such debate until after the newsmedia had reported that "the surge" has begun.
Now that "the troops are on the ground" the politics have changed. That doesn't mean that Bush's escalation is necessarily any more popular, but I do think it changes the footing of the debate. Instead of opposing an unpopular Bush policy that is coming, that they can stop, the Dems will now find themselves speaking against a policy that is ongoing.
I'm not saying don't do it, I definitely think they should, but the underlying dynamic feels different now. You know?
(Also: I think the House strategy of automatically assigning 5 minutes to every congressman is brilliant tactically. If a Republican Congressman doesn't use their time, they are open for attack. If they do use their time, they have to politically dance between the Bush position and public opinion.)
posted by mikevotes at
8:01 AM
2 Comments:
Maybe the "surge debate" window of effectiveness is closing. Maybe the House (and Senate) should be debating actual legislation to fund the redeployment of troops, VA benefits, etc.
I like Webb's line of "working to bring the Iraq War to an acceptable conclusion." It avoids the chest thumping, winner-take-all rhetoric of "victory." I love the phrase acceptable conclusion. It offers a face-saving way for hawks to declare our mission of returning Iraq to the Iraqis has been achieved, the rest is up to the people of Iraq and their sovereign government. It allows the nation to re-frame it's emotional view of Iraq.
Maybe Congress should ignore Bush's talk of escalation, and flood the media with talk of how their working to bring the Iraq War to an acceptable conclusion as soon as possible....
By
-epm, at 9:59 AM
I hadn't heard it, but I do like the phrase "acceptable conclusion" because it avoids the powerful victory/failure rhetoric.
(Victory may be impossible, but the language is still powerful.)
The smart policy is managed failure which would avoid the further bad positioning and regional risk of the current policy, but you really can't say that, so "acceptable conclusion" is a pretty good way to get there.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 10:48 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home