Strategy for the Dems

Last week, I was in my state Capitol, Lansing, for a government affairs forum. Afterwards, I was introduced by some friends to the head of the Michigan GOP. The talk boiled down to the last election, and the Iraq effect. Apparently, the GOP machine had its best turnout ever, and still got stomped because Iraq turned the the Independents to the Dems. The conversation then moved toward state issues (e.g. the desire to get a right-to-work initiative on the ballot.) What has struck me, and stayed with me, is the recognition among GOPers about their weakness on the Iraq issue. It is a mystery to me why the Dems cannot take advantage of this. As Political Animal reader Augustus states:

"If Democrats want to get anywhere they need to investigate the Republicans for lying about WMDs because it's a three-fer: it brings up Iraq (which is bad for Republicans), it establishes Republicans as liars (bad for Republicans), and helps exonerate Dems for voting for the war because they were lied to.

"Or remind people about Katrina: it shows this administration doesn't care about homeland defense, is incapable of responding to disasters, puts incompetents in charge of the most important areas of our government, the reconstruction is languishing and rife with corruption, and the administration couldn't even perform the most remedial task of collecting the foreign aid pledged to New Orleans (to the tune of nearly $900 million dollars).

"Dare the DNC to say it: the Bush administration has proven itself to be far less competent caretakers of New Orleans than the French. Oh, but the DNC won't - they're still struggling and on the defense about stupid things like Pelosi's trip to Syria.

"Here's a word the DNC should start using: treason.

"Hell, Republicans have been throwing that term around with all the care of drunk frat boys tossing Mardi Gras beads (hey, look at that, I mentioned New Orleans again...) WHY THE F*** ARE DEMOCRATS SO INCOMPETENT!?!?

"No, seriously. This administration -- with the full and willing participation of the GOP controlled house and senate -- has perpetrated more crimes, more scandals, more lies, more screw ups than perhaps the last 20 presidents combined. And yet the Democrats are still on the defensive and are almost completely incapable of mounting a real offense, yet alone accurately branding the GOP for the bad deeds they have done."

Now, Augustus is a very angry man. Why? Probably because he loves his country, and has noticed that the GOP in its current incarnation has seriously damaged our security, has structurally undermined our economy, and has diminished our standing internationally. His desire to see the Dems use the "treason charge" is unwarranted--simply because the GOP has been flip in its use does not mean the Dems need to mirror this behavior. This especially true when, as Augustus correctly notes, the GOP has given the Dems multiple opportunities to go on the attack. I like in particular the emphasis on the "three-fer" nature of pounding away on the missing WMDs. Everytime the GOP tries to turn to its traditional macho, tough-guy swagger, the Dems need to point to Iraq, to the missing WMDs, and to the patent dishonesty -- the lies -- of the administration and its allies.