A return to the White House in 2009 has been served up to the Democrats on a Silver Platter. But the Democrats have one big problem. They neither perceive the opportunity nor do they recognize how to take advantage of it. Instead, they remain hostage to the Cheney/Rove bullying game, swallowing the guilty bait on Iraq and thereby empowering an Administration strategy designed to mask its own failures.
Nothing more stands between the Democrats and victory than the realization that they need to play their own strategy - deliver a sustained, acceptable alternative message (choice) on Iraq, but not necessarily results. The latter burden remains squarely with the Republicans. This gives the Democrats an opportunity to provide an intelligent choice to many pivotal swing voters who, like me, are what I'll coin as "DMR's" (disenchanted moderate Republicans).
Under the likely assumption that the situation in Iraq will degrade further before it improves, our sizeable in-country presence, compounded by the 4-5,000 projected deaths of American service personnel will be the single most important issue of the 2008 campaign. The Republicans themselves, via General Casey, recently projected that there will still be at least 100,000 troops in Iraq going into Primary season. That projection is hugely optimistic, just noting recent trends/developments. It too neither acknowledges the insurgency as chronic, not curable, nor does it factor in a potential ugly civil war.
If Iraq is destined to be the centerpiece election issue in two years, what constitutes a creative, sound, winning and sustainable message today?
The answer is to offer something that the Republicans have failed to put forward, a sensible exit plan framework that incorporates the three criteria critical to acceptance by the American mainstream: Patriotism, Prudence and Honor. Putting this plan forward with some new-found intestinal fortitude in the face of Republican diversionary criticism wouldn't be a bad idea either.
The Iraq invasion, while triggered by expectations of finding stores of WMD's, was pitched by the Republicans and accepted by the American public as an intervention in the name of Liberation, and not as what it has become, a prolonged and unpopular Occupation. It was even characterized as such in the mission's name Iraqi Freedom.
The presentation of an exit plan consistent with that already accepted theme of liberation would be equally well received by American voters. One worthy approach is a "controlled withdrawal", the antithesis of "cut and run". Call it the "Three for One and Done" Plan.
Here's how it would work. We currently have 130,000 troops in Iraq (the U.S. military estimates that three-times that many will actually be required to secure the country).This Plan would require investing the necessary resources (in the end, a mere fraction of the $100 billion we now allocate to Iraq every year), to train a 400,000 person Iraqi security force over 36 months. For every three Iraqis trained and deployed, we bring home one U.S. service member. When the final US troop hits American soil in three years, the plan and mission is "Done". In addition to meeting the criteria for American public acceptance, the Plan also removes the ugly moniker of occupier from the lexicon of the growing number of critics who are disparaging us.
As respects Occupation, a point to be made. If for whatever strategic reasons that was the purposeful intent of the Administration's Iraq invasion, which there exists no apparent data to suggest otherwise, then there fundamentally is no incentive for this Administration to help the Iraqis build a quality 400,000 self security force to allow us to leave, and why progress reports on reaching that goal are always so discouraging. We don't seem to want to make it a reality and it never will until we do. If our purpose is to stay, then we defeat that intent if the Plan ever gets Done. Therefore the Republicans will never embrace "3 for 1 and Done", leaving it ripe for the Democrats to solely own this prudent and honorable position.
The Democrats would champion this framework and not abandon the theme regardless how hot the proverbial kitchen gets. If they remain strong on principle, they can carry this approach right into the 2008 Election Cycle. However, a Democrat assumption that they will be able to come out of the woodwork in 2008 and say we told you so after they effectively did a "duck and hide" two years earlier will not lead to success. In fact, remaining steadfastly on theme will obviate the need to say we told you so in two years and will lead to the Party's garnering the swing votes of many moderate Republicans, like myself.
A Democratic victory in 2008 should be akin to a golf gimme. Unlike the more difficult Republican predicament, victory for Democrats is based neither on executing against a demanding plan nor on delivering results, but rather on championing a strategy of choice while keeping the risk of implosion on the Republicans as they struggle to succeed with their updated version of Vietnam.
Vietnam II is not the victory we want. "Three for One and Done" is. Embracing this strategy of sound choice with conviction over the next two years will win the vote of this DMR, put a Democrat in the White House on Jan. 21, 2009, and most importantly, bring our troops home with pride and honor.
It's time to turn "Mission Accomplished" into "Mission Done".
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people: "3 for 1 and Done" - Now
The Democrats do not need slogans to get themselvers disentangled from the disasterous decision to attack Iraq. Let the Republicans try to talk themselves out of responsibility for that disastrous decision.
Karl Rove hopes the Democrats will get tangled in an Iraq solutions "tar baby" by trying to respond with slogans to answer Rove's taunts to Democrats, such as his "cut and run." He is in the challenge of his life, because it's a hopeless one, to come up with winning political statements for this Administration's failed policies. Even the Republican Congressmen are now trying to distance themselves from Bush, Cheney and Rove.
The only slogan the Democrats need is: they can try to run, but they can't hide from their record.
by
Christie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 143 comments)
on Saturday, September 16, 2006 at 6:08:56 PM
The article provides a credible plan framework. You're missing that substance by getting simply hung up on a title.
Focus on the substance - the plan framework details.
Alternatively, if you're not in favor of this withdrawal plan, please kindly suggest another credible plan the Democrats are offering and/or the American people will embrace.
All good constructive ideas and thought welcome.
Thanks
PS - As an added bonus, the Plan title works too
by
Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments)
on Saturday, September 16, 2006 at 7:17:37 PM
In my Post, "No Slogans Needed by Democrats" I made comments on strategy for the November, 2006 elections. The only excuse for the crossed wire in my brain is that I have been online a lot lately reading about the upcoming elections. So as I read the message in this article, I managed to forget to remember that it applied to the 2008 Presidential election not to the Congressional elections this November, 2006.
I stand by my analysis and comments in the above posting as they apply to the November elections. The only comment I have about Iraq in relation to the elections and the plan put forth in the article is that if the Democrats gain control of even just the House of Representatives in November, 2006 -- more so if they become the majority also in the Senate -- then the Democrats will be in a better position to have an influential say concerning Iraq as well as on a number of other issues that I believe need to be reviewed and investigated.
by
Christie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 143 comments)
on Saturday, September 16, 2006 at 9:31:06 PM
No problem and thanks for your thoughts. Glad you were able to give the piece a second look.
Perhaps fair to say, that I'd rather see the Democrats back a(ny) withdrawal plan that makes sense then to just say they disagree with the war. Identifying a problem is important but coming up with a credible solution/framework gets votes.
The disenchanted moderate Republican vote, which is indeed up for grabs, must see "solution substance" to make a vote change. If they do, they will. If they don't, they won't.
It's really that simple - as this pivotal voting block has the power to sway the 2008 Presidential election - either way.
by
Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 2:59:40 PM
Thanks for offering a reasonable and, more importantly, realistic plan. As a proud lifelong Democrat I want nothing more than to see Republicans voted out in HUGE numbers. A complete house cleaning!
This said, I agree with your observations that without an exit strategy, that can actually be executed, the Democrats are walking away from "free" votes and possible control of the House and/or Senate, as well as first prize in 2008. Americans need and want to vote for individuals (and a party) they believe will make a difference NOW, not at a date to be named later. We, as a country, can no longer afford to stay on this treadmill!
Your plan should be submitted to the DNC as an option they cannot afford to ignore!
by
Proud Dem (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 8:51:43 PM
Our country deserves a Plan to debate where none currently exists. It is remarkable the Administration has been tolerated to the degree it has without one.
Hopefully, as intended, "3 for 1 and Done" is a withdrawal plan/framework that can provoke a necessary public/congressional debate which really has yet to begin, if not been entirely purposely thwarted.
by
Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments)
on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 9:37:48 PM
6 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
