Why are Republicans considered better on national security?

[TNDemo]

Bottom line is we got attacked on their watch. They did not protect us.

[stopthegop]

1. then in '41 we got attacked on our watch...

not a good way to address it...better to look at veteran's affairs and such

[EllieDem]

2. Thats the way it always has been

we democrats are also considered soft on crime. Deserved or not deserved that is how the country sees it.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

3. They have a better PR machine..

It's the same with the military. Dems, for some reason get a bad rap on the military. I'm honestly not sure why, all things considered.

[chelsea0011]

9. If you say it enough, it must be true.

They have the talking points lined up for all the interviews. Get it out quickly and it looks like you are the leader.

[newyawker99]

15. Hi Feeney2!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[MsUnderstood]

4. because clinton was president

It is clinton's fault that:

We were not prepared
We could not respond adequately
We did not have good information
We have to pull our reservists up and deny them returning home
Janet Jackson flashed her booby

*sarcasm off*

[Freedom of Speech]

5. It's their swagger.

"Bring it on" is something I can hear Raygun and Nixon say very easily.

Way too much testosterone...especially with the women.

[EllieDem]

7. Traditionally its our party

that tries to cut military spending so theres the reason for much of the "perception" Sometimes its justified and sometimes (in my opinion) its not.

[iamjoy]

12. Republicans Better at Security?

Partially marketing.

But, really, Reagan ran up the deficits in the 1980's, but his wild arms race with the Soviets had the intended result and that "evil empire" collapsed.

They are blaming Clinton for Al Queda & Iraq, saying he was asleep at the wheel for eight years, turned down an opportunity to get bin Laden and ignored the "gathering" threat of Hussein.

I have a few points to ponder:

- Are we really safer with the Soviet Union broken up? During the Cold War, we had two roughly equal powers. M.A.D. seemed to be working, the Soviets were unlikely to launch nukes at us, because we'd retaliate and both be obliterated. Now, we have all these states with nuclear weapons and third world economies. And terrorists (some of whom we trained to fight the Soviets - eg: bin Laden) are shopping.

- As for blaming Clinton, what were the Republicans doing during those eight years, 6 of which they controlled both the House & Senate? Pushing national security initiatives or nosing around land deals in Arkansas and a stain on a blue dress?

But the truth is, Bush can tout many accomplishments in the war on terror, several arrests. I'm not a big conspiracy theorist, but I think there is a Rovian plot afoot. I think they've captured bin Laden but will announce that they "just captured" him in September or October. That will cement Dubya's chances of reelection.

[stilpist]

14. I suggest you don't accept that crap about

RayGun causing the collapse of the Soviet Union without checking it out. The thugs like to parrot it but it's far from universally accepted. I can't offhand give you chapter and verse, but lots of knowledgeable folks think that the USSR simply collapsed under its own weight and that RayGun's arms race had little to do with it.

[iamjoy]

16. post hoc, ergo propter hoc?

ah, you mean just because the sun rises after the rooster crows doesn't mean the rooster caused the dawn. True, but the common perception is that Reagan "won" the Cold War.

[maggrwaggr]

19. I watched a building collapse once, but that doesn't mean I caused it

just cause I was standing there.

If I thought that, I could be considered either a) a child or b) insane.

Ronald Reagan: "I have superpowers!!!!"

Reagan didn't have jack shit to do with the fall of the U.S.S.R.

[nannygoat]

28. Here's a good resource to counter the "blame Clinton" crowd...

Don't blame Clinton
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A45352-2003Feb21¬Found=true

[ithacan]

6. don't know, cause they are really clueless...

the Bush policies and attitudes have made us and the world much less safe.

I can't believe that the GOP is going to run on national security! Unless that means they plan a terrorist attack as their october surprise.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

8. Because people who otherwise say

"you can't throw money at a problem" somehow find it logical to say that throwing more money at the Pentagon than it even asked for will somehow make us "safe."

All the trillions (yes, trillions) spent by the Pentagon could not prevent 9/11, and all the trillions spent on the Pentagon will not prevent anti-American sentiments. In fact, one can justifiably argue that having all that money available has led the "defense" establishment to seek out military adventures and covert operations, thereby creating more anti-Americanism.

[drdigi420]

10. Marketing

plain and simple

[movonne]

11. Because they are the party of WAR

[earthman dave]

13. It might be their apparent viciousness

As a foreigner, I find Don Rumsfeld's speeches shockingly cold and bloodthirsty (which is not to imply that you don't). "National security" usually means war, doesn't it? Anyone who promises revenge, death to the enemy will be well liked.

[ramapo]

17. Goes back to at least Nixon

Kennedy kept us from being blown up but some thought him soft on Russia (the Generals wanted to go to war). LBJ got us deep into war but didn't win. Nixon was an end-the-war candidate but "peace with honor". He was "tough" with the USSR but was able to make the opening to China. Nixon was a big anti-commie going back to the '50s.

Not that the Dems were pro-communist but you had the peace movement coming from the Democrats. A lot of the rhetoric came from the '68-'72 period.

Got a big boost from Reagan (great marketing).

It doesn't make much logical sense but say it a few million times and it makes an impression.

[maggrwaggr]

18. because they're known to lack empathy

and are therefore more ruthless and vicious than the empathetic Dems who "feel your pain".

[donotpassgo]

20. BECAUSE THEY EXPLAIN THEIR BLOWBACK BETTER

Ray gun ended the cold war and started the War on Terror. No breaking the cycle of violence, just more bad guys to kill.

[booley]

21. becuase it's not what you do, it's what peopel think you are doing

..or at least seeing you do.

Repub presidents have no problem attacking and invading smaller countries to boost thier political careers.

Democratic presidents generally try to hide when they do this.

Unfortunatly a lot of people are shallow. I used to be one of them. Not knowing why the US is really invading where ever, they presume that if the US military is shooting at 'those" people, then "those" people must be bad and therefore deserve it.

Shooting bad people = national security.

Too many americans are still just not willing to continence that a President fo the US would flat out lie and let thousands of peopel (many americans ) die horrible deaths. Too many people see these thousands of deaths as abstractions (notice how the US media is NOT showing any of the American dead or the Iraqi dead for that matter), and it's just to horrifying to beleive that a group of peopel could be so EVIL as to use the deaths of 5000 people in a terrorist attack for thier own personal political gain with no regard to truth or justice.

often people will beleive a comfortable lie repeated often enough...especially when they think there is no reason not to beleive it, rather then look for themselves and risk losing thier faith.

[lostnfound]

22. Simple minds believe best defense is a vicious offense. n/t

[CWebster]

23. It is all a question of monopolizing perceptions

like who is more electible, who is more presidential. Same thing, and it is made credible when there is no counter argument or challenge, or the contrast is based on a definition determined by those framing the debate.

[Q]

24. The CIA calls it 'perception management'...

...but it's no more 'real' than a bully in a schoolyard being called the 'strongest'.

[snippy]

25. Because they market fear and hatred to appeal to people's bloodlust.

Republicans use fear and hatred almost exclusively as their marketing principles. The entire republican platform could be condensed to:

"You must fear that which is different or which you do not understand and you must hate what you fear."

This principle explains nearly every position of the republican party except corporate welfare, which is a prostitution thing.

[wildwww2]

26. They own the media and the media says so everyday. Truth for the gullible!

But not the truth. Bu$h`s dictatorship has been so well conducted by the press. It is hard to believe. But I witnessed it so it must be true. And no God exists that would put Bu$h in charge of wiping up snot. Let alone be in charge of the most powerful country in his or her world. I am not that gullible.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[nannygoat]

27. One interesting point Michael Moore brings up

in "Dude, Where's my country?" is the effect of having 200 FBI agents devoted 24/7 for several years to investigating Whitewater and Monica.

Imagine what they could have found out if they had been assigned to protect OUR country (i.e., check out INS records for suspected terrorists, reports of suspicious people taking flight lessons, etc.)?

[Iverson]

29. macho psychology

An aggressive posture means security, and pointless aggression is even better. Actual evidence isn't worth mentioning unless it supports the approved conclusion.

If you dissent, you are a sissy, a pinko, a weenie, a wanker, a 98 lb. weakling, a loser, crazy, and unacceptably far left.

Got that?

[leesa]

30. Because they tell us they are 24/7 in their media

They also tell us they are fiscally responsible, pro-small business and that they create more jobs. All blatant lies that can be disproved by reviewing federal data, but the GOP media tells us so and we buy it.