Why isn't Kerry hammering Bush on Iraq?

[fujiyama]

Why has he seemed to be so damn quiet about the issue? He seems to be going around everywhere discussing the economy and jobs, which is probably the issue that concerns people the most. However, Iraq IMO is just as big an issue, and Kerry isn't saying much one way or the other.

This could be a mistake. After all, Kerry's major problem is still convincing people he's strong enough on defense.

Maybe I'm wrong though. After all, if he did start whacking Bush on Iraq, I would imagine GOP media networks to start saying that Kerry is trying to take advantage of the bad situation in Iraq.

BTW, here's an interesting article on it. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/09/missingkerry/

[swag]

1. He has delegated that job to Bush.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

2. Exactly!

The facts, the images, the truth...all these things are doing a mighty fine job of hammering Bush.

Let Kerry get his rest. He'll need it.

The less he associates himself with negative images of Iraq, and negativity in general, the better off his campaign will be.

[Old and In the Way]

8. hehehehe

good one. True, too.

[leyton]

17. LOL!

Kerry has been doing this since the general campaign begun. A good move, in my opinion. His strongest suit is economics, and he can sharpen his image there and let Iraq speak for itself. There's still time for Kerry to get his national security message out there, and perhaps he wants to wait for Bush's credibility on the issue to be shot.

[noahmijo]

3. Why should he hammer him?

Seems like Junior's doing a good enough job of hammering himself with that situation. At the top of the list of most American's concerns is the economy, and this is an issue that will be central in my opinion even moreso than Iraq. This is not to undermine Iraq, but the fact of the matter is right now people are more interested in our current economic situation than Iraq, even moreso than terror for that matter it seems.

Overall though, Bush continues to buffoon himself on the Iraq issue on a daily basis all Kerry has to do for now is just sit back and watch Bush attempt to put his own fire out by throwing more gas into it.

[aquart]

4. Bush is self-destructing. Kerry does not have to say a word.

Really, what can he say? He's the one who's going to have to undo this mess. Somehow he has to make the army feel victorious, and get them out anyway. He has to get help from allies who want nothing to do with Bush. He has to convince everyone his word is worth something and he has to restore this nation to power after being reduced to a third world banana republic.

Better to come in like Fortinbras when the bodies are all on the floor and take over, than rush in like Laertes and wind up on the floor himself.

[necso]

5. There is no longer a "winning" strategy.

If Kerry hammers, he gets asked: "What would you do?".

He can say some stuff about bringing the UN and other forces in, but it is way too late for that.

He can say: "Pull the troops out", (looking like the only option), then he gets labeled as "weak". Plus, he gets hammered with all the consequences of doing do.

Best he keeps his mouth shut. There are no good options left in Iraq.

[Union Thug]

6. I also think this is the right strategy.

Rome is burning and Bush is fiddling. These Republican shitheels are sabotaging themselves. Kerry can finish them off later on.

[The Traveler]

7. Exactly right

Bush has been given the rope. Now he hangs himself. "By their fruits, ye shall know them." It will take amazing denial systems for people to not notice Bush's "fruits" are pretty nasty. (God, I do LOVE to throw the Bible back at these assclowns. Forgive me. Mea culpa.)

[Lexingtonian]

9. Why should he?

If he does it too explicitly, Bush gets a chance to change the subject and complain about Kerry 'playing politics with national security'.

If a guy is digging himself into a hole, you don't want to do anything to stop him. In fact, you hand him a bigger shovel.

The Bush people are no good at defending themselves. The two things they are good at are 1) lowering the bar further, and 2) attacking other people for supposedly being worse. They really haven't done anything in three years in office other than cut their buddies' taxes and talk up a pointless war in the Middle East.

Everything serious that they do tends to end up as another run of Operation Footbullet, so forcing them to explain themselves and take responsibility for something major means forcing them into a reiterating loop- aka death spiral- of screwups.

And there is the practical argument- Kerry can't possibly guess what kind of a disaster Iraq will be in October or November, let alone next January. With this Administration everything they leave behind will be in worse shape than even the greatest pessimists had guessed- remember all the goodies that Clinton found he'd inherited from Bush Sr in 1993? W makes his dad look like a piker in that regard. There is literally no floor to the range of possibilities.

[Rationality]

10. In one word: POLLS!

During the Democratic primaries, the economy remains the biggest issue, while the war has faded significantly (which I thought was the reason Dean went down).

It appears Kerry's paying attention to these, and while I don't mean to cut him down, given the fact that he voted to give Bush the authority to engage in war activities in Iraq, he should emphasize the economy regardless of the motivations behind his vote on the IWR, because the more he opposes the war openly, the more vulnerable he will be because of that one vote. Explanations be damned.

[no name no slogan]

23. Very good point, but things are getting worse in Iraq

The economy may be the issue du jour today, but that could change over the next six months.

Kerry needs to take a principled stand on Iraq-- not necessarily play it as a main issue (because IMHO he's not that strong on it), but to emphasize that he believes that the Iraqis are the ones who should determine their own destinies, NOT the US government or big business.

Otherwise, the Iraq war will become the 800 lb. gorilla of this campaign.

[emulatorloo]

11. Read what Kerry said Yesterday - qualifies as hammering, I guess

Reuters yesterday friday

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040409/pl_nm/campaign_kerry_dc&cid=615&ncid=2043

<snip>

Kerry said Bush had failed to minimize the risk for U.S. soldiers in Iraq as well as the cost to taxpayers.

"This administration has stubbornly refused to involve other countries in the real decision-making," the senator from Massachusetts said. "I think this is a failure of diplomacy, a failure of foreign policy, a failure of creative leadership."

<snip catty bush campaign comment>

Kerry said the United States now had three options in Iraq. The first -- to continue along the same lines -- would mean American troops would remain exposed, taxpayers would bear billions of dollars in costs and "we will go down a very dangerous road where the outcome is very difficult."

"Option two, you could just say 'Okay, you guys don't want democracy? We'll see you. We're out of here,"' he said. "Not acceptable, because nobody believes that we are better off with an Iraq that is unstable."

The third alternative -- what Kerry called the "smart" approach --- was to reach out boldly and clearly to the international community, explain their stake in not having a failed Iraq and give them a real say in its transformation.

<snip>

[edzontar]

12. Because with his IWR vote, it's his war too

And if he criticizes it, he criticizes himself.

Sad but true.

[MaggieSwanson]

16. Dingdingding

...we have a winner.

[democracy eh]

13. He better be cooking a solution

as dismal and doomed as the whole scenario is, the people will soon turn from being pissed off at Bush to looking for solutions.

[ACK]

14. Easy. He can't without being painted as Anti-American troops

CNN in every other mention of Kerry and his stance on the war has warned him. They say he is walking the thin line between criticizing the Administration and ending up looking like he is pissing on the troops as they get shot.

This is not fair or right and this is the time to have the debate.

He is accussing the administration of a failed plan of Iraqification.

He is accussing the administration of being unilateral and calls for going back to the UN and trying to internationalize the effort.

He is accussing the administration of proposing an artificial date of June 30 to force down the throats of the Iraqi people and planning a cut and run.

All the media whores have vaguely warned Kerry not to take it much further than this.

There are no good options left.

If you cut and run, you get almost certainly a religious cleric as leader and a new country declaring jihad on America. You get a country with a broken infrastructure. You get a civil war with more Iraqis dead.

If you stay, then at this point all you get are more deaths and a popular movement and underground constantly fighting against our troops. This has become a popular movement. We face not terrorist but what amounts to a true uprising. This can only leading to mounting deaths and spiralling quagmire.

I am afraid that no UN forces especially arab forces will step into this mess to internationalize the effort especially by the time that Kerry wins.

He has no good options.

None at all.

Now I heard just now CNN said he will do another Iraq speech.

Let the Bush Co cut their own throats and let Kerry call out the calm message of taking an international approach blah, blah...

Bush is destroying himself.

+

[NewYorkerfromMass]

15. He has begun. See post 11. nt

[leyton]

18. Also, criticizing Bush would politicize the issue.

Or, in other words, make it a partisan thing. Right now, things are going to hell in a handbasket in Iraq, and Bush is getting the blame and Kerry doesn't have to get his hands dirty with it. If Kerry criticized Bush, the issue suddenly becomes partisan. Then it detracts from the power of the issue and everybody looks at it a little differently.

[Padraig18]

19. Never jump in front of a perfectly good train wreck.

Chicago ward politics Rule #1...

[belle]

24. Right. And apparently Kerry is a past master of this technique.

I forget where, somewhere I'd read about his last opponent speaking with frank admiration about the way Kerry thoroughly trounced him. which apparently involved holding back until a certain latish point in the campaign, letting the opponent whip himself into a frenzy; and then, after opponent's team had released their best shots, strolled in and annihilated them. It is certainly a technique that would make sense here, since, as noted, BushTeam is digging a hole all by themselves. Let this shit percolate for a while, maybe; it's not going anywhere, not really, even if it appears to take a back burner somewhere down the road. By around convention time, i think the shape of things will be much more evident. And BushTeam will likely be exhausted: i think from here on out it's bad for them.

[jpgray]

20. Surrogates like Kennedy are busily working away!

The less open Kerry is to the 'Chicken Little' or 'not supporting the troops' epithets, the better. He needs to get his policy worked out before he starts his own attacks, and IMO, he doesn't have his policy worked out to the degree that it will survive the kind of scrutiny it will receive.

[sphere]

21. Hammering On Iraq

I've got the impression that Kerry is already a shadow government. He's talking Iraq/foreign policy in all his public appearances. I think he is signaling Europe, Middle East, whole world, what his foreign policy intentions are. So he's is not per se 'hammering', which would be unstatesmanlike.

[newyawker99]

25. Hi sphere!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Slide]

22. Kerry is playing it smart.

National security in general, and especially the "war on terror" are losing issues for Democrats. Public support for the war has solidified at just above 50%, and barring a disaster, it will not significantly change. Appropriately, Kerry has positioned himself well for any possible outcome. (There is a chance, after all, that this thing could work.) If things even out and improve, then Kerry voted for the war, supported the troops, strong defense record, Vietnam, etc. If things continue to fall apart, then Kerry strongly opposed the war from the beginning, criticized the process, urged UN control, warned of quagmire, etc. Kerry needs to continue to hold back, keep it vague, and wait for more developments.

But more importantly, the Democrats need to CHANGE the conversation back to the ECONOMY, a much stronger issue for us. If the recovery fizzles and employment gains weaken then Kerry can seize an opening. (It could happen, although things are looking bad here.) But for god's sake, he should shut up about taxes. They'll be time for that later. Kerry is a backbench hack, but he has strong political skills, and they should not involve putting his ass (and OURS) on the line for potentially losing issues. Let Kennedy carry the water.