Reid - When will the Democrats learn?

[HardWorkingDem]

Even though Reid made valid statements, when are the Democrats going to learn to choose their words carefully and frame the subject more effectively?

Yes, the 100 percent believers are going to state Reid did the morally right thing, but politically, with just the movement of a sentence here and there, his statement would have been much more effective.

For example, if had only said at the first of his statement, "The way Bush continues to conduct this war only ensures that this war is lost."

People in the military do not like to lose, or appear to lose. Neither do their families or other Americans. Now we are going have several days of the media coverage of Reid's comments that will be misconstrued, mangled and molded into other things when it could have been different.

In an age of 24/7/365 news, when are the Democrats going to learn this?

[grytpype]

1. I agree, I think it was a misstep.

[enough already]

2. Couldn't disagree with you more

Reid is right, the war is lost. I'm pissed that he's trying to parse his words after being spot on the first time. If there is anything to be learned, it's that you never, EVER back down to pukes.

[John Q. Citizen]

3. People prefer lies, is what it sounds like you are saying. I don't agree.

I also think he did the right thing politically.

Perhaps you imagine that the President of the Senate knows nothing about framing, politics, or the military.

Again I disagree.

The military knows they can't win the occupation. That's what they've been saying for months. The American people said the same thing last November.

[HardWorkingDem]

8. All he had to do is move a simple phrase here or there...

and then today maybe Murtha's speech and his better framed one would be picking up positive headlines rather than the media jumping on images of defeat, retreat and losing again. He could have dropped this entire thing right in Bush's lap, but for whatever reason he had, he did a "Kerry".

Frankly, I think many of the top tier Democrats get a little arrogant with their words, shoot from the hip and then have to come back and clean it all up again.

Besides, what is the main goal? It's to end the Iraq War, right? Well, throwing out perceptions of losing a war, retreating or things like that won't help out better than being more thoughtful with one's words.

[John Q. Citizen]

12. I think I have more faith in the electorate than you do. We can't win the occupation militarily.

If Reid had said what you suggested he would have hurt the Dems.

People, including people in the military are well aware we can't win the illegal occupation through military means.

It's obvious to almost everybody except bush. And look at his ratings with the public. Everytime bush gets up and says it's winnible his rating drop even more.

We lost. Except it and we can save lives. Or pretend we can win and waste more lives. That's our choices, and real leadership will tell us the truth.

Do you have any data at all that suggests Reid's words hurt him or Dems politically?

[HardWorkingDem]

15. You miss the point....

For the last two days and probably more, because of Reid's poor use of a simple phrase (just like the famous 87 billion Kerry mistake) what should be being discussed is not.

For example, Bill Maher just gave Reid phrase he SHOULD have used: The war is lost, but it's not the troops fault; it's Bush's.

So just turn on the tv and watch and listen what all these idiots are talking about.

[karynnj]

13. Kerry by the way has been the toughest most articulate

speaker against the war for the last 2 years. The fact is that every word he has spoken in the last 3 years has been looked over by the Republicans and media to use against him - and he actually has given them very little to use.

It is beyond pathetic that you and others pick up the RW theme to the contrary. By the way genius - Kerry has used EXACTLY the formula you recommended for the last YEAR!

Kerry's not running for President. Remember it was Kerry more than anyone who pushed Iraq last year - and in case you don't remember he spoke of it as getting the policy right. In fact people here criticized him for NOT saying that the war was lost.

[HardWorkingDem]

16. You're entitled to your opinion, as am I, but why....

do you have to be rude about it with the "genius" type remark?

We're all Duer's here.

[Ninja Jordan]

4. With the war going so badly, and with it being so unpopular, is what Reid said REALLY a misstep?

It's tantamount to a politician in 1972 saying 'Vietnam is lost.'

[madfloridian]

5. Reid is right, good for him. He should not back down.

Dean got crucified when he said it December 2005. But he stuck by it. It started a conversation, but no one picked up on it that much until now.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/746

It is time to get out of there before we can't.

[sinkingfeeling]

6. Reality bites, doesn't it?

[Robbien]

7. We lost long time ago.

Headlines should say we have lost Iraq. In fact headlines should be shouting we lost Iraq.

[flpoljunkie]

9. TPM: Joint Chiefs Member During Gulf War Agrees wih Reid, Said Iraq War's Lost

Republicans are already jumping all over Harry's Reid's comment that the "war is lost." How about this Senator Reid: You cannot win an "occupation." Why do they fall in the adminstratinon's trap and call what we are doing in Iraq a war--it is not a war, it is an OCCUPATION!

Flashback: Joint Chiefs Member During Gulf War Agrees With Reid, Said Iraq War's Lost
By Greg Sargent

Here's someone who shares Harry Reid's view that the Iraq war is "lost": Retired general Tony McPeak, who served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War.

Here's what McPeak had to say in the March 22 issue of Rolling Stone:

The war in Iraq isn't over yet, but -- surge or no surge -- the United States has already lost. That's the grim consensus of a panel of experts assembled by Rolling Stone to assess the future of Iraq. "Even if we had a million men to go in, it's too late now," says retired four-star Gen. Tony McPeak, who served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War. "Humpty Dumpty can't be put back together again."

McPeak also added: "It's not a question of whether we're going to leave Iraq -- it's a question of when." The whole Rolling Stone panel discussion is worth a read in light of Reid's remarks yesterday and the GOP's assault on them.

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/apr/20/flashback_joint_chiefs_member_during_gulf_war_agrees_with_reid_said_iraq_wars_lost

[primative1]

10. Bingo ...

We have been hearing the same thing for a few years.
Just now we finaly get to hear it from a politician who has the sack to say what we already know. My opinion of Harry Reid continues to improve.

[nolabels]

11. An invasion and occupation is not a war

* and Iraq remind of when i was a little toddler. My older sister would tackle and sit on me and my little brother till she got us to say uncle. Later in life you realize no amount of power or force can change other peoples intent. Trying to make people do something against their will only makes them hostile to you later on. To me, that in nutshell is why * has failed in Iraq.

Iraq is becoming larger than * and his time to sit on it is now passing

[flpoljunkie]

14. Exactly! I wish the Democratic leadership would call it what it is--an OCCUPATION.

[HardWorkingDem]

17. This line of yours is a great point.....

"Iraq is becoming larger than * "

And I think that is something the Dems need to really hammer on: Iraq is a larger issue than Bush, the US and the military and is going to take a world-wide and inclusive solution.

[HardWorkingDem]

18. I MUST APOLOGIZE....New hope in Reid....

Just read this over at Dailykos...


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/22/232927/385

Paul Krugman is a national hero to us. He has given me hope in Reid's thinking and possible intentions....

[TwilightGardener]

19. I read that too, and I do think that Reid is introducing the concept

of our involvement there being a failure, quietly and gently, and being careful to say he speaks for himself. Old Harry can take the heat--this way public opinion will gradually accept the truth of what he is saying, and the war debate will start to focus on winding this shit down instead of waiting forever for the Surge to bring us "Victory".