Being an advertising/marketing guy, I spend a lot of time devising strategies and creating communications for all kinds of clients with a wide variety of target audiences. Strategy and messaging focus on three primary elements:
- What the client has to say
- What the competition is saying
- What will motivate the target audience to take a desired action in favor of the client
The third element -- what drives a selected audience to act -- is the key, of course, and will often dictate messaging.
As such, I have been keenly interested in:
- What the administration is saying about Iraq
- What Democrats are saying about Iraq
- What Americans are thinking about Iraq (and what is likely to resonante with them prior to election day)
Below, I provide my analysis of this situation and the best way for Democrats to talk about Iraq.
(Read on...)
Karl Rove is desperate to equate Iraq with his favorite phrase, "The War on Terror." Rove knows that most Americans have turned against the war. There is no running away from Iraq for Bush and the administration's supporters in Congress (no matter how desperately some of these incumbents may try).
So Rove's strategy is for Republicans to hug the war to their chests as tightly as possible. Make it part and parcel of his oft-pedaled "World War III" scenario, the "struggle for civilization," as Karl's
Mouthpiece-in-Chief now utters daily.
In addition, Rove has every available mouth using the word "terrorists" to describe those doing battle with our forces (and with each other) in Iraq. The truth, of course, is that we are fighting Iraqis in Iraq. The military's own intelligence estimates are that only 4-6% of insurgents are foreign fighters.
The uptick in over-the-top rhetoric from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and their desperate friends in Congress make Rove's strategy clear. (Much easier to discern than any administration strategy for actually managing the situation in Iraq.)
Rove's hope is that by ratcheting up the fear, he'll be able to salvage just enough support among the rabid right and those who may teetering on Iraq to at least negate Iraq as the primary issue motivating voters in November.
We can debate whether or not his strategy will succeed, but, for the purposes of this diary, I prefer to play out the scenario as presented and figure out the best ways for Democrats to talk about Iraq.
Recent polls have shown two significant trends:
- Americans, in increasing numbers, think Iraq is a failure
- Americans are increasingly seperating Iraq from the so-called "War on Terror"
Thus, Rove's "Iraq-is-the-central-front-in-the-war-on-terror" strategy. It's really all he can do at this point. In that regard, we have an advantage; Rove's options are limited.
That leaves Dems with two primary tacks to take when speaking about Iraq.
The first tack involves taking what Rove is giving us and turning it against Republicans. I have heard a number of Dems using this tack. Essentially, Dems present this simple logic...
IF Iraq=War on Terror
AND Iraq=Failure
THEN War on Terror=Failure
... undercutting Rove's claims that Republicans are better at keeping Americans safe and more likely to win the "War on Terror."
Dems using this tack present the fallacy of Rove's argument:
"If you claim 'Iraq is the central front on the war on terror,' you're failing miserably at the job."
Phrasing here is critical. When phrased as above, it undercuts Rove's primary strategy.
But what doesn't work (and what I have heard from more than a few Democrats) is "Iraq has become (or will become) a breeding ground for terrorists."
Wrong.
This phrasing concedes Rove's main point... and brings us right back to the Kerry campaign: "We will do what Bush is doing, only more and better." (Okay, fire away, but that is my capsule summary of the Kerry campaign on Iraq.)
And therein lies the rub of this first tack. It comes perilously close -- especially when misstated as cited above -- to agreeing with Rove's main contention that Iraq=War on Terror.
We can avoid falling into that trap by careful phrasing. But I believe the better tack -- and the correct way for Dems to speak about Iraq -- is to follow the trends which are already occurring among voters. In other words, "Go with the flow."
And that is to delink Iraq and Rove's "War on Terror." (Yes, we should also pop the whole "War on Terror" bubble, but I don't think we have enough time before the election, nor do I think it is necessary at present.)
Democrats need to hammer away at these points at every opportunity, particularly since a growing number of Americans are clearly seeing these things as being true:
- We are NOT fighting terrorists in Iraq, we are figting Iraqis. We are caught in the middle of a civil war, not fighting terrorism.
- No Iraqis were involved in the 9-11 attacks. No Iraqis have ever been involved in a worldwide terrorist attack. Don't let George Bush or Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld or Karl Rove tell you otherwise.
- The war in Iraq is a distraction from the battle against international terrorism, not the "central front" in the battle.
- Republicans have made us less safe by focusing our reources -- our military forces, our equipment and our financial resources -- on Iraq intead of on the real terrorists who are plotting to attack us as we speak.
- Bush and the Republicans failed to finish the job in Afghanistan -- where the real terrorists, our real enemy, are and now we are back in a war in Afghanistan... without the resources to finish off those who attacked us on 9-11.
The events of the past two weeks in Iraq will serve to only further darken American moods on Iraq. The daily death toll in Baghdad, the increasing number of American casualties (again), the report from Marine intelligence that Anbar is "lost," and even the announcement that trenches will be dug around the outskirts of Baghdad all underline the fact that the Bush administration blundered in getting us into Iraq and continues to foul up the occupation.
Democrats have an opportunity to cut off Rove's last leg: That Republicans are better at keeping Americans safe from terrorists than Democrats.
But our leaders and our candidates must speak as one. They must hammer home, at every opportunity, the points listed above.
Our best chance for November is to underline to the American public that the Republican distraction in Iraq has made us less safe. Iraq is NOT the central front in the war on terror. And many of those who plotted to strike us on 9-11 are still roaming free in the hills of Afghanistan... while we are tied up in the middle of a civil war.
Agree, disagree? Let me know.