Will The GOP Blindside The Democrats On Terror Issues?

While many Democratic strategists are confident that the deteriorating economy virtually assures the victory of their presidential candidate on November 4, there is a quiet debate over whether the party and prospective nominee are likely to get blindsided by Republicans raising issues of terrorism and national security.

Republicans are making no secret of their intentions in the general election.

Karl Rove declared that if either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton is nominated, he or she will be challenged on upcoming Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) legislation: "Do they or do they not want our intelligence officials to be listening in on terrorists' conversations in the Middle East who may ... be plotting to hurt America?"

Alex Castellanos, Republican media strategist, told the Huffington Post that the continuing concerns of American voters about the dangers of another terrorist attack will be the engine behind a Republican victory in November:

"9/11 changed everything," he said. "The president's job is to lock the doors at night and keep America safe from terrorism. We are still in that world in 2008. And that's why a Republican is going to be elected president again in 2008."

Opinion on the likely strength of such Republican challenges to the Democratic nominee varies widely.

At one end of the spectrum, former Senator Gary Hart warns that Democrats are vulnerable and unprepared. "The ghost of Karl Rove will raise the specter of terrorism and swift boat whomever the Democrats nominate. The fear card is the last resort of the collapsing W. coalition," he said.

At the other end, Joseph Cirincione, Senior Fellow and Director for Nuclear Policy at the Center for American Progress, contends the Democrats will offer stronger messaging:

Story continues below

advertisement

"The Democratic candidate will have a very strong case to make to the American people that the conservative national security policies have failed. We are less secure now than we were in 2000, in 2001 or in 2002. Osama bin Laden is closer today to getting a nuclear weapon or weapon materials than he ever has been. This is the most serious national security threat facing America. The president's policies have increased this threat, not decreased it. I do not believe that the Democratic presidential candidate will have any trouble making that case to the American people."

Similarly, Brookings Institution foreign policy scholar Ivo Daalder argued, "Terror and fear are the only things the Reps can run on -- and so they will. Every Democrat knows that. But the country is clearly hunkering for a leader who can also address their real and current fears, which are economic first and foremost. So the Democrats have to talk about these issues, which surely aren't peripheral to the voters. That doesn't mean that they should not talk about national security -- they should, they do, and they will."

Republican pollster Bill McInturff surprisingly reinforced this view. "Each party's nominee has a lot of latitude to define themselves for the general," he said. "To be fair, as of now, there's not a major candidate who has messed up an issue for the general beyond repair as of today."

The most nuanced analysis of the politics of terror was provided by Brian Katulis, a less well known figure in the Democratic foreign policy establishment who is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress where he is a Senior Advisor to the Center's Middle East Progress project.

"I wouldn't say that Democrats have avoided national security as much as they have not yet developed a coherent narrative that simply goes beyond 'Bush screwed things up.'....Conservatives have an overarching story when it comes to talking about national security - it's not dissimilar to Bush's narrative: there are bad people out there, we need to go out there and try to kill them ourselves before they get us. Simplistic, and applied to many different threats, but it's kind of an easy story line....

"It's those political consulting classes on the Democratic side who are particularly wounded and still operating on the defensive when it comes to national security - which is truly a stunning thing when you think about it, given all of the strategic errors conservatism is responsible for on the national security front the last seven years.

"So I think there's a sweet spot for Democrats to actually say something that connects the dots on the national security and terrorism front - one that actually responds to a need from the American people to hear a viable alternative - but we're just not hearing it yet at that political communications level. We're seeing and hearing tick lists that make the broader public's eyes glaze over. On the conservative side, we hear a story line - a batshit crazy one for the most part that got us in the predicament that we're in now, but hey, it's a story. Most people would rather go to a movie that has a plot."

Comments

[Feettotheflame]

Thomas Edsall is a washed up hack who used to play nice with Republicans for the Washington Post. He's a textbook fascist who plays politics with nonissues, which feed the fear and ignorance for Red State voters.
The terrorists I fear are the Thomas Edsalls who beat the drum to war. National security is not an issue, except to corporations who wish to feed on the teat of fear. There is so much easy money to be made in wiretapping, security cameras, fences, riot gear, tear gas, etc.
Thomas is waiting for the day those fascist tools can be used on YOU. Americans are the next target on the "war" on terror.
Thomas doesn't care who he hurts as long as there's a paycheck for him and his people at the end of the bloody day.

[patriotscholar]

I sincerely hope that the republicans are not planning on staging an attack on the us to generate sympathy for the cause of "See, we told you so" rhetoric.

It won't work...the­re are too many people out there right now looking for exactly that to happen and watching all the players in the game.

[timothe]

Wow! A fair article! Kudos to Thomas Edsall on a good piece of journalism.

However, I disagree with the premise that the Democrats are vulnerable on foreign policy. The Republican base can't forgive Democrats for attempting to legislate the war, but their votes aren't going Democrat anyway. A large part of the independent vote is still seething about Bush's decision to go into Iraq. Therefore, I don't see it as the main GOP attack point.

The main GOP attack point is immigratio­n...specif­ically, border security. It is the 3rd rail issue for Democrats and if the GOP candidate has a strong record on immigration, it's bad news for the Democrats.

That's why the Republican base is adamantly trying to remove McCain and Huckabee from the race. They can't beat the Dems in the general election because they are both on the wrong side of the immigration/border security issue.

[cruisepuppy7452a]

Ok, I am tired of wathing the terror card, morality card, race card, the gay card get played. Is that all the GOP has? Can't find a sheep in there, something real to bitch about? Its sad and pathetic those people who died needlessly on 911 get abused further. The GOP has some titanium ones playing this card, those deaths, the terror card. They want to talk morals and ethics, terror? How about how the people of the USA are daily abused, left behind, left without jobs, healthcare, outsourcing, watching thier civil rights errode as egregious leaders in DC are allowed to committ treasonous acts? Talk about hyposcrissy. Rove is a snivelling, sleazy, weasel, who would allow dirty tricks, theft, voter fraud to steal yet another election. Using the terror card isn't enough. Basta. The American people deserve leaders whom we can trust. GOP, we cannot trust.

[loki]

The GOP is the Terrorist issue. As others have said, AL Qaeda and the GOP are apparently in bed together, and its to drive up the GOP membership, votes, and power over Americans.

One thing you can not deny is that its the American people who have allowed this all to happen. For some reason when election time comes around , the majority of the voters will re-elect the same people who abuse their powers and the American citizens , no matter how corrupt or abusive they are proven to be. There has to be a massive mental illness in America , because I can not figure any logical reason to keep putting such abusive and corrupt people in positions of power over us as much as we do.
Maybe we deserve this?? I would hope not, but I can not find any logical reason for this. There is something wrong, and it started with the voters, and it can only end by the voters.

[gevan]

The GOP and their Al Quaida allies will think of something to maintain their hold on power. Whether or not the American public "won't get fooled again" remains to be seen.

[BillZBubb]

The RepubliCLOWNS have lost all credibility on terrorism. A big majority know Iraq was a major blunder. Plus the public is wise to their "fear, fear, fear, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11..." game. That dog won't hunt any more.

The Democrats, however, should go on the offensive on the terrorism issue. They should tie all of the blunders and crimes to conservatism not just to Bush. It is the conservative ideology that leads to messes like the one we are currently in.

[Pat15]

They have done it so many times ..but Democrats never learn ..First rebut their lies immdeiatel­y... Then tell the citizens ..A 2-bit Al Quida (Osama that SOB) which has so called soilders with no helmets, no shoes & old rifles..Bo­osh could not defeat A failed policy & strategic mistake he made to invade Iraq which had nothing to do with 911. Imagine a powerful nation such as ours, with best soilders, best air force & best equipment etc could not defeat a 2-bit organization called Al Quida not because of our military but because of blunders Boosh made...Tha­t is where the moron Decider made the strategic mistake, bad policy which led to shift resources away from Afghanistan & move to Iraq... Boosh never understood the enemy (Al Quida) You cant defeat Al Quida by tanks etc but thru covert operations, surgical strikes & thru intelligence ...Boosh & his neocons never understood that ...He now says he invaded Iraq to bring Democracy ...what a cruel joke that is... Unfortunately, cluless citizens elected him twice ... We deserve this moron who not only destroyed Iraq & its economy but ruined ours too... Amen...