Update: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full assault on senate republicans.

UPDATE: New youtube video I uploaded from Obama's site highlighting the 16 votes strategy that his campaign has been actively pursuing. Who will join me to help Senator Obama end the Iraq war?

Much has been made of the other contenders' Iraq plans to keep sending the same bill to George Bush over and over again. I agree that this gutsy move shows balls but not necessarily smarts. Obviously the ultimate goal is a timetable leading to withdrawal and not a total cutoff of funds. There is no way that you will get any Senator or presidential candidate on record saying that they would endorse a total cutoff of funds and that includes John Edwards.

What is most puzzling to me is that the burden of change seems to be put squarely on the shoulders of a president who has nothing to lose instead of a resistant republican congress who does. Obama's strategy of late has been a smart and sharp 180 degree course turn from what other presidential contenders have been proposing.

Obama smartly knows that the ultimate bargaining chip is votes. Those who stand to lose the most by continual support of this war are the republicans in the senate and not the lame duck president that Biden and Edwards is focusing on. Obama is now implementing the "16 votes" phase of his Iraq plan. He is now calling out republican senators in congress who, up to this point, have not budged on their war positions of the president's failed strategy.

Senator Obama now has up his offical "16 votes" web page which shows a US map highlighting all the states that need to pressure their congressmen. This is absolutely the best strategy to date and shuts down some of the criticisms of Obama that suggested he never takes an adversarial position. Just recently Obama called out senator Grassley of Iowa to stop his support of this failed war. Even after Senator Grassley protested Obama's move, Obama renewed this political pressure by saying he is not overstepping his grounds. He says the issue isn't about Washington etiquette -- it's about bringing the troops home.

Lets bring our troops home folks. Lets support Obama's effort by going to the 16 votes website and signing the petition to pressure these dumb fucking republicans.

We cannot allow our soldier's lives to be taken for granted and those Republican congressmen cannot afford to take their constituency's vote for granted either.

Obama '08.

P.S.

For those who want to learn more about Obama and what distinguishes him from the rest of the pack, please visit my youtube site here.


Poll
Which is a better plan?
To pressure the republicans.
To pressure the president.

Votes: 50
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Re: Obama's Iraq strategy (3.00 / 0)

I wish all the candidates would unite behind this effort.  Especially after not just voting for the War but co-sponsoring it, Edwards should use all his efforts to incite his supporters to action, not simply anger.


by dougdilg on Fri May 11, 2007 at 07:44:32 PM EST

Umm, he is (3.00 / 1)

"Congress is considering abandoning it's plan to end the war in favor of yet another "extension" for President Bush that doesn't bring a single soldier home. We have to turn up the heat--and we have to move fast.

As of this morning, 101,180 Americans have joined our call for Congress to stand up to Bush and end the war. We have a plan to get these names onto every desk and doorstep in Washington D.C., but we need your help."

Feel free to help out:


by okamichan13 on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:43:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Umm, he is (none / 0)

Bush does not care.  Tell me what he has to lose?

Lets stand up to the republicans, fuck Bush.


Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:49:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Lets stand up to both of them (3.00 / 1)

neither of them care enough


by okamichan13 on Fri May 11, 2007 at 09:36:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lets stand up to both of them (none / 0)

But one of the has something to lose whether they care or not.  I guarantee they care about votes.


Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Fri May 11, 2007 at 09:46:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Expecting enough for a veto override (3.00 / 1)

in the house and the senate for a real bill that ends the war is expecting quite a bit.

Put pressure on them both. Pressure on Bush gets us votes in 2008 as well.


by okamichan13 on Fri May 11, 2007 at 09:56:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lets stand up to both of them (none / 0)

That's one of the smartest statements I have read today!


by yitbos96bb on Sat May 12, 2007 at 10:30:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

perhaps I'm wrong, and your diary is great, but (none / 0)

when I read the title, I thought I was going to hear how Barack's strategy was causing a Republican assault against him. does the title need a tweak? i'm not sure.

and to get to the point, I concur heartily.


by the green and bold on Sat May 12, 2007 at 05:45:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are right (none / 0)

You are right.  I changed it to:

Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full assault on Republican opposition.


Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Sat May 12, 2007 at 10:15:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are right (none / 0)

lol now it sounds like he's anti Republican opposition, to the war.


by fisheye on Sun May 13, 2007 at 11:21:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are right (none / 0)

Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full assault on senate republicans

Boy you guys are working me.  I'm sure you understood my point but I will change it again for clarity.


Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Mon May 14, 2007 at 12:08:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are right (none / 0)

just giving you a hard time

I got it


by fisheye on Mon May 14, 2007 at 07:27:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy (3.00 / 5)

I see Edwards "keep sending it back until the veto passes" strategy and Obama's "keep pounding on the Republicans until there's a veto override" strategies as more complimentary than anything. In a lot of ways they're two sides of the same coin. Both serve to keep up the pressure on the Republican establishment, it's just that the pressure is applied in different places.

I do think Obama's strategy is a lot more likely to actually work, since Bush has no reason to eventually give but the Senators do. However Obama's strategy is massively helped by the existence of Edwards' strategy, since Edwards is greasing the Senatorial wheels by potentially making it even more uncomfortable for Republicans to be close to the president, and because Edwards' tack makes Obama's seem more moderate and possible by comparison (there's this whole "Overton Window" thing)...


by mcc on Sat May 12, 2007 at 12:07:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Agreed (none / 0)

it doesn't need to be either/or. And Edwards pressure is on all of Congress as well as Bush.

They are complimentary efforts towards the same goal.


by okamichan13 on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:43:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (3.00 / 1)

Just look at the re-vote effort and understand the political implications of a marginalized presidency and you'll know Obama isn't the only one who has a 'plan'.

To pressure Republicans you discredit their President. Trying to pressure them indivually won't work nearly as well as a marginalized President.

This is happening naturally already but an effort to accelerate the process could be very effective. All parties on our side are headed to the same goal. It's a question of tactics.

Remember...Nixon didn't leave until his own party told him to get out before he destroyed them all.

The first meeting of this sort happened this week at the WH with REPUBLICANS telling their President that they couldn't keep up the support if he didn't budge. (Which he won't in any significant way.)

He is daily becoming more marginalized from his own party. That's how you get the votes in the House and Senate on a veto-proof resolution.


...just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg at PolCampaign
by BigDog on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:00:29 PM EST

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

But this is not sending the same bill again without a veto proof vote. I think you make a good case, however, that veto proof vote is the ultimate indicator of success. This must come first, not another useless bill that will get vetoed anyway. I am by no means an advocate of just sending a clean bill, however, I also do not believe a continual exercise in futility is smart either.
Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:14:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Will Obama vote differently than Biden? (none / 0)


by dpANDREWS on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:33:03 PM EST

lovingj (3.00 / 1)


i have to say that your passion is contagious. please keep it up!
by pmb on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:35:37 PM EST

Re: lovingj (none / 0)

Thanks.
Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:42:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

I agree totally.  Bush wants to stay in iraq and pass it off to the next president.  Since he is in full lame  duck he doesn't have to do anything.  And on Political Wire I read a Cheney quote that said they did not get elected to care about the republican party.  That is where they stand.  They will let the republicans sink on their own.  They feel they owe no one.
You have to put the pressure on getting the votes needed and the one signature thing became Obama's rally cry.
by vwcat on Fri May 11, 2007 at 09:13:21 PM EST

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

that was fun.  I wrote a note to my 2 senators to tell them to back the pressure on the republicans.  Only problem is that my senators are Dick Durbin and Barack Obama.  But, I could not resist doing the message thing and said I back the pressure on the republicans - then added a lol.  I also said That the people of Illinois are proud of both him and Durbin.


by vwcat on Fri May 11, 2007 at 09:22:41 PM EST

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

I am from Michigan but I am super proud of your two Senators.  Durbin and Obama make a great team.


Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Fri May 11, 2007 at 09:42:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

thank you.  We kinda like the two of them.


by vwcat on Fri May 11, 2007 at 10:12:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

best tandem goin'!


by serge in dc on Fri May 11, 2007 at 11:23:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

Michigan will go Obama in the primary huh?


by fisheye on Sun May 13, 2007 at 11:25:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Post! (none / 0)

Thanks for posting this. I love it.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Fri May 11, 2007 at 10:01:19 PM EST

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

I like this plan a lot, it's similar to John Kerry's "Roadblock Republicans" plan, good move. If Obama would ask his fan base to making some real noise by encouraging them to give to ActBlue general fund pages against those 16 Senators, then I'd be impressed.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri May 11, 2007 at 10:01:38 PM EST

Re: ( Sniff Sniff ) (none / 0)

What's that? I'm sorry, what?


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Fri May 11, 2007 at 10:16:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That is a good idea, (none / 0)

but don't hold your breath.  They charge $50 a head just to hear him speak.  All funds go to Obama for Pres.


by littafi on Sat May 12, 2007 at 12:19:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That is a good idea, (none / 0)

(ahem)

It's actually a "suggested donation" of $ 25.00 a ticket thank you very much.  


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sat May 12, 2007 at 06:19:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That is a good idea, (none / 0)

Here in St. Louis it's $50.


Join us at Show Me Progress!
by clarkent on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:43:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That is a good idea, (none / 0)

That's called a fundraiser. It's not just designed to hear him speak. It's to raise money for the campaign. It appeared several hundred actually didn't have a problem with it either.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sun May 13, 2007 at 07:40:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

Gee Jerome, why don't you go and blog or write to the campaign.  Go on the site and make the suggestion.  Maybe they are not aware of it or did not think about it.  Lots going on these days for them.


by vwcat on Fri May 11, 2007 at 10:13:39 PM EST

"Sniff, sniff" is what I heard (none / 0)

When I received my first and only call asking to contribute directly to the Obama campaign during the rush to meet the end of first quarter donations, I told the caller that I'd made contributions through ActBlue. I have my own page for Obama in fact, and had made one other contribution in cash on his announcement day, Feb. 10. The caller wasn't at all congratulatory for my efforts, rather, he made clear they liked to keep the donations "in house."

BTW, being out of the loop this way, a Thank You postcard arrived this week! Took them a long time to integrate an oulier donor like myself.


by Books Alive on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:09:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Sniff, sniff" is what I heard (none / 0)

Good for you.


by Jerome Armstrong on Sun May 13, 2007 at 11:14:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq (3.00 / 1)

It's potentially a good strategy to get some removed from office in 2008, but I doubt any of them (aside from perhaps Coleman, Collins, and Sununu) could be persuaded to change their minds, so I doubt it's a real strategy to end the war before then.  Like Jerome said, this is as much about taking on the Republicans in elections as getting them to vote with us.
If Obama's "bipartisanship" means asking them to stand with us where we have big public support, like on this issue, or have to face our wrath at the ballot box, I'm all for it.
"And so in the place of the palace of privilege, we seek to build a temple out of faith and hope and charity."-FDR
by jallen on Fri May 11, 2007 at 10:46:04 PM EST

Going after Bush is Better (3.00 / 1)

Going after president bush is better.

1.  It reinforces the frame that the change we need is in the whitehouse.   Obama's effort may help pick up extra seats in the Senate.

  1.  The President is weak right now and the weaker he gets, the harder it is for Republican members in congress to stick with him.  i.e., this is an effective way of dividing the opposition so that we can split and pick up votes.  
  2.  Keeping the heat on Bush allows adds pressure on the Democrats to stay strong, united and oppose the president.   Our biggest risk is now is dems being split and peeling off to cut some deal - led by the leadership.


Don't hate the media, become the media. -- Jello Biafra
by Orlando on Fri May 11, 2007 at 11:06:09 PM EST

as barack says (3.00 / 2)


"it's a both/and proposition, not and either/or propostion"

let's go for both.


by pmb on Fri May 11, 2007 at 11:16:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Agreed (none / 0)

there doesnt have to be conflict here, the strategies are complimentary


by okamichan13 on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:27:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Barry Obama is so yesterday (1.50 / 4)

When people wanted substance from him he offered talking points.  


by dpANDREWS on Fri May 11, 2007 at 11:23:24 PM EST

Re: Barry Obama is so yesterday (none / 0)

huh???


by serge in dc on Fri May 11, 2007 at 11:24:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Barry Obama is so yesterday (none / 0)

Obviously you need someone to explain to you word for word what Obama has accomplished in the way of substance. But first announce who you support in the primaries and then tell me where you think Obama lacks substance.
Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:24:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Pathetic (none / 0)

You're such a troll.


by Korha on Sat May 12, 2007 at 12:49:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Barry Obama is so Non-Understood (none / 0)

Well, would someone tell me where all the 'substance' from Obama is??? Not just another comment, I'm really in dire need of a thread about where Obama has really drawn his lines. I still do not have any idea of what this candidate actually STANDS FOR. I need much more info.


by blues on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:35:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Barry Obama is so Non-Understood (none / 0)

For one he's not much for drawing lines between people in general. We've had enough lines drawn in the sand don't ya think?


by fisheye on Sun May 13, 2007 at 11:30:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (none / 0)

... is aimed squarely at recalcitrant Congressmen and Senators ... instead of giving them the high ground in behind the scenes negotiation, put them on the record as voting against the withdrawal timetable when it comes up for the vote, and when it comes up for the veto override ... then put them on the record again in another two weeks, and again, and again, and again.

They will start to crack.


*John Edwards* ... and the JE08 Supporters Blog
by BruceMcF on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:37:07 AM EST

Re: The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (3.00 / 2)

Exactly. Somehow there's this idea that Edwards' call to send the bill back again and again is aimed at Democrats. It's aimed at Bush and Republicans in general. The more they vote against it, the more they vote against funding for the troops and for a never-ending US presence in Iraq.


Join us at Show Me Progress!
by clarkent on Sat May 12, 2007 at 10:13:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (3.00 / 1)

Why would they start to crack?  If you send the same bill again and again then you make yourself appear to be as stubborn as the President and provide the ground for Republicans to stay firm.  It sidetracks the issue from bringing the troops home to politics as usual in Washington where nothing gets done and slowly public support would start to congeal around Party lines.

Instead we need to isolate the President from his Party.  We cannot make this a battle between Parties.  The country is not split down Party lines on this issue.  We need to make it more and more difficult for Republican Senators to stay firm by staying focused on saving lives, not being tough for tough sake.  


by dougdilg on Sat May 12, 2007 at 12:33:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (none / 0)

Great point and I agree. The best way to win this battle is to get more public pressure on the republicans to concede and part with this president's failed strategy.
Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Sat May 12, 2007 at 12:40:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (none / 0)

OK, but where's the pressure? You really think that what's his name from Idaho or Wyoming are going to feel pressure to vote for timetables from their constituents in Idaho and WY? Even if they're the last two holdouts, don't you think they'd be more concerned with crazy primary opponent going after them for voting with the Dems than a Dem in the general election?


by adamterando on Sat May 12, 2007 at 10:37:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (none / 0)

Well put.

Instead we need to isolate the President from his Party.  We cannot make this a battle between Parties.  The country is not split down Party lines on this issue.  We need to make it more and more difficult for Republican Senators to stay firm by staying focused on saving lives, not being tough for tough sake.

I think this is the only realistic way to put pressure on the President. Sending the Bill back and having it vetoed over and over again isn't going to put any pressure on him. He will love that sort of battle.  


by Mystylplx on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:22:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They do not want to vote on this again, ... (none / 0)

... because for a large number of them, a large majority of their constituents disagree with that vote. And the more times they vote to support the President's failed policy, the juicier the attack ad becomes in the fall of '08.

Most Americans want their elected officials to be a bit stubborn in doing what they want done ... its when politicians get stubborn on what appears to be their own agenda that they don't like it.

And the Democratic bill that Bush vetoed was, on balance, what people want done.


*John Edwards* ... and the JE08 Supporters Blog
by BruceMcF on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:35:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They do not want to vote on this again, ... (none / 0)

The problem is that going about it in that way sets it up as a partisan battle between Democrats and Republicans instead of a non-partisan battle between Americans and the Bush administration.

Huge difference.


by Mystylplx on Sat May 12, 2007 at 02:03:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They do not want to vote on this again, ... (none / 0)

Actually, that's a good thing. Americans agree with the Democrats on this.


Join us at Show Me Progress!
by clarkent on Sat May 12, 2007 at 03:11:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They do not want to vote on this again, ... (3.00 / 1)

A good thing in what way? A good way to score political points? Or a good way to get this mess cleaned up?

It seems to me the odds of pressuring the administration into doing anything different are alot greater if we can get at least some greater portion of his own party to turn on him, and accomplishing that is less likely if we frame it as a partisan battle.


by Mystylplx on Sat May 12, 2007 at 03:20:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They do not want to vote on this again, ... (none / 0)

Getting out Iraq is good policy and good politics.


Join us at Show Me Progress!
by clarkent on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:52:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How does setting it up as non-partisan ... (none / 0)

... put any pressure on the Republicans. Insisting that it be "non-partisan" give Republicans a lot more bargaining power than saying, "we are going to do what we were elected to do, and you can either join or stand in the way".


*John Edwards* ... and the JE08 Supporters Blog
by BruceMcF on Sat May 12, 2007 at 03:55:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How does setting it up as non-partisan ... (none / 0)

Non-partisan doesn't necessarily mean bi-partisan.

As you pointed out above, there are lots of good reasons for Republicans to support, at the very least, a change of course. If they break ranks and start opposing the Bush strategy then many of them will be rewarded by their constituencies down the line. And I suspect there are lots of Republicans teetering on the brink of doing exactly that.

But if this gets framed as a partisan battle between Democrats and Republicans that makes it harder for them to break ranks in that way.

we are going to do what we were elected to do, and you can either join or stand in the way

How about this instead--

we are going to do what we were elected to do, and we invite you to join in a non-partison way...


by Mystylplx on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:17:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The strategy of sending the same bill back ... (none / 0)

Right, that approach is simply antagonistic. Pushing instead of pulling the string.


by fisheye on Sun May 13, 2007 at 11:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Veto Math? (3.00 / 1)

Isn't it fundamentally incorrect to say that you need to find just 16 votes?  You need both the Senate and the House at 2/3rds to override a veto.  Why doesn't Obama mention the 72 extra votes in the House that are needed? There needs to be an 88 votes website.  

Of course "We're just 88 votes away from ending the war" doesn't have a very nice ring to it.


by cesar on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:22:10 PM EST

Re: Veto Math? (none / 0)

Lets face it, this is a much smaller issue in the house. The senate has been the hardest body to crack to date. If we crack the senate then its end game.
Obama Citizen Ad Videos
by lovingj on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:30:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If they get over the almost impossible 16 ... (none / 0)

... vote margin in the Senate, getting the votes to override in the House will be child's play in comparison.


*John Edwards* ... and the JE08 Supporters Blog
by BruceMcF on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:36:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not so sure about that (none / 0)

a lot of the House Repuglicans are much "redder" than many of their Senators. They are more ideological and their districts are smaller and more ideological. With around 30% of Americans supporting Bush basically no matter what he does and House Republicans representing a lot of areas where those people are either a majority or a large %, I don't think its that easy at all.


by okamichan13 on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:49:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not so sure about that (none / 0)

agreed - a lot of these pols are in safe districts with hardcore red supporters - Getting a 16 vote swing is reaching beyond the stars and not realistic. It can also look bad on dems in general because people are sick with "congress not doing anything" and while liberals think sending it back over and over is doing something, conservatives see it as doing nothing. In the end it goes back to the middle ground, and i think the middle will get fed up quite quickly since nationally congress does only slightly better than bush in the polls


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Sat May 12, 2007 at 10:05:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

To be honest (none / 0)

I really really doubt we are going to make real progress on ending this war before we chose our next president unless the Iraqi government themselves decide to kick us out.

There is a strong Iraqi movement now within the government to pass a timetable to remove US troops and in the end that might be the most effective.

Doesnt mean of course we cant keep trying by pressuring Bush and Republicans. And we should. But realisticly expecting Bush to sign anything that severely limits the war or expecting either or both houses of Congress to override him is at this point extremely unlikely.


by okamichan13 on Sun May 13, 2007 at 02:25:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

This seems like a smart move, although if Edwards or Obama could bring themselves to endorse the plan of the other as a complimentary addition to their own, it'd be be a great way of establishing themselves as movement candidates rather than just personality candidates.

It's also notable that Iowa, NH and SC are amongst the 20 states he's targetting with this. One wonders if this will dovetail into attempting to gain votes there.


Visit Forgotten Countries, my new foreign policy-based blog
by Englishlefty on Sat May 12, 2007 at 02:36:21 PM EST

Re: Obama's Iraq strategy is morphing into a full (none / 0)

Which Edwards plan? The one where we immediately cut the funding? Or the one where we get into a big partisan game of chicken with Republicans?

It seems to me this is either Edwards 'Democrats vs. Republicans' or Obama's 'Americans vs. the Bush administration.'

I don't see how it could be both.

And Obama is already well established as a movement candidate. I also wouldn't describe Edwards as a 'personality candidate.'


by Mystylplx on Sat May 12, 2007 at 03:24:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you know that 360 degrees is a full circle (3.00 / 1)

I think we need

  • pressure on the White House,
  • pressure on Democratic congresscritters to stand up against Bushco, and
  • focus on republicans to either own this travesty and all the problems that go with it or stand with the American public.

It's going to take all three to change the course of this military action plus getting the American people to be public and vocal in their opposition.


by edgery on Sat May 12, 2007 at 09:40:16 PM EST

excellent post, lovingj (none / 0)

interesting approach by Obama on this. THe key phrase from the site page is this: "to carry out the will of the American people... to end the war". Dems need to get on TV and repeat this ad infinitum.


by NuevoLiberal on Sun May 13, 2007 at 09:42:11 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.