The Democratic leadership never learns

Rahm Emanuel told us that Tammy Duckworth was more "electable" than Christine Cegelis because of Duckworth's service in Iraq, and her sacrifice.  I said at the time that Republicans always attack candidates on their strength.  They've been doing it for years, but the Democratic leadership still hasn't caught on.

From Talking Points Memo:

GOP candidate Roskam accuses Democratic opponent Duckworth of wanting to 'cut and run' in Iraq.

Duckworth, a double amputee, lost both legs while serving in Iraq.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

Tags: 2006 election, Christine Cegelis, Dirty Tricks, Republicans, strategy, Tammy Duckworth (all tags)

Comments

10 Comments

Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

Ummm...I think using the phrase "cut and run" against Tammy Duckworth is going to backfire, bigtime.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2006-09-25 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

Linking triple amputee vet Max Cleland to bin Laden in 2002 didn't backfire. The fact is, being a disabled vet will get you sympathy, but not votes.

The trouble with Cleland was that he tried to be too Republican and didn't motivate Democrats to turn out for him. And now Duckworth is making the same mistake.

by Sitkah 2006-09-25 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

The difference is that Duckworth actually lost her limbs while fighting IN Iraq.

Had Max Cleland been accused of "cutting and running" from Vietnam, the attack would have been laughed out of the state of Georgia.

The two situations are not comparable.

And, I seem to recall that the reason many people were rooting for Cegelis was precisely because she was MORE against the war than Tammy Duckworth.

So explain to me how accusing Cegelis of wanting to "cut ad run" from Iraq would have been better for us?

by Hesiod Theogeny 2006-09-25 04:54PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

I don't use the term "cut and run". As far as I know, only Republican propagandists do.

Cegalis would have been a better candidate because she almost won last time against an incumbent, and frankly, she's a better Democrat who would have motivated Democratic voters more than Emanuel's choice.

by Sitkah 2006-09-25 05:21PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

Too many ordinary Democrats need to catch on to the fact that too many of their DC leaders are not only corrupted by K Street cash, but also corrupted by DLC political stupidity.

by Sitkah 2006-09-25 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

Tammy Duckworth is the WRONG politician to be making your stand on, pal. Everything I've read about her is admirable. Sje's exactly the kind of person we need more of in Congress.

There's plenty of establishment hacks you can pick on that would advance your argument better than using Tammy Duckworth as a symbol of your ire.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2006-09-25 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

Actually, I didn't choose Duckworth to be the topic of this diary. Take it up with the diarist.

And you're seemingly the only one of us two with ire. I pointed out that being an amputee hero isn't enough if you don't campaign so as to turn out your own party's voters. It's a simple fact that you'll just have to live with.

by Sitkah 2006-09-25 05:18PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

What did Cigalis ever win?

And sure is easy to be tough in a diary on a blog.

Eh, Caro?

Tammy has run a great campaign and I will proudly be working for her this weekend.

Didn't the great Cigalis lose to Duckworth?

Do you know how to read?

by skeeters 2006-09-25 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

Max Cleland lost because he was too much the gentleman in 2002.  I cannot remember a single negative ad he ran against Chambliss that year, despite ample opportunities.  Also, then Gov. Roy Barnes (D) had alienated rural Georgia with the flag change, alientated teachers with his education reform, and alienated environmentalists with plans for a super-highway around Atlanta's northern exurbs.  None of that helped.  Finally, 2002 was a Republican year all around, period.

None of this applies in the Duckworth/Roskam race.  Duckworth is not giving Roskam a free pass, Gov. Bagojevich will be reelected easily, and 2006 will be a Democratic year.  

by CLLGADEM 2006-09-26 01:52AM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic leadership never learns

And I don't see Duckworth hitting back, either.  It's a prescription for loss.

Thanks, DLC.  Thanks, Rahm.  Thanks, Chicago political machine.  Another good job.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

by Caro 2006-09-26 05:16AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads