On the vast majority of issues the public supports progressives over conservatives. Taxation, healthcare, Iraq, social issues, climate change, energy, etc. The only issue we lag behind is terrorism. By sheer coincidence terrorism is the sole campaign point of Rudy Giuliani.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
"A major survey [pdf] seeking to identify characteristics of independent voters, conducted by the Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University, found that unaligned voters view the Democratic Party favorably by a 55-41 margin, and the Republican Party unfavorably, 55-41. Independents were asked which party they prefer on 10 different issues, and they chose the Democrats on nine issues, including healthcare, 48-20; the situation in Iraq, 44-28; global warming, 49-21; and on such social issues as abortion and gay marriage, 43-26. The only issue on which independents preferred Republicans was "the U.S. campaign against terrorism," 39 GOP, 30 Democrat."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvSYNOPSISvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
So what do we do about it? Here is what I think we should start doing. We need to start showing and proving that neocon policy leads to terrorism but progressive policy fights terrorism.
In fact, I think we can build a 'contract with america' like the neocons did in 1994 on the terrorism issue. We can turn our biggest weakness into one of our biggest strengths. They had a point by point list in 1994 of what they'd stand for. In 1994 the republicans turned their biggest weakness (domestic policy) into their greatest strength. In 2008 we democrats can turn our biggest weakness (the war on terror) into one of our biggest strengths. But we need to start now, not wait until summer of 2008 to come up with a comprehensive terror policy and give it to the people. If we wait until summer of 2008 for the democratic nominee to explain his solution to the terror war, by then Giuliani will have written the democratic position for us in the minds of voters. He is trying to do that right now. We should be telling the people what we'll change now so when the debates come up in summer of next year people already know where we progressive stand.
Just for the sake of our base ten numerical system, here it is. This is what we have to promise the voters on the terror issue. I call it the 'democratic contract with america on foreign policy' after the 'republican contract with america' in 1994. I think we should write something like this, I think we should have all 100 democratic senators running, all 435 representatives running and all 8 presidential candidates running sign it or something like it:
- No more ignoring terrorism in favor of devoting our intelligence and military efforts to fighting unnecessary, poorly planned wars that are waged for political capital. No more using the military and the troops as a tool to win elections. From now on we will only use the military if our intelligence is valid, verified by multiple sources and we know it is absolutely necessary to put our men and women in harm's way.
- No more alienating our allies or squandering their goodwill.
- No more encouraging muslims to become anti-american extremists by engaging in heavyhanded neocon policy. No more torture. No more denying we torture. No more manipulative semantics over torture.
- No more ignoring intelligence reports, falsifying intelligence or engaging in coverups if we fail. No more congressional hearings with the phrase 'I don't recall' in them.
- No more leaks of classified info vital to national security when it suits our political purposes. No more Valerie Plames. If anyone afiliated with the democratic party threatens America's national security by exposing top secret anti-terror information for political purposes they will be prosecuted for treason. Even if it is the vice president of the united states who harms america's national security by undermining US intelligence efforts for partian revenge, then the vice president will be prosecuted for treason. No coverups will be made and no pardons will be granted.
- No more keeping america dependent on mideast oil.
- No more destabalizing the mideast with threats of war. The mideast is an area which is full of countries like Pakistan, Iran, Syria or Egypt which all have chemical, biological or nuclear weapons and all of which are fighting movements against Islamists. Movements that are made stronger by heavyhanded US foreign policy because they encourage extremism.
- A meaningful global anti-poverty campaign to combat idealogical extremism.
- A surge of special forces in Afghanistan and near the Afghan/Pakistan border. Change our anti-terror military practices to become more special forces based policy, and follow the tried and true Israeli model for dealing with international terrorism using special forces units.
- More funding and support for moderate movements in islamic countries.
I personally believe that if not only the presidential candidate but every senator (especially those in contested states) signs onto a 'contract with america on a new direction with national security' or something like that it will have a major effect on the vote in 2008.
If 41 senators can sign a letter condeming Rush Limbaugh, then 100 democratic senators either in or wanting to be in congress along with all 435 people running to keep or win their house seats, along with the presdiental nominee should sign something like this. Imagine how powerful it would be if we had a 'contract with america on foreign policy' signed by 100 democratic senators or candidates, 435 representatives or candidates and 1 presidential candidate. And imagine that letter being xeroxed and mailed to tens of millions of homes all over america, especially swing states and contested senate states.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^SYNOPSIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
We really need to keep emphasizing the role in humanitarian aid in fighting the war on terror. This one is very important, but isn't mentioned much. If people knew this stuff support for a $30 billion a year anti-poverty campaign would be through the roof.
http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/...
After Pakistan had its earthquake in 2005 the US sent millions of dollars and military help to help the people. Bin Ladin sat in a cave reading the Koran. This fact wasn't lost on the Muslim people. This statistic really stands out.
"US favorability among Pakistanis has doubled from 23% in May to more than 46% now, while the percentage of Pakistanis with very unfavorable views declined from 48% to 28%."
The exact same thing happened in Indonesia after the tsunami. Bin Ladin sat in a cave, the US raised millions of dollars and used our military to get food & water to the people.
http://findarticles.com/...
http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/...
"For the first time ever in a Muslim nation since 9/11, support for Osama Bin Laden has dropped significantly (58% favorable to just 23%)."
Now really sit back and think of what that means. There are 400 million muslims in Indonesia & Pakistan, out of a world population of 1.3 billion muslims globally. By enacting these two policies alone we shifted 25% of the public in Indonesia and Pakistan away from Bin Ladin & terrorism. That is 100 million muslims who shifted loyalty away from Bin Ladin.
That means we shifted attitudes in 100 million muslims with these two programs alone. That means 8% of all muslims on earth used to support Bin Ladin, but changed their mind and saw their support either evaporate or decline.
If we make ending global poverty for all people (not just muslims, and not excluding muslims, but all people) a cornerstone of our foreign policy we can really help shift global attitudes towards the US. If we focus only on muslims that'll come across as obviously manipulative, aside from being grossly inhumane (the soviets used to use food to buy and punish loyalty and disloyalty). I'm not calling for that, I'm saying we need to combat poverty everywhere on earth for humanitarian reasons and as a result attitudes on terror will change.
It seems if we portray the frontrunners of the GOP as incompetent, chickenhawk saber-rattlers who drive muslims into supporting terrorism and the progressives as competent, humane leaders who make people not want to become terrorists that we may be able to shift the vote in favor of progressives.
But we have to be serious about fighting global poverty. No $100 million programs that only affect Ghana, I'm talking a $20-40 billion a year global policy or more funded by ending the war in Iraq, allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices, ending subsidies on oil companies & retracting Bush's tax cuts on the wealthy and using that money on programs like this instead.
Enacting those policies should raise over $400 billion a year in funds (more than enough for public funding of elections, universal healthcare, fighting global poverty and getting serious about renewable energy) that'll affect the hardest hit people on earth with medicine, education, technology and agricultural aid.
Terrorism is the GOP trump card in 2008, if they terrify the electorate enough into thinking that a vote for anyone but them will lead to another 9/11 they will win alot of votes.
If we start working now and start working hard to prove that they are incompetent and dangerous but progressives are smart and effective we can take that trump card away.
Of course the GOP could say we are trying to 'coddle potential terrorists' as a rebuttal. And I'm sure they would. But hopefully thinking people would see through that crap.
An added benefit is funding this program is just a matter of priorities. Nobody is talking about raising taxes on middle class america by $500 billion. We are talking about raising funds by
-ending corporate handouts to drug companies, insurance companies & the oil/gas industry by taxing record profits and allowing medicare to negotiate prices
-ending a stupid, counterproductive, unpopular war
-ending tax cuts for the wealthy because their incomes have almost doubled in the last 10 years while everyone elses have stagnated
And taking that money and enacting policies that have broad public support. Public elections (to kick out lobbyists), universal healthcare, fighting global poverty, a serious alternative energy policy)
So by ending policies that 70-80% of the electorate disapproves of (corporate handouts, tax cuts on the rich, the Iraq war) and using those funds to fund policies that 70-90% of the electorage agrees with (public funding of elections, a serious energy policy, a serious anti-poverty policy, universal healthcare) we also win on that front.
If they (the GOP) rally against this measure they are supporting policies that 4/5 of voters disagree with and trying to stop measures that 4/5 of voters agree with.
It is win-win for the progessives and for humanity. If we PROVE to the electorate that the GOP is incompetent and dangerous we kill the entire momentum behind Giuliani and the biggest vulnerability progressives are facing in 2008