OK, so in a few hours we won't be able to escape every media outlet in the country talking about the brave Iraqis going out to vote and how much of a triumph that is. I'll side with the brave part, but you'll have to excuse me if I'm a bit skeptical of that "triumph" bit.
Of course the Bush spin team will be working overtime to make sure that the media buys the whole thing hook, line, and sinker to make sure thier talking points echo in the ears of as many Americans while they sleep as possible. We naturally don't want this to happen because it would allow the administration to define/brand/whatever the marketing consultants say for months to come. So with the objective of staying one step of your opponent let's all make some predictions about exactly how Bush and company will use the coming elections to their political advantage and think of a few ways to counter the spin and keep focused on the reality of the situation. Predictions and unsolicited advice below the fold. As it's a brainstorming session this is an open thread.
I'll admit the Bush team is incredibly good at using timing to their advantage. One example is Bush's speech yesterday where he "took responsibility" for the faulty intelligence leading to the war (while of course not changing his stance). Huge, right? Well I promise not as huge as the right wing and the media will make the Iraqi elections. Bam. He shifted his stance a great deal yesterday, and half the country won't remember, and the rest will only remeber it as a vauge headline. That's probably the most minor uses the administration has for the elections.
The polls are only open today, and its likely to go pretty smoothly- intimidation has already happened and any retribution will come after the elections. Its incredibly unlikely that we'll see any sort of results until at least Sunday, and anything we get then will be so preliminary that their talking points can put just about any sort of spin.
Here's where they catch the Dems flat-footed, and take advantage of the situation.
Democrats aren't going to have much to go after the administration when it comes to the elections. Unless they choose thier words carefully, anything they say might be twisted to where the talking point cooked up in response will be "Democrats hate elections! Democrats don't want the Iraqis to be free! Democrats hate democracy!" and while we're all reeling from the absolute irony of that last statement, the administration will convience the public that the elections went well and were great with the cover of a couple of washed up Democrats desperately trying to salvage what's left of their political careers. The rest of the party elite will probably react with the typical "wait and see" fence-sitting we've come to expect.
The stakes in this argument are very high- whoever wins it will have a significant edge in the much more important debate about the future of the American presence in Iraq. I think the proper Democratic talking point about the elections should be along these lines:
"It's great that the Iraqis were able to vote, but lets hope that whoever wins will be able to have the leadership to hold Iraq together and let our troops come home faster."
I think its a good response because for Repubs to argue against it, they're going to have to imply that they want to keep the troops there, and it leaves enough wiggle room for Democrats that have been squeemish about the war in the past. Our pundits and talking heads should also be pointing out that the elections could put a fundamental islamic government in place. And wasn't fundamentalist islam one of the problems that led to 9/11? Remind the public that its a very real possibility as a result of this administration's actions. Don't assume they know already- people have been working very hard to make sure they haven't.
We've seen our party make some pretty shrewed moves as of late and hold the debate for once in five years. However, as good as they been it's times like now that are the most important. I'm completely open to suggestions and I'm hoping that the Democrats up there on the Hill are too.
Any ideas?