ADVICE FOR DEMS FROM LAST NIGHT'S DEBATE.
1. Note to Barack Obama: These guys fight dirty, and they don't give even a nod toward compromise. Rising above it will mean letting their attacks stand, so prepare to beat them at their own game with quick, precise, straightforward prose.
2. Republicans are terrified of the words "George W. Bush." A smart Democrat would force her or his Republican opponent to face up, as often as possible, to the legacy of his party's leader.
3. Republicans attempt to speak for the troops. McCain claimed every single soldier in Iraq supports the surge and a continuous U.S. presence there. Duncan Hunter said most troops are "conservatives" and uncomfortable serving with gays. Democrats can't let Republicans own this debate -- force them to respect our soldiers by acknowledging the diversity of opinions that exists among them.
4. Unless McCain or Huckabee miraculously wins the nomination, the Democrat will be facing an opponent unafraid of appearing ungenerously, rabidly anti-immigrant. Study McCain for clues about how to sound sensible on the issue, and even prepare to name drop him as a guy you agree with on immigration: Nod toward border security, but emphasize the humanity of immigrants and realistic solutions for dealing with 12 million undocumented people within our borders.
--Dana Goldstein
Feeds: 



COMMENTS (11)
Agreed. Nicely done.
Posted by: Will | November 29, 2007 11:25 AM
I think Giuliani will slide around on immigration if he gets to the general election, the way he currently slides around on his crime fighting record in NY-- was he battling people in their neighborhoods or protecting them against the criminals in their neighborhoods? (What's a little excess here and there, it happens)... Meanwhile, Giuliani wasn't an immigrant basher as mayor.
The top candidate who really wants immigration as an issue is Romney, who *really needs* to deflect attention from his prior life as a private equity Robber Baron, and from the current business practices of his friends. Did you notice the look he gets on his face when they go after his flip flopping? The guy's a practiced liar (necessary in his original calling), but he does *know* he has lots and lots to hide.
The problem is that if HRC went up against Romney, I have no idea what domestic issue they would have to argue about, other than immigration. She's not going to deal with any of the other reasons for people's economic insecurity either. Our insecurity means more security for Chelsea. Steering that was savvy in its way, but I don't think we should elect her president for it.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 29, 2007 11:52 AM
Why is Ron Paul always winning these debates, according to the polls, yet he only garners less than 2% of the popular vote? Maybe people voting are not republicans.
Posted by: jason | November 29, 2007 12:07 PM
For once, I agree with TAPPED, that's some darn fine advice. It's especially good considering how McCain's support for IllegalImmigration has vaulted him to top place in the polls. The Dems should also continue to conflate different types of immigration; the public is NOT catching on to that lie. And, the Dems should continue to falsely accuse the large % of their own members who oppose illegal activity of being "anti-immigrant" and the like.
Keep pushing for the stars!
Posted by: TLB | November 29, 2007 12:37 PM
"It's especially good considering how McCain's support for IllegalImmigration has vaulted him to top place in the polls."
ROFLMAO.... Dear heart, this is what happens to you when you become a monomaniac on any single issue. You see, dear, McCain doesn't "support" illegal immigration, which means that the "false accusations" here are coming from ... wait for it ... you. Moreover, McCain's positions on illegal immigration are hurting him with the rabid anti-immigrant Republican base like yourself, not with independents.
"The Dems should also continue to conflate different types of immigration; the public is NOT catching on to that lie."
Really, dear? Are they catching on to the lie that Democrats are "supporting" illegal immigration?
"And, the Dems should continue to falsely accuse the large % of their own members who oppose illegal activity of being 'anti-immigrant' and the like."
Dear heart, we accuse you, specifically, of being "anti-immigrant" because you are, in fact, "anti-immigrant." Deal with it.
Personally, I loved that conversation you and I had over on Kevin's blog where you were consumed with fear and hatred for the demonstrations in Los Angeles and elsewhere and you were just absolutely convinced that the rest of the country was going to rise up and join you. How did that work out for you, dear?
Posted by: PaulB | November 29, 2007 2:08 PM
"A single room, a table for one--
It's a lonesome town all right,
But soon I'll kiss you hello at our front door,
And, Dear Heart, I want you to know I'll leave your arms never more."
Dear PaulB: Please stop stealing my seduction lines.
Posted by: Andy Williams | November 29, 2007 3:09 PM
Obviously, when McCain promoted things like illegal aliens picking lettuce, he was supporting IllegalImmigration.
As for the Dems supporting IllegalImmigration, there are too many examples to list. However, when HowardDean conflated the legal and illegal varieties ("scapegoating immigrants"), he was supporting it. When Dem leaders consistently seek to block ImmigrationEnforcement, they're supporting it. When state Dem leaders join with a former MexicanConsulGeneral in a parade in support of IllegalImmigration (tinyurl.com/ygbclj), they're supporting it. There really are too many examples to list.
Posted by: TLB | November 29, 2007 4:21 PM
Hej, hej, PaulB, how’d that “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” scam work out for you? It was one of the biggest travesties the Dems have come up with since the Confederacy or Jim Crow. Of course, they had help from business elites and their GOP minions in Congress. By the way, I am one of those who is opposed to illegal immigration but has no problem with legal immigration even at high levels. I’m not bothered by the current policy, which allows about 1 million legal immigrants per year (although the system undoubtedly needs to be more efficient, user-friendly, etc.). I’m so pro-immigrant that I married one--a Norwegian who is a legal immigrant. But unlike most of the 20 million or more illegals in the US, my wife respects the rule of law and the democratic process, which is why she was willing to endure the Kafkaesque process of becoming a legal resident.
Posted by: Phelan | November 29, 2007 4:29 PM
"Obviously, when McCain promoted things like illegal aliens picking lettuce, he was supporting IllegalImmigration."
ROFL.... Responding to an accusation of a lie with another iteration of the lie just proves my point. You really should get out more.
"However, when HowardDean conflated the legal and illegal varieties ('scapegoating immigrants'), he was supporting it."
ROFLMAO.... Dear heart, I don't even need to respond to this bit of drivel, since it's so self-evidently false, there's literally nothing I need to say. Is this really the best you can do? This is just pathetic.
"When Dem leaders consistently seek to block ImmigrationEnforcement, they're supporting it."
ROFLMAO.... And this, as well. Dear heart, are you ever going to actually have a point?
This was truly sad, dear. I like more of a challenge.
Posted by: PaulB | November 29, 2007 10:33 PM
"Hej, hej, PaulB, how’d that “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” scam work out for you?"
It worked out just fine, dear, as far as I was concerned. Did you have a point to make?
Posted by: PaulB | November 29, 2007 10:34 PM
I harmonise with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your next updates. Just saying thanks will not just be enough, for the exceptional clarity in your writing. I will directly grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. Solid work and much success in your business endeavors!
Posted by: ichuan | January 29, 2010 1:58 AM