Time to Go on the Offensive

By emptywheel

With Bush's support on the issue of social security dropping quickly, it's time the Democratic party went on the offensive. It's time to turn Bush's fiscal irresponsibility into a liability. I tried this at a under-40 Social Security roundtable last week, sponsored by Carl Levin, where this worked like a charm.

The event was smaller than the town halls legislators are holding--not more than 30 people total, no press, invite only. Because it was small and the agenda was unclear (was this supposed to be interactive? Did Levin want to know what we thought?), it was fairly easy for two people--both obviously older than 40--to begin to dominate the event. Fairly early, they started raising their hand while Levin was speaking, and challenging him on his points. All of their points were straight out of GOP talking points, down to one guy insisting that Social Security would be broke by 2018 (yes, he admitted to investing in bonds, and yes, he claimed that he really thought they were funny money).

Finally, I got fed up and asked the question I've been waiting for Democrats to start asking, publicly, with respect to this debate:

We've been arguing about whether or not social security is in crisis. But it seems to me we're ignoring the real crises people our age are facing. We're the first generation to make less than our parents. We're not going to get the same kind of health care--or even employment opportunities--our parents got. All of these things are a lot more pressing than whether we'll get social security.

And now, on top of all of this, the dollar is tanking. Other countries are moving away from the dollar reserves. We're one stupid fiscal decision away from crashing the dollar. And if that happens, our debt is going to take up all of our budget. If that happens, we'll be cutting social security and medicare and even military spending. We're going to be like the Argentines, searching for recyclables off the top of garbage dumps to survive.

(Okay, I was being a bit dramatic. But the loudest GOP plant just sat there, opening and shutting his mouth like a guppy. He kept looking for a response, but never managed to find one. Either he simply didn't have the talking points he relied on...or he realized threre simply is no good response.)

We're just about to the point where GOP legislators are publicly calling on Bush to concede. If they have their way, this whole debate will be shelved within the next four weeks. So it's time--whether we use my approach or not--to go on the offensive. And the problems with the dollar are just beginning to make the mainstream media  (and hey, they're even quoting blogger Brad Setser!).

Time to turn the GOP into silent guppies--and start making the dollar crash the subject of debate, not social security.

Comments

[DemFromCT]

I posted some polling data at daily kos earlier today, which has some interesting polling both from AP-Ipsos, WSJ/NBC and most recently gallup to support your story.

link is here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/1/91413/51458

Gallup says:

Perhaps most significantly, Bush's approval rating on handling Social Security has dropped to 35%, the lowest score he has received on this dimension since Gallup began measuring it when Bush first took office. Bush's current Social Security approval rating is also down from 43% and 41% in two previous polls in February.

I don't see how the GOP salvages this.

[Trapper John]

I don't see how the GOP salvages this.

The Lieberman Option. The only way the GOP can win now is to convince a weak-kneed Dem, who's too stupid to know when he's won, that he should help broker a "compromise."

Luckily, they've got just the guy in Stamford.

[citizen k]

It's interesting to see the gap between Ed Kilgore and Atrios on this. Even though Kilgore seems like a decent fellow and quite sharp, he has the DC Dem "play to get a good sportsmanship award" attitude and Atrios speaks for those of us who want to not only win, but to utterly and totally destroy the opponent. We play by Bush rules, the DC Dems play by loser rules.

[emptywheel]

And I think Kilgore seriously underestimates the damage Joementum could do. Think of the difficult position BushCo would be in if the Dems had managed to reel in those last 6 Dems on the Abu Gonzales nomination. It would have made the Republican vote incredibly costly. Now, they can have their torture and claim to be moderates too.

If Joementum deals, then it really admits some credibility to an incredible argument.

[citizen k]

It's also interesting how Kilgore wants to use - "If Joe fucks us over, then we can react" while game-theory and practical politics require "Joe understand that there will be a serious price to pay BEFORE he makes a decision" as well as "Joe's failure to show solidarity is ALREADY a decision". You cannot win by waiting for defeat and then complaining.

[braq]

About the other countries selling their dollars: didn't the Asian Central Banks re said last week that they would keep on buying dollars? how do we incorporate that into your question? How can the problem you mention be measured to be made clearer to the general public?

[Bonddad]

The debt issue is HUGE. Think about these facts.

Currently, total US debt = 80% of total US GDP.

Last year, our interest payment = 321 billion. That's 2.2 months of Treasury receipts.

Two Asian Banks (South Korea and China) have announced they will move away from the dollar. While the banks revoked these statements, I think the first statement was in fact the actual policy.

Although they preach fiscal conservatism, Reagan, Bush I and Bush II are in fact the cause of the massive US deficit.

[braq]

Well it is for a good reason that under IMF standards the US should not be let manage its budget itself.
As for "fiscal conservatism", i think of it the same way as i think of the term "pro-life": it is partisan propaganda. Allowing long term deficits to happen is irresponsible (i put long term because probably there must be some exeption to my sentence).
I read somewhere that this debt would never have to be repaid. But who are the creditors actually?

[Mike in MI]

I agree with Trapper; we have to play by their rules. We can no longer pretend that we don't know how the game is played. I may be wrong, but with Dean and Reid (this jury is still out on Pelosi) we may be getting some fight back. Where Daschle seemed content to simply make his points I see Reid as demonstating a real desire to score real victories or, at the very least, make the GOP leave a little of themselves out on the ice even when they win.

If you'll abide a sports analogy, Daschels' Democrats were something along the lines of any years's Lady Bing winner; a good, solid skater who plays by the rules and would rather appear to be proper than win. Where Reid is more in the mold of a Gordie Howe, who made the opposition pay for their goals, even if he couldn't prevent them from scoring. Eventually, Howe won.

I like Reid's and Dean's combativeness, their confidence, and the sharpness of their elbows. We have to start being concerned with results and not so much how we got there.

So we take every opportunity we can to sting them. We leave them speechless as we blow by them, as emptywheel did here, and when we do it consistently enough, we will play like and be winners.

[emptywheel]

Mike in MI (where in MI? I'm in A2)

Yeah, I had a funny conversation about Reid and Dean here locally. The person in question is fairly progressive and thinks I'm a screaming radical by comparison. So he said to me, "well, I'm not a huge fan of Reid as I suspect you aren't." Um, you miss the points. It's the sharp elbows I appreciate. Only after you prove your elbows will I look at the ideology.

[Mike in MI]

M, it's GOTV.

Yes, I agree with that. I cannot abide the anti-choice policy that Reid carries, along with some of his environmental stances, but if he keeps giving the opposition the elbows, especially behind the play when the refs aren't looking, I'll take that over Tom "Lady Bing" Daschel's policy of reasonable compromise any day.

[emptywheel]

Well you can't change your name mid-stream. People won't recognize you!

[Mike in MI]

I'd rather change my kos name to Mike in MI, candidly, but kos said, "No can do."

[emptywheel]

Mike in MI. How milquetoast is that? Can't we think of something a little more clever?