What is the best way for Dem Candidates to overcome the TERROR card...

[kid a]

I've heard it now twice today - N. Korean is now the NEW terror regime and Dems are soft on terror.
The repug sheeple are eating it up and convinced if Dems take control, we are doomed.
How can we preempt that view?

[Mass]

1. What did Bush do in 6 years to prevent that?

[bryant69]

5. That's half the response

Republicans suck and democrats can do better. We need to say both.

I think one answer is that Democrats do not look on diplomacy as a nasty word. It's not smart to adopt the "go it alone" appraoch of the Bush administration (to say nothing of the mugger diplomacy of some in the Bush Administration - "Do what we want or we'll beat the shit out of you." Democrats also won't piss away our resources and our troops in costly adventures like our mission in Iraq.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[kenny blankenship]

2. for SIX YEARS Bush failed to do anything to contain N. Korea

when he came to office N. Korea was contained, he promptly threw that containment regime out the window. Like Kim Jong Il wouldn't respond with a resumed atomic program? North Korea's nukes have George W. Bush written all over them.
And this just after we learn that Bush's Administration had heard red alert warnings about OBL and airliners before Sept. 11. Bush didn't do anything about that either until IT WAS TOO LATE.
Then he and his clowns HID THE FACTS that show they were negligent for FIVE YEARS.

There is only one way to tackle their bullying and lies and that's HEAD ON.

[Rosemary2205]

3. The "repug" Bush base in unreachable.

We can, however, take every opportunity to remind the American people that when the Democrats were in charge NK did not have a nuke and that invading Iraq did not stop NK. Clearly the Bush admin doesn't know what it's doing.

On the WOT, lets just focus on the true threats (like milkmen in Amish country) instead of creating all that useless drama at the airports every time Osama sneezes.

[HereSince1628]

4. Well, I'd say tape the R's mouths shut so they can't cry wolf

but other DU'ers will object that that effort at stemming noise pollution is an infringement on free speech.

[Skidmore]

6. I also heard a poll read on Washington Journal this morning

that for the first time reported that more people thought Dems would be stronger on national security.

Anyone else remember what poll was being discussed?

[Demobrat]

7. As the Dems have repeatedly failed to point out...

9/11 happened on Bush's watch.
He has ruthlessly exploited it ever since.
NK's nuke test happened on Bush's watch.
He is now chomping at the bit to exploit that too.
If the Dems can't make those circumstances work to their advantage there is no hope for them.

[Marr]

8. Bush's record. I mean Christ- look around.

From border/port security to North Korea, Bush has screwed everything up. Couple that with the fact that he allowed the single most devastasting terrorist attack to happen on his watch, and I don't see why anyone would be skittish about overcoming the terror card.

This guy wants to hand our ports to a middle eastern state-run company for crying out loud. It should be easy as hell to attack him WITH the terror card. Korea's finally attained nuclear weapons, thanks to the Bush Administration's stupid "ignore them" policy. He's got us stuck in Iraq and his GOP buddies like Bill Frist are saying we should just put the Taliban back in charge of Afghanistan.

And how about Bush's widely-accepted stupidity, that the GOP sells as "folksy"? I'd bring that up every single time they use scare tactics, and I'd say, "yes- these are very scary times. We can't afford to have idiots running the country".

Terrorism could be their biggest weakness, if you asked me.

[alfredo]

9. When bush won reelection, the terror alerts stopped.

Why? Now that his control of congress is threatened, he's scaring us again.

[uppityperson]

10. I thought latest news was that it wasn't a nuke, but a bunch of TNT?

Seems like they are trying to play it both ways. BOO! (we will keep you safe vs we did nothing to keep you safe)

[DeeDeeNY]

11. On the one hand,

the truth of the matter is that Dems are much stronger on terror because they go about their business smartly and with a multi-faceted approach. The Repubs make black and white decisions with no room for flexibility or negotiation and give no value to those offering other perspectives. They drive the car over the cliff and refuse to change direction because that would admit defeat. Not to mention that they value cronyism over strong credentials.
But on the other hand, I once read that when people are fearful, their brains do not always operate rationally. The repug sheeple are so afraid that they are willing to follow the car being driven off the cliff just because their leaders sound tough.
The problem is, the sheeple have short attention spans, so the only thing that can be said to them is to look at the quagmire in Iraq. It's made us less safe, not more, and depleted our military and treasury in the bargain. And things are only going to get worse.

[mtnsnake]

12. It's very simple. We just need to say the right thing over & over....

"Democrats will be tougher, smarter, and more effective in dealing with terrorism than Republicans".

Terrorism has increased tremendously since Bush took over. If our Democrats start saying something to the effect of what I'm saying above over and over, then maybe it will sink in that we're a better alternative.