So, I'm driving east on I-70. It's late and I stop in East Bunghole, Indiana,

[smoogatz]

get a room at the Hampton Inn. There's a wings-n-beer place across the street, one of those chains with big-screen TVs, three different ball-games on at once. No place else around to get a drink, so in I go, sit down at the bar, order a beer. The couple next to me are forty-ish, affluent for the region (turns out he's driving the Porsche parked outside), and talking politics. I eavesdrop: Hillary's going to win the nom, he says. She's going to pick (get this) Evan Bayh as her running mate. I snort into my beer. He's drunk and just a shade under belligerent; she's drunk and seems nice if not very bright. They're dyed-in-the-wool Republicans of a sort one hardly ever runs into anymore, outside of the internets. I engage. It's all reasonably polite. I said, if Hillary gets the Democratic nom, who's she running against? Giuliani, they say. Definitely. I say but Giuliani's pro-abortion, anti-gun and likes to dress up as Aunt Sally. Who cares, they say. He'll be tough on terrorism. Hillary won't. They want universal healthcare. They think Iraq was a mistake. They're VERY concerned about global warming. They're unabashedly pro torture (the guy tried the old "if there's a ticking nuclear bomb in New York City, and you've got the guy who knows where it is, do you torture him" routine. I explained to him that it's a stupid question, then said that in the very unlikely event that that precise thing took place, then yes, you torture the guy if it's going to save a million lives, of course. He was impressed by that, for some reason). They think the last thing the country needs is more tax cuts for the rich. You're basically Democrats, I tell them, except you like torture and you're scared shitless of Muslims. They pondered this. Then they pretty much agreed that that was the case. The reason they'll vote for Giuliani is that they just don't think the Democrats are tough enough on national defense. Which made me think. To the extent that Republicans get any votes at all in 2008 (and I think it'll be shockingly close, when all the votes are "counted"), these are the people who'll be voting for them: those who are still scared shitless of Islamic terrorism. It made me wonder if there's any way to win over a meaningful percentage of these voters, short of compromising core principles. Any thoughts?

[pepperbear]

1. hammering home that....

osama bin ladin still "missing", that the war on terror didn't originate in Iraq and that they criminally lied (or blundred, depending on whom you believe) our way into it. I am still disappointed that the Democratic contenders aren't playing those cards.

[smoogatz]

6. These people understood that.

Their question was "what now." They want a big tough daddy to protect them.

[midnight]

20. Good point.....Wasn't there a book written about the soldier who

was not able to move on Osama. But had to watch him get away. How is that being tough on terrorism?

[rockymountaindem]

2. I keep trying to tell that to people all the time

All these articles you see in left-leaning domestic and foreign media about, "what makes the RW tick?" are way too easy to write. The answer is they live in fear that they will actually be killed by a terrorist. Simple as that.

And yet people around here still wonder why our candidates say "all options are on the table" with Iran. Saying otherwise would mean immediate political self-immolation.

[Xenotime]

3. RW doesn't stand a chance.

[MadHound]

4. Sadly it is sentiments and voters like this that are keeping Clinton, Edwards and Obama

From committing to pulling out the troops during their first term. They realize that Dems have the rep for being soft on defense, and thus they always over compensate. Hell, that's why we never saw any peace dividend after the Soviet Union fell, Clinton didn't want to appear weak, so he kept the military beefed up. Same reason that Johnson went all in with the Tonkin Gulf Resolution. And that's why I seriously doubt we'll be out of Iraq anytime soon, and afraid that we'll be in Iran all too soon.

[ikojo]

5. I think the further one gets from NYC the more

effective the terror fear card is on voters. These folks in Indiana are a prime example, although if they were at a motel they most likely aren't from that area.

[smoogatz]

7. They were locals; not much of a there there

so the townies all hang out at the Buffalo Wings N Suds or whatever, in the gas station/motel/McDonald's district.

[mark414]

21. right on point....those least likely to be victims of a terrorist attack are the most frightened

by the possibility

[Clark2008]

8. I would have asked if they'd vote for Hillary if Wes Clark was

her running mate. He's tough enough.

[smoogatz]

10. Ha. I did just that.

They were unimpressed by Clark; felt he wasn't sufficiently dynamic to be an effective leader. I said, but he was a thoroughly effective leader in Yugoslavia. Still not impressed. Clark's lack of overt blood-thirst seemed to be a major negative, in their view. Not tough enough because he's anti-torture.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

9. East Bunghole, Indiana?

Isn't that where Uncle Rudy goes when he wants to be Aunt Sally? Or is that French Lick?

Sorry. Had to.

All-in-all, you witnessed something quite interesting: the flyover Repiglican in the wild. They can seem almost sane, almost reasonable when they're isolated. Get 'em into a group, however, and the dynamic changes completely.

[smoogatz]

12. Yep.

I'm pretty sure you've got that right. They could have a perfectly civil conversation with a guy like me, then the minute I'm out the door they tune into the Faux Nooze 24-hour hate. It's not really discussion they want, it's affirmation that their fears are rational, and that those who aren't afraid are either delusional or cowards. It's quite strange.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

25. It's the Klan syndrome

And I mean that sincerely. You can stand around kickin' the tires with somebody and never even suspect that on Saturday nights they put on the hood, set fire to a cross and talk about "the mud races."

It's a function of the authoritarian mindset.

They do, indeed, WANT that Big Daddy government they're so fond of damning.

[riqster]

11. Remind them that Clinton not only was able to FIND Bin Laden...

..but he also took a couple shots at him. Dubya can't do either. 'So are Reeps REALLY better at National Security?'

That seems to hit Reeps hard, and makes many of them think a bit.

[smoogatz]

15. I brought that up, too. The millenium plot. Richard Clarke.

No principles meeting. No response to the Cole. The 8/6 PDB. "You've covered your ass." Tora Bora. They thought it was all propaganda. "No," I said. "It's all documented fact." It confused them, but still didn't really penetrate the fog. These people are not critical thinkers.

[riqster]

18. I just use the OBL example

...seems Reeps can only absorb one hunk o' heresy at a time.

[mahina]

13. Because the fake war on terra has made us less safe,

weakened America, raided our treasury, and broken our military. Listen to Al Gore's mp3 of his speech on Martin Luther King day; we should all take lessons in persuasion from that talk.

If I could insert the mp3 here, I would. You can find it here, http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/01/16/al-gore-podcast/

and read it here
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/16/AR2006011600779.html

Now to elect a Democrat who will not do the same as the R's...

[tabasco]

14. Yep, there's a lot of idiots in the country.

Not exactly breaking news. Indiana seems to be ate up with them for some reason.

[smoogatz]

16. They weren't drooling morons, exactly.

They kind of understood a lot of what's going on, and had enough common sense to be essentially right on obvious stuff like healthcare and global warming, and even on Iraq. They were completely stuck on "stupid" on terrorism, though. It was weird, but it made a kind of sense in retrospect.

[tabasco]

23. Made what kind of sense?

Republicans have greatly damaged our national security and allowed attacks on our country. They have allowed our enemies to escape in order to conduct an oil grab.

These people are voting for more of the same.

How does that make sense?

[smoogatz]

29. It makes sense that terrorism would be the sticking point.

It's the same mindset as the NRA types who arm themselves to prevent the unlikely event of home invasion, ignoring the much more likely prospect that a relative or friend will use their guns against them. It's the same fear-web tingling in their little brains. They want someone to protect them, ultimately; whoever talks toughest looks to them like the best bet. Their fear isn't rationally constructed, so their response to it can't be entirely rational, either.

[tabasco]

30. In other words, they're idiots.

Just like I said.

[smoogatz]

34. Well, yes.

But they're not quite as dumb as the 24% who still support Bush. They're idiots, but are they irretrievable?

[unpossibles]

40. and wimps

I'm about up-to-hear with these piss-bags who will trade the very things which make America great - our freedoms and rights - just so they can feel slightly safer. People who will sell their values down river because they think the guy on TV actually gives a rat's ass about protecting them from terrorists. Terrorists who will never in a million years bother to bomb a friggin wings-n-suds.

Tell them to throw their TVs away and start reading the news from a variety of sources, and not ones that start with "freep..." or "newsm..." or even "dru..." Tell them to grow a freaking spine and face reality - that their Big Daddy is not going to do shit for them and never has.

[supernova]

17. I think we do have to talk to them

like a stern but loving parent, (not a stern but punishing parent, as the GOP does).

They like authoritative speechifying, and if it sounds tough enough, they will vote for universal healthcare too.

Thanks for the vignette.

I think the talk about "redeployment" from Iraq to Afghanistan works. Catch Osama so he can't hurt you.

Work on effective intelligence gathering without the civil liberties disasters.

More cops on the beat.

More emphasis on arabic speakers in the military and intelligence communities.

The ordeal for our candidates will be, can they talk tough enough on the one hand to sooth the "regan democrats" without making the rest of us bolt the party entirely?

[NoPasaran]

19. I don't think there is anyway of winning these people over

They are irrational; their lives are driven by fear and they want somebody to give them illusion he's protecting them. Short of sending them to be deprogrammed I think it's a waste of time to try and "win them over". What we need to do is register another new voter to cancel them out.

[smoogatz]

26. A reasonable point of view.

But they're not entirely irrational, of course. Nineteen crazy Arabs did manage to do a hell of a lot of damage here on 9/11; there's little question but that more crazy Arabs will attempt to do more damage here in the future. It's also true that, given enough attempts over time, some will likely succeed no matter what we do. To think otherwise would be irrational. The question is, how much does it scare you, and what are you willing to give up in order to achieve an arguably false sense of security? That's where these people draw the line differently than you or I would. But you're right, registering new voters who recognize that living in a dictatorship is no solution would be a very good thing.

[midnight]

22. Likes to dress up like Aunt Sally-very funny. Did they laugh?

[smoogatz]

28. They winced.

Republicans don't really know how to deal with Rudy's public cross-dressing episodes. All in good fun! Ha ha! But you can tell that it actually makes them pretty damned uncomfortable. That's how desperate they are: Rudy's really the anti-christ to many southern and midwestern conservatives. On the other hand, they want someone who, as Borat would say, would drink the blood of every Iraqi man, woman and child in order to win the war of terror.

[lonestarnot]

24. If money is trying to ride the bike in his boots, we may not have to worry bout it.

[dysfunctional press]

27. just the numbers...

drunk drivers kill/have killed thousands upon thousands more innocent victims EVERY YEAR than died in the 9/11 attacks.

and so on.

they need a healthy dose of reality- and remind them how true FDR's words ring today especially: "we have nothing to fear but fear itself"

then throw in a little something from eisenhower warning of the tyranny of the military-industrial complex.

for starters.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Folks like that are the reason the Cold War had such a smashing 45 year run.

"They're comin' to git us!" :hide:

[smoogatz]

32. Indeed.

Good point.

[DaveJ]

33. It doesn't really take any thought

Muslims are not our only threat in the world and torture is not any way of remedying security threats.

Historically, there is no reason to think Democrats are weak on national security.

Mention how Clinton caught the people responsible for the 1993 WTC attackers and they are still rotting in prison. Yet with Bush, OBL is still roaming free and he invades a completely unrelated country. Unlike Bush, Clinton did not blame the previous President for what happened, and instead took care of business.

Kosovo is another example of how Republicans accused Clinton of being a war monger yet he was able to help win that war without the loss of a single American.

[smoogatz]

35. They don't care about history.

They care about who's going to keep us from getting nuked by some crazy Arab. They're looking at the Democratic field--a woman and two metrosexuals (from their point of view)--and not seeing the big bad tough guy that's going to protect us. If Jim Webb were running, these people would be all over him. But he's not. So, how do we sell them Hillary (or Obama or Edwards)? That's my question, really.

[DaveJ]

38. Against whom?

Rudy, Thomson, or Romney have no military record as far as I know.

I don't know how to get this through their thick skulls, but Republicans are not strong on national security, but weak soft handed corporatists. Their most coveted leaders avoided their opportunity to serve this country in the military. Hillary has a good strategy of laughing at people like this.

I really am personally concerned about how weak Republicans are militarily. I cannot for the life of me understand how people can perceive Repukes as strong in any way, given their recent record of failure.

[MsRedacted]

36. I got a ticket in East Bunghole IN once. Only ticket in my life - was going 59 in a 55.

Stay away from East Bunghole Indiana.

[Hekate]

37. I really think that Hillary's bellicosity stems from this very strategy: look tough on terra

Whether it will work or not is anybody's guess.

And I agree with you that the election may appear to be very close due to the current methods of "vote" "counting".

Hekate

[smoogatz]

39. Memo to Hillary: They're not buying it.

Meanwhile, you're making the base doubt your freaking sanity.

Maybe she'll pick Webb for her running mate. That could actually work.

[Hekate]

41. Why not General Clark? What does Middle America have against intelligent generals? Nt

[AuntPatsy]

42. What idiots, I get so tired of these fools saying outloud how scared they are of muslims

most of these people that profess this foolish fear are people that are gun owners....what they should fear are those running this country, they admit they are doing poorly and yet still believe the foolishness the wingnuts put out that the dems are not able to defend this country?

If you think about it all it makes no sense whatsoever, they are simply parroting this idiotic talking point and thats exactly what I tell them, cowards I call them along with being simpleminded.

[Generic Brad]

43. If only they thought terrorists would be at their polling place

Then they would be too scared to vote.

[Ilsa]

44. Retired general Wes Clark will be her VP. That will settle their fears. nt

[RamboLiberal]

45. The sad part is that nasty bug you can get in hospitals

is more likely to get them than OBL. 9-11 killed around 3,000 6 years ago. That bug kills near 20,000 a year. Or a heart attack, stroke, cancer, old-age, will get them. And if they survive any of this they better hope they have good health care insurance that will pay all the bills or they will find out about the new bankruptcy laws the Repukes passed.

These kind of people make me shake my head. If they rest of us didn't suffer I'd say they deserve what they get.

[Contrary1]

46. Maybe they were right about Bayh as her running mate...

Hope this one doesn't come to pass...

Speaker envisions Clinton-Bayh ticket

"House Speaker B. Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, said today that he endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president for one big reason: To help Sen. Evan Bayh become her vice presidential candidate and help Democrats carry Indiana in the 2008 presidential election.


Bauer was among several Indiana Democrats who this week endorsed Clinton, a senator from New York and the former first lady. He did so, he said, after Bayh called him personally to encourage his support for Clinton. Bayh recently became national co-chairman of Clinton's campaign.
"I endorsed Hillary because I want Evan Bayh to be the vice president on that ticket," Bauer said.
Asked if Evan Bayh told him that such endorsements would help him become Clinton's running mate, Bauer said: "Um, I can't say he said that exactly, but I know that's the case."

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071019/LOCAL/710190536

[Zookeeper]

47. The wierd thing is that "terrorism" is such a vague threat....

compared to health care, loss of jobs, failing educational system, Iraq-nam, etc.

It's like being worried about the boogeyman while you're bleeding to death.

[Minimus]

48. The areas that were affected by 9/11 went for the Dem in 2004. If

they aren't worried about how Dems handle defense then why are the people in Bunghole so worried? Do they think Bunghole would actually be a target?

[bbgrunt]

49. sounds to me like they are typical of those

who cling religiously to authority figures. John Dean's book "Conservatives without conscience" explains it pretty well. Colbert plays it out on his show every night. Facts mean nothing. They connect to primeval urges and emotion. Fear charges their batteries and gives them purpose.

Too sad that so many fall in this category.

[rucky]

50. "So after 8 years of Bush, do you feel safer?" n/t