"We chatted over the weekend with Mieke Eoyang, director of the national security program at Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank. The organization last month released the findings (http://bit.ly/H7EgXp) of a series of focus groups it held with swing voters in Ohio and Florida."
Here is an excerpt of what they wrote:
National Security Focus Group Report "There are a few cautionary notes for the president. Some participants give all the credit for the bin Laden raid to the Navy SEALs and broader U.S. military. Others say
Obama is simply capitalizing on the security capabilities built up by George W. Bush
and other Republicans before him. These are minority views, but there is a risk of going
too far in taking credit and sounding boastful."
The Democratic Security Image Still Stuck in the Past
"Obama’s solid standing on national security, however, has not yet rubbed off much
on the image of the Democratic Party. These swing voters see Democrats in much
different terms than the president—and trust them less on national security than the
Republicans.
"What we hear in these groups is remarkably close to what we found in a 2008 set
of focus groups on these issues: Democrats too often are weak, indecisive, afraid to
use force; lack grounding in military matters; rely excessively on diplomatic solutions;
respond too quickly to public pressure; and defer too
readily to the party’s liberal base."....
"While the swing voters in this year’s focus groups trust Democrats more on issues like diplomacy and boosting America’s global image, they trust Republicans more on “hard security” topics like “the effective use of military force,” “preventing terrorist attacks here in the U.S.,” “capturing, interrogating, trying, and imprisoning terrorists,” “intelligence and spying,” and “dealing with dangerous nuclear regimes like North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan.”
"Their comments show that the roots of this image problem are decades old. “There
have been a couple of Democratic administrations that screwed up military-wise,” reflects
an Ohio man. “Jimmy Carter tried to rescue some people and then the other guy,
Clinton, he threw some bombs down somewhere and that didn’t go too well either.” "
Via Politico
Here is an excerpt of what they wrote:
Obama is simply capitalizing on the security capabilities built up by George W. Bush
and other Republicans before him. These are minority views, but there is a risk of going
too far in taking credit and sounding boastful."
The Democratic Security Image Still Stuck in the Past
"Obama’s solid standing on national security, however, has not yet rubbed off much
on the image of the Democratic Party. These swing voters see Democrats in much
different terms than the president—and trust them less on national security than the
Republicans.
"What we hear in these groups is remarkably close to what we found in a 2008 set
of focus groups on these issues: Democrats too often are weak, indecisive, afraid to
use force; lack grounding in military matters; rely excessively on diplomatic solutions;
respond too quickly to public pressure; and defer too
readily to the party’s liberal base."....
"While the swing voters in this year’s focus groups trust Democrats more on issues like diplomacy and boosting America’s global image, they trust Republicans more on “hard security” topics like “the effective use of military force,” “preventing terrorist attacks here in the U.S.,” “capturing, interrogating, trying, and imprisoning terrorists,” “intelligence and spying,” and “dealing with dangerous nuclear regimes like North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan.”
"Their comments show that the roots of this image problem are decades old. “There
have been a couple of Democratic administrations that screwed up military-wise,” reflects
an Ohio man. “Jimmy Carter tried to rescue some people and then the other guy,
Clinton, he threw some bombs down somewhere and that didn’t go too well either.” "
Via Politico
http://terrellaftermath.com/
Biden downplays Russian threat: ‘This is not 1956′ "He acts like he thinks the Cold War is still on, Russia is still our major adversary. I don’t know where he has been. I mean, we have disagreements with Russia, but they’re united with us on Iran. The only way we’re getting one of only two ways we’re getting material into Afghanistan to our troops is through Russia. They’re working closely with us. They have just said to Europe, if there is an oil shutdown in any way in the Gulf, they’ll consider increasing oil supplies to Europe. That’s not — this is not 1956.” "
New Poll Shows Egyptians Now Prefer Iran to US as Strategic Partner "Gee, who could have predicted this?
"Earlier this month outside the US Embassy in Cairo Egyptian Presidential Candidate Tawfiq Okasha called for the expulsion of US Ambassador Anne Patterson, the “enemy of humanity” who “bathes in a sea of the blood of others.”
"The crowd loved it."
U.S. Intel Undermined by Iraq, Obama "Much of Sunday’s New York Times story by James Risen suggests that U.S. intelligence analysts are overcompensating for their past failures on Iraqi WMDs by minimizing the risk of Iranian WMDs in the future. The upshot is that the Israelis might be right to distrust President Obama’s “we can wait until the very last minute” reassurances on Iranian weaponization, as politicized and skittish U.S. intelligence evaluations might miss that signal."
...."It’s getting easier and easier to understand why the Israelis don’t take those arguments seriously, and why they’re nervous that some in the U.S. intelligence community seem to."
New Poll Shows Egyptians Now Prefer Iran to US as Strategic Partner "Gee, who could have predicted this?
"Earlier this month outside the US Embassy in Cairo Egyptian Presidential Candidate Tawfiq Okasha called for the expulsion of US Ambassador Anne Patterson, the “enemy of humanity” who “bathes in a sea of the blood of others.”
"The crowd loved it."
U.S. Intel Undermined by Iraq, Obama "Much of Sunday’s New York Times story by James Risen suggests that U.S. intelligence analysts are overcompensating for their past failures on Iraqi WMDs by minimizing the risk of Iranian WMDs in the future. The upshot is that the Israelis might be right to distrust President Obama’s “we can wait until the very last minute” reassurances on Iranian weaponization, as politicized and skittish U.S. intelligence evaluations might miss that signal."
...."It’s getting easier and easier to understand why the Israelis don’t take those arguments seriously, and why they’re nervous that some in the U.S. intelligence community seem to."
No comments:
Post a Comment