The Politico reports that rank and file Congressional Democrats recognize that a relentless focus on retreat in Iraq hasn’t helped the party in 2007, and would hurt them more if it continues in 2008:
As has been pointed out here before, Congressional Democrats have for some time been pitching different messages to different audiences on Iraq. They’ve told the antiwar base that they’re holding the president’s feet to the fire, and that they are committed to doing whatever it takes to end the war. At the same time, Democratic leaders have promised that they would never fail to fund the troops. They gave the Defense Department flexibility to shift among defense accounts so that the war could continue, in the hopes of putting off a vote on specific funding. Expect the hypocrite shuffle to continue. It’s been clear for some time that Democrats concerned about victories at the polls have wanted to turn away from Iraq. People close to the party’s presidential candidates, as well as strategists like Rahm Emanuel are eagerly talking about the move to issues that help Democrats. Iraq by contrast, has crippled Democrats in Congress. And if the situation on the ground in Iraq continues to improve, look for Democrats to try out more ‘nuanced’ messages. Some Democrats will emulate Steny Hoyer, and say that they always believed we needed more troops to prevail in Iraq. Others will point to the Democratic win in 2006 and the new pressure they brought on the administration as the cause for adoption of the surge. They will argue in fact, that victory could not be achieved without them. Also be sure to check out Ed Morrissey’s take on the Democrats’ dilemma.
