The "We Have to Win" Myth

When we fight an issue of colossal importance, I often hear from people that we shouldn't do it because "we have to win." To which I want to scream - No shit, Sherlock!

Really, you wanted to win? I never thought of that. I thought losing might be an excellent strategy. Of cooouuurrrssee we want to win. The question is -- how?

When we fight an issue of colossal importance, I often hear from people that we shouldn't do it because "we have to win." To which I want to scream - No shit, Sherlock!

Really, you wanted to win? I never thought of that. I thought losing might be an excellent strategy. Of cooouuurrrssee we want to win. The question is -- how?

I don't want to set up one straw man to knock down another, so let me try to be as fair as possible to the people on the other side. They genuinely believe that if we fight on some issues and we lose, it will look bad, especially if we know we're not united before we start the fight. They're also worried that on national security issues the Republicans currently have an advantage, whether that is justified or not. And you don't want to change the topic to one where you are at a disadvantage. We have to the Congress back first, and then we can be more effective.

Those seem like reasonable calculations in the short term. But in the long term, they have devastating consequences. Because we never force a fight, we become convinced that we can't win a fight and then we lose members because they are worried we will lose - and voila, we have dissension before we even start.

And even more importantly, we send out the malodorous air of weakness to the voters. They can smell fright from a mile away. It reeks. When they get in that voting booth, who are they going to vote for - the weakling who can't even stand up for himself or the man who whipped them into shape and promises to do the same to our enemies?

On the other hand, if you fight all the time, you fight hard, you fight sloppy, you fight clean, you fight with conviction - you become a fighter. And then people get scared of you! They know to not even nominate a guy like Sam Alito because he won't have a chance. You'll rip him apart in the hearings.

Yes, you might screw up a couple of things along the way, but in the end, you send the message. We are strong and we will not back down under any circumstances. We are fighters!

We will fight to protect the United States, we will fight to protect the constitution, we will fight for our laws, we will fight for our values, we will fight for you and your family, we will fight for morality and we will fight to keep you safe and America proud.

That's how you win.

This is how you lose (as reported in Salon):

But Leahy was clearly frustrated by the white-flag mood among some Senate Democrats. As he said in an interview, "In my own caucus, people say, 'We can't oppose this, look what happened to Max Cleland.'" (A Vietnam veteran confined to a wheelchair because of war wounds, Cleland, a Georgia senator, was defeated by GOP attacks ads in 2002 because he had supported a Democratic filibuster delaying the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security). Leahy recounted that his weak-kneed Democratic colleagues also argue, "'We have to go along with it because we'll never be able to explain it back home.'"

This is a list of losers who don't have the stomach for the fight:

Carper (Del.), Johnson (S.D.), Landrieu (La.), Lautenberg (N.J.), Lieberman (Conn.), Menendez (N.J), Pryor (Ark.), Rockefeller (W. Va.), Salazar (Co.), Stabenow (Mich.), Nelson (Fla.), Nelson (Neb.)

I only mention Democratic senators here because these are the people who could have stopped The Torture Bill today if they stayed united and filibustered it - but they chose not to fight. They chose to lose.

Believe me, if this was the first time, I wouldn't be this angry. But I've already lived through the confirmations of Alberto Gonzales, Condoleezza Rice, General Michael Hayden, John Roberts, Sam Alito and all of the other justices and nominees that have sailed on through as the Democrats kept their powder dry.

And through all of these losses, I have been told that "we have to win." I'm going to put that down in the ironic category. As long as we don't root out this loser mentality that the Republicans will beat us up if we dare to take them on, we will never win first.

Even if the Democrats manage to take one of the Houses of Congress this election because of historic mistakes by the Republicans (and then they'll be all proud as if they earned it - this is the worst administration in history, you should be wiping the floors with them), you think they're going to stand up then?

I'm not so sure. I know there are genuine fighters on the Democratic side. I know a majority of the party voted the right way on this torture bill. I know they are infinitely better than the Republicans who don't just assent to the idea of torture and secret detentions, they relish it.

My guess is that people like Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Louise Slaughter are going to take the fight to these guys. But I am not at all sure the rest of the party will follow. I can see it now - you don't want to seem too partisan by doing hearings before the 2008 election, remember we have to win in 2008 ...

< Bye bye, Miss American Pie.... | Common Sense On Energy >
 Display:
We can't oppose this, look what happened to Max Cleland.

Cleland's voting record didn't leave him a leg to stand on.

by Twba on 09/29/2006 05:02:18 AM EST

This is what happens when you live in the land of Orwell, A genuine hero gets ridiculed by a chicken hawk

by LORD FOUL on 09/29/2006 07:15:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Cleland was not despondent after defeat, he was heard to say, "Let's roll."

by Twba on 09/29/2006 07:30:54 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I love this site.

by jarett on 09/29/2006 04:57:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Somebody needs to explain that.

We are  never leaving Iraq.

by HoneyBearKelly on 09/29/2006 06:12:18 AM EST

We should expect this from the Republiliars.  It's far worse that there wasn't even enough Dems. in the Senate to sustain a filibuster - which explains why no one tried.  The vote was 65 to 34.

I'm a lawyer.  I can't believe that I've been so ashamed of my country on so many occasions in the last 6 years.  Just saw a movie (Invasion of the Barbarians) (French Canadian).  A group of older friends were discussing all of their youthful causes and the sad state of affairs that exists today.  Someone said something along the lines of "Intelligence has left us."  Sadly, true.  Another character marveled at the cosmic good luck to have had people like Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Franklin, et al live at the same time in the same country.  The first and most lasting representative democracy . . . every other attempt had failed elsewhere.  The only way I can get through this is to think in those terms - there must be a cosmic cycle at work here . . . we're in the New Dark Ages and hopefully we'll live long enough to see the New Renaissance.

by tja on 09/29/2006 06:43:27 AM EST

about cycles.  It was written in 1997 and predicted a 4th Turning - a crisis  around 2005.  The first crisis in US History was the Revolution.  Read it.  Oh and always include Tom Paine among the founders.  He's left off, but is the most important IMHO because he represents every American, not just the property owners.

by LadyDi on 09/29/2006 07:40:03 AM EST

[ Parent ]
When Democrats don't play, they lose.

It's pretty simple.

I think I'll just spend the day sending out faxes to those fifteen assholes, that just have one simple sentence on it - "With liberty and justice for all" - and cross it out.

by Avedon on 09/29/2006 07:01:56 AM EST

Although at heart I agree with the content of this post, I feel progressives have to leave behind the inclination to fight 'lost causes'  (kind of self fulfilling, isn't it)  As a progressive, self-rightous indignation gives me the same warm feeling as the next progressive, since we're always right.  However, the interest of our country lies in strategically hitting our most vile opponents, while _empowering_ those most like us.

And lets not forget who is truly abdicating their constitutional rights (for the time being) which is the American people.  After the reelection of King George, there was a part of me which felt, **ck em, they deserve what they get.  But, after a couple of days, I returned to thinking, what can I do.. 

by emaxware on 09/29/2006 07:03:48 AM EST

What's really cynical about this bill, is that one of its important purposes is to scrub/exhonerate the torturing that has already been done in the past 5 years, illegally.  So, this rewriting of the bill of right isn't even to protect our country, but to protect torturous thugs.

Neocons want it both ways.  War on Terror is going great, but ...  things are so bad and evil that we need to rewrite our most basic constitutional rights.  If this current regime becomes only more despotic  while claiming victory, I hate to see what our V-day will look like.   Bush took an oath to protect the contitution, not the country and people, as he stated in his interview with Matt.  But I'm sure that nuance is lost on him. 

by emaxware on 09/29/2006 07:10:25 AM EST

the Truth Matters." at consortiumnews.com.

"Clinton's tolerance of REagan-Bush cover-ups was a lose-lose- lose - the public was denied information it needed to understand dangerous complexities in the Middle East, George W. Bush built his presidential ambitions on the nation's fuzzy memories of his dad, and Republicans got to enact a conservative agenda."

"Yet Clinton-and now some pro-Iraq War Democrats- view truth as an expendable trade-off when measured against political tactics or government policies.  In reality, accurate information about important events is the lifeblood of democracy."  

It's one thing to be "generous" to your fellow citizens.  It's just plain stupid to be "generous" to these thugs.  They'll just kick you in the face and laugh at you while you're down.  "To the Lumberyard!" 

Cenk, read the Parry piece to Ben over and over. 

by LadyDi on 09/29/2006 07:33:06 AM EST

 Display: