Strategic Retreat

[scheming daemons]

Sometimes, the best play is a strategic retreat.

It is a lesson that Ted Cruz never understood last month and a message some Democrats are not understanding now.


In Tuesday's elections, especially in NJ, there were a couple possible narratives to come out of them.


First... the narrative that *HAS* come out:
- Christie won big, but it was against the Democrats' "JV team", and Democrats won almost everywhere else. The tea party won absolutely nowhere, and the national mood is turning away from the far right.


Second... the narrative that WOULD HAVE been, had the Democrats made a serious play in NJ:

- Chris Christie took on the national Democratic party, as Democratic leaders such as Barack Obama, the Clintons, Howard Dean, and others poured money and effort into the NJ governor's race in a failed attempt to unseat the popular governor. The Democrats turned this race into a national referendum when they brought in all the big guns to try to turn the tide in the state. Their efforts failed massively, as Governor Christie easily won re-election anyway. "They came after me with everything they had, and the people of NJ rejected the message of the Democratic party," said a jubilant Christie. Republicans are now emboldened about 2014, as they see the public has tuned out the administration.




Much the same way as Ted Cruz miscalculated last month with the shutdown... a battle he had ZERO chance of winning... a battle that ended up damaging the Republican brand to levels never seen before.... a Democratic push for NJ would've damaged the Democratic brand for 2014. We now get to toss that race out as an outlier (again, Christie beat the JV team) and instead say that everywhere we competed on tuesday, we won. The President and the Clintons pushed McAuliffe over the top... and a race that was a referendum on ObamaCare was won by the Democrats.

Read EJ Dionne today. His column about America taking a leftward turn on Tuesday *IS* the narrative. The Christie race is an afterthought. The Tea Party is furious that Christie's win has catapulted him to front runner status for 2016.


In 1863... General Lee knew, in his gut, that a loss at Gettysburg would effectively turn the tide of the war. His instinct told him to "strategically retreat" and prepare his outnumbered and undersupplied forces for a different battle in a different location. His generals thought otherwise, and Lee's army took on a battle they had little chance to win. Instead of a minor loss after a "strategic retreat", the confederates took on the heart of the Union army and suffered a dramatic defeat.

It is one thing to concede a loss and live to fight another day. It is another thing to go on a suicide mission and end up losing the battle anyway, but harming your chances to win future battles.


Buono was a sacrificial lamb. Any Democrat running in NJ would've been. It was a foregone conclusion that Christie was going to win... so from a Democratic Party perspective, the best we could do was to deprive any larger meaning from Christie's win than otherwise would've occurred.


Christie was going to be a 2016 candidate in either case. It could come after a big win against the full weight of the Democratic establishment, or it could come after a win in a race the Democratic Party effectively pulled out of. Yes... we forfeited. But that forfeit means that Christie and the GOP can't apply a larger theme to the win. Christie's win ended up not being a referendum on Obama, Hillary, ObamaCare, or anything else. It did, however, end up getting the tea party's panties in a bunch.

That was the best outcome we could've hoped for.

[el_bryanto]

1. Interesting analysis - makes a certain amount of sense. nt

[okaawhatever]

2. Excellent analysis. i agree. Do you have a blog or anything I can tweet? Thanks nt

[scheming daemons]

3. No... no blog. I just post here, mostly.

...

[RobertEarl]

4. Chritie can't be beat

No huffing or puffing will blow down the Christie house.

He is the greatest ever. Not even Obama could take him down.

That there is your message.

[scheming daemons]

5. Not in NJ. He can definitely be beat nationally

...

[RobertEarl]

6. Butwill he? How?

They couldn't take him down there, what makes you think they can here?

The message you have delivered is that he is untouchable, and that's why they ran away from him. It really sucks, doesn't it?

See, he is a fave of NYSE and has all that power behind him. Even Obama is scairt.

[scheming daemons]

7. The tea party will fight tooth and nail to stop his nomination

... and in the process, bloody him up if he somehow makes it through the nominating process.


Nationally, Christie would be a tough one to beat. But he can't get there unless he can navigate the Republican primaries... which are dominated by the tea party.

He'll be lucky to come in 5th in Iowa or South Carolina in the early primaries.

By the time the race gets to states he can compete in, he may no longer be a frontrunner.

[RobertEarl]

8. TBaggers see him as a winner

I will profess to not know much @ or really give a shit about the TBaggers, they are fading, afaict.

But Chritie has proven to be the first to win over Obama, mainly because we Dems were so afraid to stand up to him. He can't be beat, is your message.

[scheming daemons]

10. You couldn't be more wrong.

All of the teabagger web sites are panning the "coronation" of Christie.

Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have spent the past two days railing against the idea that Christie should be the GOP standard bearer.

The vitriol by the teahadists toward Christie rivals their vitriol toward Obama.



You're being obtuse. He couldn't be beaten specifically in 2013 and specifically in NJ.

That has nothing to do with him being beatable on a national stage in 2016.



My "message" is the opposite of what you said. By Obama *NOT* injecting himself into the NJ race, Christie was deprived of being able to claim he "beat Obama". That's the point. That narrative did *NOT* happen precisely because the President stayed out of the NJ race.

[RobertEarl]

12. You follow TBagger websites?

What fun that must be......

I get you don't like your own message. It sucks. It sucks that Dems think they could not hurt a major republican leader. But then that is why politics in this country is so damned screwed up, eh? Republicans have us in retreat all over the place. No wonder you are so running away from your message.

[scheming daemons]

14. I havent waivered from my "message" one bit

The Republicans had us in retreat in NJ... but we were on the offense in NY, VA, and everywhere else.

And we deprived Christie of a more meaningful win. The NJ race would've been a proxy for the 2016 race had Obama and the national Democrats injected themselves into it.

Instead, it is nothing more than Christie winning a race he was effectively unopposed.

It doesn't set a trend. It doesn't set a narrative. The Democrats deprived Christie of that.


Where do you get that I am "running from my message"? Every post in response to you has been a reinforcement of my message!

[Pretzel_Warrior]

16. trying to debate with Robert Earl is a lost cause

he's fun to take jabs at...but he will never concede a point. ever.

[scheming daemons]

18. I've shot down every one of his posts, but he add non sequitirs...

I keep repeating that the sky is blue... and he posts that I'm running away from my message that the sky is blue.

[geek tragedy]

19. He can be beat in NJ in a general Presidential election.

Hillary would beat his ass there,

[RobertEarl]

23. Where was Hillary?

Some leadership from her, huh?

Maybe she was all like with the headline in the op: RETREAT

No. Our person was just too honest. That's why she got NO support from the likes of Hillary.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Thank you.

Nicely explained.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

11. very well said.

others have taken stabs at that kind of explanation since Tuesday, but you nailed it.

[RobertEarl]

13. Figured you'd show up

""The Dems can't win!! Chritie can't be beat!! We may as well retreat!!""

That message sucks. It reminds me of losers. What's up with that crap?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

15. Dems took house and senate in 2006. added White House in 2008

then suffered setbacks in 2010 but held the senate. Then 2012 Dems won presidency again AND added house seats and senate seats. Now 2013 the wins continue. I think the Dems know how to win. This isn't like we're back in 2003 wondering what the fuck happened.

YOu can feel free to disagree. The more strategic-minded of us kind of see it for what it is.

[RobertEarl]

21. What it is?

It's retreat. Right there in the damned headline: RETREAT

Thanks to smart folks like you who can see "What it is" this country is going down the tubes. Go ahead, take your bows. Your message SUCKS!

[Pretzel_Warrior]

25. try not to take victory so hard

You must be a peach to be around during football games. GODDAMNIT!!! Our coach is a loser and absolutely quit!

"Uh, Robert...they just scored a touchdown. Our team is still up 56-7".

You don't understand! He just let that guy run past him!

"Ok, Robert. Whatever you say."

[scheming daemons]

17. "The Dems won everywhere but NJ! GOP Civil War deepens as Tea Party infuriated over Christie win!"

"GOP Circular Firing Squad over MSM's Love for Christie!"

"Tea Party lost Everywhere! Nation shifts leftward!"

Those are the headlines from Tuesday.

[RobertEarl]

20. Yeah, but your headline is: RETREAT!!

Sounds more like "Cover My Ass".

I think our candidate was just too honest and too progressive. That's not good in modern politics, at least the way you folks swing, so it's "CYA all the way"!

[scheming daemons]

22. My headline is "STRATEGIC retreat"

Or put another way....

"Democrats sacrifice Buono and NJ to win the larger war"

[RobertEarl]

24. There ya go

Sacrifice Buono. The truth is revealed. No Dem is safe from that kind of strategic tactic.

And you want us to agree with that crap? I say SCREW THAT.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

26. she knew it when she entered the race.

[RobertEarl]

27. Hey, I've had fun beating up on the message

But I got something to go do.

Remember: Don't back down. Fight to the end. It's called integrity.

c'ya

[HereSince1628]

28. "Remember the Alamo", and remember the immortal word of Gen. Anthony Clement McAuliffe

"NUTS!"

Spin that as you may, but there is honor in losing a fight well fought, and only shame for leaving people stranded on the field as you escape.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

30. weird analogy. Barbara Buono did surive this election

She's still there to fight another day.

[HereSince1628]

31. Sacrificing for comrades as they escape is honorable, leaving a comrade behind as you cover your ass

IS NOT.

Based on Buono's own comments, she didn't take a stand knowing she was sacrificing so others would have the campaign funds, and 'political capital' not spent on her.

It's despicable exploitation of a comrade...which is to say it's just like something a person might expect from economic conservatives, the DSCC and the DNC.

[geek tragedy]

33. That's a very noble sentiment, but it has nothing to do with strategy or rational choices nt

[HereSince1628]

34. No doubt it sits in the face of selfish self interest of people WHO ALSO WANT THE MONEY!

[geek tragedy]

35. Fighting is not a strategy, nor should it be a goal in and of itself.

Fighting is a means to an end, always.

[HereSince1628]

37. Oh for sure. Hanging out a comrade is certainly a means to an end

To hang out a friend without telling them? Still a means to an end,

Dishonorable, yes, but it's undoubtedly a "tactic". And being something intellectual like a "tactic" makes it SO much better, because the base is too stupid to understand things like tactics.

[geek tragedy]

38. Buono knew she was going to get minimal support when she

entered the race.

You're still using emotive, not analytic, frameworks to assess this race. I'm afraid that means we'll just continue to talk past each other. Last word is yours.

[HereSince1628]

39. She claims she was hung out. The analysis doesn't need to be very deep

UNLESS you are looking for a rationale that justifies supporting people who do this sort of thing to their comrades.

Then it may take an appeal to nth dimensional chess.

[Rex]

41. Backstabbers, gotta watch the lot of them.

I cannot stand sellouts. They have no integrity whatsoever.

[SidDithers]

29. Good post...

Sid

[Tarheel_Dem]

32. +1 to everything you said. Internal polls are worth their weight in gold, and Dems knew the.....

internals of this race had Christie winning BIG, no matter what they threw at it.

[Rex]

36. Unrec.

Voting for a Repuke is just wrong, but some don't seem to have any problem with it. I would bet good money it is the same people that voted for Reagan...and then became "Democrats".

[scheming daemons]

42. i dodnt advocate voting for a repuke, and I never would

I was explaining the actions of the party leaders, not excusing the voters.

[magical thyme]

40. it's called "choosing your battles" and it's how to win over the long term. nt

[truebluegreen]

43. Even without a full assault that would have failed, the national party

could have put some effort into beating him up some, instead of letting him waltz to victory. His past connections and current (mis-) administration of federal money for Sandy could have easily damaged his image, and softened his support.

Of course, if you agree with the premise that there is only one party in this country--the Business party--then letting him slide by unscathed makes perfect sense. He's a former lobbyist and a big friend of Wall St.

[scheming daemons]

44. we (democrats) want a gop civil war

Having Christie boost now helps feed that civil war.

You already see rw radio and the tea party getting pissed at the attention he is getting.

[truebluegreen]

45. They swallowed their disdain for Mittens, and he was way less of a wingnut

than Christie is. A civil war among the Republicans is great, but why should we allow Christie to paint himself as a reach-across-the-aisle guy for the moderate and independent audience? No conservatives are going to vote for our candidate, but moderates and independents will--unless they want a change and see a "moderate" on the other side. Look what happened with "compassionate conservative" Dimson Bush.

I submit that, nationally, the demographics already dictate that a conservative cannot win with only the conservative base. Why give them a chance to enlarge it, even though they would have to lie about their policies to do it? (what are the odds...)