Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Iraq Politics and the '04 Democrats

Aired October 13, 2003 - 15:03   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: And now we turn to Iraq politics. Even on this Columbus Day holiday, the Bush administration is continuing its campaign to give the public a better impression of what is happening in Iraq. Extra effort may be needed after a new series of attacks that left three U.S. soldiers dead in two days. Even some top Republicans say that Bush advisors need to better coordinate the administration's message on Iraq.
Meantime, Democrats have their owner Iraq problems. Let's bring in Ron Brownstein of the "Los Angeles Times."

Ron, we have the nine Democrats running for president. They were split originally on whether they supported the idea of going to war. Now they're facing the question of whether to give the president this $87 billion he's asking for.

RON BROWNSTEIN, POLITICAL ANALYST: The same agony for the members of Congress that they faced a year ago is approaching again as the House and the Senate near decisions this week on whether to support the $87 billion. What we've seen over the last few weeks in the debates, Judy, is that the Democratic candidates have all said they might support some of the money if President Bush did a lot of things differently. If he rescinded part of the tax cut to pay for it, if he established a clearer plan to get out of Iraq at some point, if he went back more energetically to the U.N. to try to get international support.

The problem the members of Congress who are running for president are going to face is in the next few days they're almost certainly going to approach a vote where they will have to vote yes or no on the $87 billion without any of those conditions. And it's a very difficult decision for people like John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, and Dick Gephardt.

WOODRUFF: Ron, is there an obvious politically right vote here?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, the pressure on the Democratic Party is all in the direction of opposition to the war. I mean, it is a remarkable turn of events. Certainly, I don't think anyone a year ago thought that the people who would be on the defensive in the Democratic Party are those who supported the war.

One of the reasons, and not the only one, certainly, but one of the reasons for support of the war among Democrats was the belief that it was necessary to be politically viable in 2004. But here we are a year later -- and in your latest CNN-"USA Today" Gallup Poll, 80 percent of Democratic partisans say we never should have gone to war at all. That's an extraordinary number; much higher even than it's been over the summer. And you can see that puts a lot of pressure on these candidates who are going to face tough decisions in the next few days about how they come down on this vote.

WOODRUFF: Specifically, Ron, what kind of pressure would they be feeling out of the early primary states, whether it's Iowa or New Hampshire or South Carolina, Arizona?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, Iowa, of course, is famously dovish and is probably one of the most dovish electorates in any war (ph) electorates in the Democratic primary. But an 80 percent number, Judy, it's pretty broad across the board, certainly in New Hampshire as well.

I would suspect that you would see Dick Gephardt and Joe Lieberman stand with the president. John Kerry made noises yesterday like he may oppose it. John Edwards is also giving indications that he may oppose it. And both of them voted for the war originally.

Again, when you see Howard Dean out there really taking the offense again in the last few days, attacking the Democrats for their vote a year ago, it just gives you a sense of the current in the party and the kind of pressure those members of Congress will face on this vote.

WOODRUFF: But Dean is now saying -- at least he did in the debate -- he said last Thursday that he is in favor of spending this money, that we can't -- Americans can't pull their troops out.

BROWNSTEIN: Right.

WOODRUFF: So you've got -- you know people like Kerry and Edwards voted for going to war, now may be going against it. And just the opposite with Dean.

BROWNSTEIN: Well, I think Dean's position is not entirely crystal clear. But my sense of it is that he's saying he would support the money for the troops, not necessarily the additional money for the reconstruction. And that's a position that several of the Democrats I think want to take.

The problem is, for the ones who actually have to vote on it, they may never get that chance. I mean, there may be a vote to strip away the reconstruction money that fails, and then they're left with a decision of, do you support the money that includes the troops and the reconstruction or not? That's why it's so much easier in these circumstances to be out of Congress, where you don't have to cast these votes and you can establish distinctions in your mind that really don't conform or comport with the actual legislative choices.

WOODRUFF: Is there any way that this could get so complicated that it won't matter? When I hear you saying, you know, it could be this, or it could be that, but it's...

BROWNSTEIN: No. I think it's going to be another line in the sand. I have a feeling -- look, I mean, as we've talked about before, to a remarkable degree, the war in Iraq has been and sustains itself as the driving force in the Democratic race. I mean, they're arguing about this in your debate last week more passionately I think than any other issue, even though of course the war itself, the vote was a year ago.

So I do think this becomes another dividing line. And I suspect that the anti-war candidates will use it against the supporters if they support the president.

WOODRUFF: And yet some of them, as you're pointing out, Ron, run the risk of, if they were with the president before and they're against him on the money, then the question is, you know, how consistent are they?

BROWNSTEIN: Are they -- yes, absolutely. Look, I mean, you have them accused of flip-flopping. But I do think they have the opportunity to argue that they supported the war based on certain assumptions that have not borne out in terms of the ability to attract an international coalition and to stabilize the country after the war.

Certainly, Judy, all of them have been very critical, whether they supported the president or not initially. They've all been critical of the way he's handled the war since the end of major combat hostilities. And I think what you're going to see in this vote is the changing of the tide within the Democratic Party toward a position of more skepticism about the president's Iraq policy.

WOODRUFF: Fascinating to watch. All right. Ron Brownstein, thank you very much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired October 13, 2003 - 15:03   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: And now we turn to Iraq politics. Even on this Columbus Day holiday, the Bush administration is continuing its campaign to give the public a better impression of what is happening in Iraq. Extra effort may be needed after a new series of attacks that left three U.S. soldiers dead in two days. Even some top Republicans say that Bush advisors need to better coordinate the administration's message on Iraq.
Meantime, Democrats have their owner Iraq problems. Let's bring in Ron Brownstein of the "Los Angeles Times."

Ron, we have the nine Democrats running for president. They were split originally on whether they supported the idea of going to war. Now they're facing the question of whether to give the president this $87 billion he's asking for.

RON BROWNSTEIN, POLITICAL ANALYST: The same agony for the members of Congress that they faced a year ago is approaching again as the House and the Senate near decisions this week on whether to support the $87 billion. What we've seen over the last few weeks in the debates, Judy, is that the Democratic candidates have all said they might support some of the money if President Bush did a lot of things differently. If he rescinded part of the tax cut to pay for it, if he established a clearer plan to get out of Iraq at some point, if he went back more energetically to the U.N. to try to get international support.

The problem the members of Congress who are running for president are going to face is in the next few days they're almost certainly going to approach a vote where they will have to vote yes or no on the $87 billion without any of those conditions. And it's a very difficult decision for people like John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, and Dick Gephardt.

WOODRUFF: Ron, is there an obvious politically right vote here?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, the pressure on the Democratic Party is all in the direction of opposition to the war. I mean, it is a remarkable turn of events. Certainly, I don't think anyone a year ago thought that the people who would be on the defensive in the Democratic Party are those who supported the war.

One of the reasons, and not the only one, certainly, but one of the reasons for support of the war among Democrats was the belief that it was necessary to be politically viable in 2004. But here we are a year later -- and in your latest CNN-"USA Today" Gallup Poll, 80 percent of Democratic partisans say we never should have gone to war at all. That's an extraordinary number; much higher even than it's been over the summer. And you can see that puts a lot of pressure on these candidates who are going to face tough decisions in the next few days about how they come down on this vote.

WOODRUFF: Specifically, Ron, what kind of pressure would they be feeling out of the early primary states, whether it's Iowa or New Hampshire or South Carolina, Arizona?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, Iowa, of course, is famously dovish and is probably one of the most dovish electorates in any war (ph) electorates in the Democratic primary. But an 80 percent number, Judy, it's pretty broad across the board, certainly in New Hampshire as well.

I would suspect that you would see Dick Gephardt and Joe Lieberman stand with the president. John Kerry made noises yesterday like he may oppose it. John Edwards is also giving indications that he may oppose it. And both of them voted for the war originally.

Again, when you see Howard Dean out there really taking the offense again in the last few days, attacking the Democrats for their vote a year ago, it just gives you a sense of the current in the party and the kind of pressure those members of Congress will face on this vote.

WOODRUFF: But Dean is now saying -- at least he did in the debate -- he said last Thursday that he is in favor of spending this money, that we can't -- Americans can't pull their troops out.

BROWNSTEIN: Right.

WOODRUFF: So you've got -- you know people like Kerry and Edwards voted for going to war, now may be going against it. And just the opposite with Dean.

BROWNSTEIN: Well, I think Dean's position is not entirely crystal clear. But my sense of it is that he's saying he would support the money for the troops, not necessarily the additional money for the reconstruction. And that's a position that several of the Democrats I think want to take.

The problem is, for the ones who actually have to vote on it, they may never get that chance. I mean, there may be a vote to strip away the reconstruction money that fails, and then they're left with a decision of, do you support the money that includes the troops and the reconstruction or not? That's why it's so much easier in these circumstances to be out of Congress, where you don't have to cast these votes and you can establish distinctions in your mind that really don't conform or comport with the actual legislative choices.

WOODRUFF: Is there any way that this could get so complicated that it won't matter? When I hear you saying, you know, it could be this, or it could be that, but it's...

BROWNSTEIN: No. I think it's going to be another line in the sand. I have a feeling -- look, I mean, as we've talked about before, to a remarkable degree, the war in Iraq has been and sustains itself as the driving force in the Democratic race. I mean, they're arguing about this in your debate last week more passionately I think than any other issue, even though of course the war itself, the vote was a year ago.

So I do think this becomes another dividing line. And I suspect that the anti-war candidates will use it against the supporters if they support the president.

WOODRUFF: And yet some of them, as you're pointing out, Ron, run the risk of, if they were with the president before and they're against him on the money, then the question is, you know, how consistent are they?

BROWNSTEIN: Are they -- yes, absolutely. Look, I mean, you have them accused of flip-flopping. But I do think they have the opportunity to argue that they supported the war based on certain assumptions that have not borne out in terms of the ability to attract an international coalition and to stabilize the country after the war.

Certainly, Judy, all of them have been very critical, whether they supported the president or not initially. They've all been critical of the way he's handled the war since the end of major combat hostilities. And I think what you're going to see in this vote is the changing of the tide within the Democratic Party toward a position of more skepticism about the president's Iraq policy.

WOODRUFF: Fascinating to watch. All right. Ron Brownstein, thank you very much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com