Democratic "Defeat"?

Publius is more optimistic:

With that in mind, let’s look at the “defeat.” First, Democrats had absolutely no chance of forcing troop withdrawal. None. The votes weren’t there because the margin of control is very slim, and because the Republicans are simply not yet frightened enough to abandon Bush. In addition, a chicken-like shutdown over war funding would, sadly, be blamed on Congress and could single-handedly revive Bush (which is why he refused to budge – he was hoping to trigger a shutdown).

The only way to end the war is to put political pressure on the Republicans and/or expand the Democratic majority. Accordingly, the reason the Democrats’ efforts should be seen as a success is because they drew very clear distinctions between the parties on Iraq. Virtually every single Republican is on record as supporting blank-check, endless war. Realistically speaking, the purpose of these votes (and forcing a veto) was not because troop withdrawal was realistic, but to set up the chess board for 2008. Even if the Great Pumpkin appears in September, it doesn’t matter now. These people voted for endless war and blank checks, and that should be the message and the theme for 2008.

That’s why the Democrats should stop sulking and be happy with the result – because of their spending bills, the parties are polarized on an issue where the public overwhelmingly and increasingly supports the Democratic position on the war. For this reason, the “capitulation” should instead be a time for offense – We were forced to do this because Congressional Republicans support endless, escalating war and blank checks for Bush and Cheney.

For similar reasons, Bush and the GOP should think twice before celebrating their victory. Very often, people lose sight of the substance of a debate because they get too caught up in the horse race. Sure, in some sense, Bush “won,” but what exactly did he win? He successfully obtained blanket authority for endless, escalating war – the one issue that cost the GOP Congress and will likely cost them more in 2008.

If Bush had started withdrawing, it would have taken Iraq off the table for 2008 and moved the debate elsewhere. But by escalating the war – and forcing votes on blanket authority – Bush has ensured that Iraq will still be raging during next year’s election season, thus making these early votes relevant.

In short, the war will continue until Republicans abandon Bush. That will only happen if they fear political defeat (or themselves get beaten). The Democrats’ spending bills furthered that goal, and in doing so, likely shortened the war as much as is possible. Under the circumstances, I consider that a success.