Kevin Drum of Mother Jones does a good job of summarizing the politics of the Syrian refugee crisis. In the wake of the Paris attacks, people are legitimately scared. More attacks could be coming and terrorist cells might be operating anywhere. The flood of people coming from the region where the group that claimed responsibility is operating makes the refugees suspect in the eyes of many, if not most, people.
Instead of addressing those concerns, Democrats, including the president, have turned to ridiculing the Republicans. That’s a mistake. The first job of political leaders is to reassure the public. Democrats should demand tough screening, Drum says, and point out the the US is already taking a “modest number of refugees.”
As he correctly notes, “Ordinary people see the refugees as a common sense thing to be concerned about. We (liberals) shouldn’t respond by essentially calling them idiots. That way lies electoral disaster.”
In that context, Roy Cooper’s announcement that he supports a “pause” in admitting refugees makes sense even if it’s not pretty. Democrats are already playing defense on immigration in states like North Carolina. To many voters, Syrian refugees are little more than immigrants in suicide vests. It’s ugly politics but it’s also reality.
Republicans like Pat McCrory, though, are showing their cynical nature. McCrory not only said that North Carolina doesn’t want Syrian refugees, he’s trying to raise low-dollar contributions off his stance. He’s not interested in addressing people’s fears; he wants to exploit them for political and monetary gain. It’s despicable.
But it’s not all Republicans. John McCain stood up to fear mongers and said that “refugees are not the problem.” Other Congressional Republicans echoed that sentiment.
In reality, Syrian refugees pose little actual threat. They go through an extensive screening process that takes 18 months to 2 years to complete. Only half of the applicants will be accepted and children make up about half of them. Twenty-five percent are over 60 years old. Only 2% are men of combat age.
Democrats and their allied groups should undertake an extensive education effort to reassure people of their safety. Address their fears and make the case that demonizing refugees just feeds into the terrorists’ anti-American rhetoric. Contrary to the loud voices of right-wing xenophobes and bigots, Americans are compassionate people. If we weren’t, we wouldn’t be such a diverse country.
Thomas Mills is the founder and publisher of PoliticsNC.com. Before beginning PoliticsNC, Thomas spent twenty years as a political and public affairs consultant. Learn more >
There is an alternative – Ken Spaulding. Roy Cooper did not have to side with Pat McCrory but just like a whole host of other issues, he sides with the Governor but tell the people something else. He won’t debate Mr. Spaulding. Why? Is record as AG is Horrible! In the next 3 months North Carolina will find out who the real Roy Cooper is. #StandwithKen #Spaulding2016 http://www.kenspaulding.com
“Democrats are already playing defense on immigration in states like North Carolina. To many voters, Syrian refugees are little more than immigrants in suicide vests.”
Many, but not most, and those voters are going to vote for McCrory either way. It doesn’t matter, though, because you can win a statewide election in North Carolina without them. Obama won here in 2008 on a *much* more liberal platform than Cooper, and he came quite close in 2012 (and still won Virginia) despite there being absolutely no question as to where he stands.
Syrian refugees are *not* going to be the dominant issue in the 2016 gubernatorial election. Cooper could have simply issued a statement citing John McCain and James Comey and let the decided minority of NC voters who think the President is a Muslim Communist Nazi Terrorist have their say on Facebook and newspaper comment boards. It wouldn’t have actually hurt him with median Presidential year voters at all, and it would have given him a small fundraising and enthusiasm boost.
Instead he’s alienated more or less his entire base. Not just “progressives”, but plenty of pragmatic moderates and national security hawks (including myself), and many conservative but principled regular-attendance Christians as well. Hell, of the seven NRA lifetime members I know, four are deeply disappointed that he’s followed McCrory on this and the other three truly could not care less. I even know two normally opportunistic NCGOP officials who were privately dismayed that nobody was standing up for the right thing on this.
This is an unmitigated disaster for the Cooper campaign, and we should acknowledge it as such. I’m pro-gun, pro-military, and I’ve probably forgotten more about national security than any of these guys have ever known in their lives. But this isn’t about that… I don’t know *any* serious foreign policy scholars who aren’t creeped out by the turn this has taken.
This is about Cooper caving to pure, unadulterated hate and bigotry. There’s no valid strategy here, it’s just a colossal failure of judgment, whatever your politics. I have supported him for a long time because I want a moderate, principled, law-and-order type who can win a statewide election and represent all of North Carolina. Up until this week, I thought he was that. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe he just didn’t understand what he was doing and got some really bad advice.
I really hope he at least has the wisdom to fire the idiot consultant who urged this and start walking it back so he can regain a little bit of the goodwill he’s squandered and refocus on the things people will actually still care about in three months. I don’t think there are any viable alternatives at this point.
I have but four words for those who would deny a haven to children fleeing death – Remember the “St. Louis”.
Let’s be realistic here. I’m sure Mr. McCrory would welcome any Syrian immigrant who was either (1) a personal buddy, or (2) a generous campaign contributor. The man has “standards.”
Here is a much better, more concise summary of the politics of the Syrian Crisis:
“Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on
a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of
it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people
don’t want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in
Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to
drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist
dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no
voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering
Roy could and should have explained the exhaustive process by which refugees–especially those from that troubled region–are already vetted. He could have pointed out the many easier ways for security risks to enter the US. He could have pointed out the strong positive track record of refugees accepted for entry to the US. Instead, he made a serious policy mistake by echoing the language used by McCrory and the Republicans who are seeking to take craven political advantage of a real crisis. I speak as a long-time Cooper supporter to note my disappointment and distress. I believe that he can recover from this error, but he needs to understand the depth of disappointment among Democratic activists statewide, and walk back from this mistake. We cannot afford to sugarcoat it and let it sit to rot.
Actually, Mr. Wynne, might not McCrory’s position be viewed by NC Righteous Righters as the “Dark Side” stance….?
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/refugees-christians-215991
What was more predictable, that the Republicans would run with the issue and try to scare everyone while scoring political points, or that the Democrats would hand the issue to them on a silver platter? Bill Clinton would have threaded the needle on this one and said: Yes, there are legitimate concerns, which is why we are doing everything we can to vet these people so that we can safely fulfill our American and Christian duties. Remember, Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were the first Christian refugees when they left Bethlehem to escape Herod’s edict.
Yes, pretty much. Reps don’t have to even say a word, and voters will come running into their arms on this one. These aren’t refugees as we think of that term, they’re losers in a civil war and just as brutish and religiously fanatic as the people they’re running from. In the aftermath of Paris, Dems are insane to not challenge the President on this one because this issue alone could result in more losses next year.
You are calling Christians and other religious minorities fleeing from terrorism, Jihad and aerial bombing in Syria “brutish and religiously fanatic”?
I think YOU are insane. Or at least grossly misinformed.
The “brutish and religiously fanatic” don’t generally flee with their families. They’re fanatics – they stay and fight fanatically.
Nicely and deliberately misimterpreted.
Everyone seems to be missing the essential points: (1) The real security threat is not Syrian refugees coming directly to the US; it is instead the 100,000 per day that are pouring through Greece. The most the overburdened Greek officials can do is to give them a number and send them to the rest of Europe, where they can easily get a passport to the US. (2) This is just the beginning of a mass exodus from the Mid-East and other Third World countries to the US and Europe. Their populations are growing exponentially, and their native countries do not have the resources, especially food, to support them. Our goals should be birth control and improvement of living conditions in the Third World, not mass exodus to the US and Europe.