Over here on the left, messages about military conduct have only so much weight.
We aren’t spoon-fed an endless daily diet of jingoistic faux-patriotic pap that conflates war and strength.
That’s a main course on the right.
We aren’t attracted to the Mad Dog Mattis’ of the world. We don’t mythologize and glamorize the Pat Tillman’s of the world as if dying in a misguided foreign intervention is glorious.
Presidents are generals to that audience.
That has worked in Trump’s favor - until now.
It telegraphed strength to an audience too incurious to think beyond the empty words.
They’re cowardly. They show weakness in place of strength. They’re strategically disastrous in the way that gets soldiers killed.
Most of all, they’re dishonorable.
Leaving an ally in a perilous position defenseless against an enemy is downright traitorous.
No military leader could both stab allies in the back and keep the complete faith of their own troops.
The Kurds are immeasurably brave. They fought with us and for us. They faced down the brutality of ISIS, lost thousands of their own, and fought on.
Then Trump sold them out against all military wisdom.
These are themes to repeat in mixed forums like your Facebook page.
While they may not sound like compelling arguments to you, they are very effective on the right.
This is where we get to leverage the construct the Fox News’ of the world have relied on for years.
The moral weakness of a dishonorable Commander in Chief is the *one* area where the right will hold Trump’s immortality against him.
What kind of Commander in Chief leaves allies to die?
What kind of military leader runs off the battlefield so many fought to take from ISIS?
Nothing will undermine Trump among the predominantly older portions of his base like an endless repetition of the fact that he is fundamentally a coward disloyal to the brave.