Do Nothing Republicans Turn to "Social Issues"

Despite increasing their majorities in both the Senate and the House in 2004, the Republican Party has shown a stunning inability to govern in an effective manner during the current Congress. President Bush's Social Security privatization scheme was dead on arrival. There has been scant oversight of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent in Iraq and the Gulf Coast. It increasingly appears that the Congress will not be able to pass a budget this year. Immigration reform seems to be stuck in the mud, as does the pension reform bill. And what ever happened to the legislation funding stem cell research, which passed in the House of Representatives but has yet to see the light of day in the Senate?

With such a lackluster record of success, what can the Do Nothing Republicans do to distract the American people from their inability to govern effectively? Turn to social issues, naturally. Laurie Kellman has the story for the Associated Press.

Protection of marriage amendment? Check. Anti-flag burning legislation? Check. New abortion limits? Check.

Between now and the November elections, Republicans are penciling in plans to take action on social issues important to religious conservatives, the foundation of the GOP base, as they defend their congressional majority.

In order not to get trounced this fall, GOP candidates need the most regressive elements of their base to turn out en masse, and these pieces of social legislation -- which have little to no chance of being enacted into law -- might help bring an ultra-conservative or two to the polls on November 7. But playing not to lose -- which is a last resort in a time of weakness -- is not the same thing as playing to win.

According to the most recent Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll (.pdf), there is an astoundingly large 26-point gender gap on the generic congressional ballot question, with men narrowly favoring the Republicans by a two-point margin while women support the Democrats by a whopping 28-point margin. Trying to pass legislation that would restrict women's right of choice -- particularly after approving of two anti-choice Supreme Court Justices and countless more appellate judges -- isn't going to decrease that killer gender gap one bit.

In a time of great weakness, the Do Nothing Republicans in Washington are resorting to their last option -- fairly trivial social legislation with no hope of passage -- to ensure that even if they are beaten this fall, their loss won't be catastrophic. But by playing not to lose badly, they are essentially conceding that they cannot win this year. Not the type of message a party's leadership usually sends out to its voters during an election year.



Display:


The more reactionary the get (none / 0)

the more likely they are to lose, IF the Dems can play the hand they are being dealt.


"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
by molly bloom on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 02:35:01 PM EST

"Social Issues" (none / 0)

Addressing what they call social issues will only widen the chasm separating the conservatives from the moderates in the Republican caucus.  Moderates will be compelled to undermine such legislation, thereby making the Republicans appear weak while alienating social conservatives in moderates' districts.  This will only benefit Democrats, especially if Democrats assume solid stances on these controversial issues.  Claire McCAskill did in Missouri, and notice Talent is now hovering at the 40% mark.  This decision can only be to the benefit of Democrats.


by illinois062006 on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 02:50:35 PM EST

Message to Dems (3.00 / 2)

The Dems should recognize that base politics works!
The Repubs have demonstrated its virtue in all the recent elections while the Dems have seen losses as they move to the mythical "center".

This Nov will be decided by which side gets more turn out. The Dems DC leadership and their consultants believe the generic ballot advantage and don't want to be proactive. They prefer their traditional approach of not taking any stands and hope the other side self-destructs and their base will show up as they have no choice. This approach will only generate proven results of the past. The Dems again falling short.

As we have seen time and again the Dems base will not turn out in the numbers to make the difference, unless there is a raison d'etre. The base wants the Dems DC leadership to demonstrate they can take the fight to the Repubs and not cower behind the "no stand" skirt but the Dems DC leadership believes otherwise. The outcome will not be any different to the past.


by ab initio on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 02:51:19 PM EST

And Women Vote (none / 0)

Thank the gods that women vote at a higher rate than men, and because there are more women of voting age population than men, there are about 7 million more women voters.


by Mimikatz on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 04:05:31 PM EST

Contrast (none / 0)

Democrats should contrast this move by focusing on economic issues; that is, issues that actually, materially affect the living standards of Americans. Good, contrasting initiatives include repeal of bankruptcy reform and class action reform as well as a push for a hemispheric living wage to undercut the effects of NAFTA and CAFTA.

The overall message should be: "Look, the Republicans are legislating meaningless moral stuff that doesn't really affect most of us, but Democrats are fighting for fair economics and higher living standards."


by mildewmaximilian on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 04:07:05 PM EST

We need a better frame... (3.00 / 1)

  The term "social issues" has come to mean "red meat for the far right", when in actuality "social issues" also covers many things important to  (classic, pre-DLC) Democratic values, such as racial equality and poverty reduction.

  And "social issues" imputes an undeserved legitimacy to the divisive, inflammatory fundie laundry list.

  So what label besides "social issues" can we attach to fundie-pandering? I don't have any quick ideas, but I thought I'd throw this thought out there...

 


by Master Jack on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 04:15:37 PM EST

It's The Message (none / 0)

Karl Rove, the `architect' and a brilliant strategist has been successfully championing one simple hypothesis...the voting public is lazy. Here's the equation...people are busy...both parents work in most households...they get their news in thirty second sound bites...they attempt to distinguish integrity and principles from the consistency of a politician's message...if you craft a message that appeals to a majority constituency and then repeat that message religiously...you will keep those voters even if you don't deliver so long as you keep saying that you want to and you will. This works because simultaneously they begin to point out the opposition's complex message.

Democrats, albeit with good intentions, believe that if they can just get the public to listen to the details, they can demonstrate that the opponent isn't sharing all the facts...that issues have nuances and if the public will take the time to educate themselves, they will see the merits of their nuanced positions. This fails miserably despite being rational and reasonable...and it fails because they don't understand the voters.

The 2004 presidential election is a perfect example. Rove instinctively found John Kerry's vulnerability..."I actually voted for it before I voted against it"...an indictment of only ten words. If that isn't enough convincing proof, look at the debates. One could quibble over whether Kerry won two or three debates but one can't argue that Kerry didn't win. The problem is that he won on detail and depth which takes time, attention, and can't be sold in a thirty second sound bite. The best analogy may be `you don't sell ice to an eskimo.' The Republicans then `swiftboated' Kerry's primary appeal in well timed spots and the race was over. Democrats will continue to struggle so long as they refuse to acknowledge this counterintuitive, yet fully real, construct.

In the absense of the ability to tailor the message to the political terrain, Democrats will continue to win the battles but lose the war. It's the message, stupid!

http://www.thoughttheater.com


by Daniel DiRito on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 07:54:21 PM EST

30 point gender gap... (none / 0)

not a 26 point gender gap.  It would be 26 if the ladies favored Dems by 28, and the men favored dems by 2... as it is... you ADD two to 26 to get an even more "astoundingly large" 30 point gender gap.


Invest in nature
by NCDem on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 08:28:36 PM EST

woops... (none / 0)

add 2 to 28.


Invest in nature
by NCDem on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 08:29:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I do not consider Republicans good Christians. (none / 0)

I do not consider Republicans good Christians. These people do not follow the teachings of Christ in my view.

Karl Rove just repeats the messages of George Wallace and Richard Nixon. Karl Rove does not do anything original.

Speaking of issues the myth that Republicans can defend this country better than Democrats EPLODED with the first plane that hit the world trade center on Sept 11, 2001.

http://www.zazzle.com/maximus7


by maximus7 on Sun Apr 16, 2006 at 02:26:07 AM EST

a better frame. (none / 0)

In my view these crazed people cannot keep their noses out of women's panties and men's jockstraps.

The issues that these crazed right wingers focus on appear below the belt.

I do not consider these people religious, moral or even Christian. I do not conider these moral issues.

Tell these right wing idiots to stop sticking their noses into women's panties and men's jockstraps.

Republican economic policies have destroyed more marriages than any two women wanting to marry ever did.


by maximus7 on Sun Apr 16, 2006 at 02:31:59 AM EST

Re: "Social Issues" (none / 0)

In your last paragragh, you write, "... to ensure that even if they are beaten this fall, their loss won't be catastrophic."

I agree that appealing to red meat Republicans may mitigate their loses, but nothing is assured. Most analyses I've read don't have the Democrats winning big this fall or even taking Congress, however. We might just get lucky if women vote in record numbers and BushCo keeps stumbling.


by BillB on Sun Apr 16, 2006 at 10:19:52 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.