|
|
|
National Republicans
Gary Pearce posted on August 29, 2012 10:25
Political junkies like me and you pay attention to what convention speakers say. We get into the issues, the rhetoric, the charges, claims and counterclaims. But that’s not what matters.
Voters watch conventions for what they say about the candidates and the party. They watch it like just another TV show, and they look at the candidates and speakers as just more characters on TV.
That’s not superficial. It’s actually a very deep and searching judgment: Do I like this person – or these people? Do I feel comfortable with them in my life? Do I trust them?
That’s the ultimate measure of whether the Republican convention is a success – or a disaster that would have been better off if Isaac had hit Tampa.
Did Ann Romney make Mitt seem warm or likable? Or did people just think: “Rich”?
Was Chris Christie warm and personable? Or just mean and angry?
My hunch: Rich, mean and angry.
[Click to read and post comments...]
Gary Pearce posted on August 28, 2012 16:11
Isaac busted up the Republican convention schedule. It’s competing for TV coverage. Therein lies another danger to the GOP: Is it good to bash government when a lot of people may need government help?
One story said the federal government spent $10 billion building levees to protect New Orleans. Did Governor Bobby Jindal reject that “stimulus”?
How fast will those Southern Republican governors ask Washington for help? How quick will they blame Washington when their constituents start griping?
What would the Ron Paul/Ayn Rand/anti-government crowd say to those people? “You’re on your own”? “Pick yourself up by your soggy bootstraps”? “Rebuild that yourself”?
How will Romney handle the messaging: “We need government to let us alone”? Or, “we need government to help us”
[Click to read and post comments...]
Carter Wrenn posted on August 28, 2012 15:16
Unless you happen to be one of the half-dozen people in Raleigh who do not own a television you’ve figured out by now that both sides in the Presidential race mean to do whatever it takes to win. This virulent outbreak of no holds barred politics has some folks worried we’ve stumbled into a kind of moral swamp, but no holds barred politics isn’t our biggest national vice by a long shot.
Yesterday, the newspaper reported two American soldiers were killed in Afghanistan.
Why were they there? We long ago gave up on winning the war – so why haven’t we done what democracies usually do when they get in this kind of fix: Declare victory, tuck tail, and run?
Venal politics is one thing. But senseless wars are a lot deeper swamp than getting gulled by politicians.
[Click to read and post comments...]
Gary Pearce posted on August 28, 2012 08:44
A TAPster who is no fan of the party conventions offers this:
“Two thoughts as we enter two tedious weeks of convention blather:
“First, the hurricane harassing the Republican National Convention is further proof that Southern small-town wind-blown burgs like Tampa and Charlotte have no business hosting big-time conventions. What self-respecting convention city has to deal with hurricanes AND must import enough hookers, strippers and anarchists to have a real party?
“Second, shouldn't the enormous resources required to fund the conventions be better spent on some grander purpose? Feeding poor people? Caring for sick people? Avoiding $50+ million on security alone? The conventions are anachronistic wastes of time and money.”
[Click to read and post comments...]
Gary Pearce posted on August 27, 2012 13:43
Since he picked Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney has been talking about: Medicaid cuts, budget cuts, taxes (his and ours), Bain Capital, Obamacare, abortion and, now, birth certificates. None of which address undecided voters’ number-one concern: jobs and the economy.
There seems to be a simple message for Romney in this campaign: “The economy is bad. Vote for a change.”
But, for such a disciplined guy, he seems to have no message discipline.
Maybe Republicans are so blinded by their dislike for President Obama they can’t focus on what’s important to voters. It wouldn’t be the first time they made that mistake. See 1992 and Bill Clinton.
Romney’s and the Republicans’ task at the convention isn’t to bash Obama or woo the Tea Party. It’s to change the subject. If they can’t do it now, they will have little precious little chance from now on.
[Click to read and post comments...]
Gary Pearce posted on August 22, 2012 11:25
Rep. Todd Akin shouldn’t pull out (pardon the expression) of the Missouri Senate race.
First of all, he is the Democratic Party’s best bet to keep control of the United States Senate. So stand up to all those weaklings in the GOP, Todd! Stand up for what you believe!
Second, Akin may have gotten his biology wrong. But his philosophy is perfectly consistent with what many Republicans believe. The Republican platform committee just yesterday adopted a plank that makes no exceptions to allow abortion in cases of rape or incest victims.
The plank calls for a human life amendment to the Constitution and says "the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed."
Mitt Romney takes pains to say he doesn’t go that far. But nor does he go so far as to exercise any moral leadership to oppose the plank.
Rep. Akin represents an important part of the Republican coalition: people who believe that women who are rape victims and get pregnant should be forced to bear the child.
Let’s have a good old American debate about that proposition.
[Click to read and post comments...]
Carter Wrenn posted on August 21, 2012 15:43
The other day Gary wrote “Why They Lie” about the election in 1984 when Jim Hunt and Jesse Helms were duking it out and how elbow throwing was acceptable in that campaign but outright lying was taboo – that was one line both Helms and Hunt feared to cross. Because they’d pay a price.
That line was still there twenty-four years later when Liddy Dole called Kay Hagan an ‘atheist’ – and paid a price.
But the line has vanished this year, as if the whole country’s chosen sides and made up its mind it’s fine to say anything to win.
On one side we’ve got Mitt Romney supporters saying Barack Obama was never an American citizen and the other side we’ve got Barack Obama supporters saying Mitt Romney is to blame for a woman dying of cancer and it all has Gary shaking his head, wondering, “Does it go on and on like this? Or is there a breaking point?”
Well, we’ve landed in a very old political swamp.
I’ve been reading William Shirer’s The Nightmare Years, 1930-1940.
On September 1st, 1939 in Berlin the German politicians announced Poland had attacked Germany in twelve places – then added, ‘Polish bombs are falling on German soil.’ Before the Germans the Greeks, Romans, French and Russians all had Caesars, Napoleons and Commissars who had no qualms about crossing lines and, in the end, the swamp consumed them all.
So, yes, there is a breaking point.
The question is do we want to reach it?
[Click to read and post comments...]
Gary Pearce posted on August 21, 2012 13:08
Rob Christensen’s column about “Walmart Moms” shows that this election is more about personalities and less about Medicare, the debt, competing budget plans, taxes or any of the issues that animate the media and political chatter.
The focus groups Christensen went to focused not on “issues,” but on personal impressions of the candidates and their strengths and weaknesses. The moms’ verdict: they’re disappointed with Obama on the economy, but Romney is “too rich, too aloof, and… somebody who did not understand their lives.”
They described Obama this way: “disgusted,” “frustration” “indifferent,” “it’s not getting better,” “disconnect” and “loss of jobs.”
But Christensen noted they “did not seem to be closing off the option of voting for Obama. Several mentioned that Obama couldn’t solve all the nation’s problems alone, and that he needed the help of Congress, who they also blamed. Several noted that Obama had inherited a difficult situation.”
One said: “I feel more compelled toward him (Obama). I feel he is more real. I don’t have warm and fuzzy feelings toward Romney.”
They described Romney this way: “clueless,” “fake” and “deceitful.” “One woman doubted that Romney had ever been in a grocery store.”
Another: “He is so beyond wealthy. And he has these accounts offshore and is secretive and shady. He’s just this billionaire, shady kind of mess.”
One spoke up for Romney: “I personally think when it comes to the economy you’re probably not going to get anyone better suited. And to me I feel that the economy is a big part of this election. You can’t be that rich, like everybody’s saying, without knowing a thing or two about money. Granted he may have screwed people over somewhere along the line, but probably Obama has and anyone else.”
This is why all the TV ads – competing, confusing claims about who said what and did what about Medicare and the debt and taxes and all the rest – may make little difference.
It will all come to down a Moment – or two. A moment in the debates or at the conventions or in some setting we can’t predict. A moment when these swing voters – and there are precious few of them – see something in Obama or Romney that pushes them over an edge.
It will come down to: Who do I like, and who do I trust?
[Click to read and post comments...]
Carter Wrenn posted on August 20, 2012 10:17
It doesn’t take a great deal to turn a fellow’s head – a blonde whispering in his ear, unexpected praise from a stranger, a new sports car. Humility’s hard to come by and harder still to hold onto which, I guess, is one reason the Good Lord made the world such a difficult place to live in.
When it comes to humility, we Republicans have had a couple of head-turning years. Obama’s been unpopular. The 2010 election was a blessing beyond our wildest dreams. We’ve had veto overrides in the state legislature. Pat McCrory’s been ahead in the Governor’s race. And Republicans draw the new legislative districts so the future looks bright.
So, maybe, it’s just waywardness to think, It looks too good to be true.
But, that said, I’m beginning to have an uneasy feeling that in subterranean caverns political tides are turning in a not good way and since our hopes this election rest on the single political fact of President Obama’s unpopularity we Republicans may be a bit too blissful.
Anyhow, there is an antidote: I’ve taken to reading about Harry Truman and the election of 1948 that Republicans were sure to win.
[Click to read and post comments...]
Gary Pearce posted on August 18, 2012 13:16
The author of a recent guest blog (“GOP Sex Change 2012”) was amused by the comments she provoked. She responds:
“Your readers' comments about my Shirtless Paul Ryan guest column demonstrate the depth at which the True Believers have their collective pointy little heads stuck in the sand. In no way was I implying that the biggest problem in our country is whether or not there are pics of a shirtless Paul Ryan showing up all over the place. One of our many problems in the age of sharing every salacious detail and potentially compromising photo that can possibly be unearthed about candidates of both parties: that the media (mainstream and just plain weird alike) seem to THINK that the people of America WANT to see a picture of a shirtless Paul Ryan. I base that assertion on the number of times I've seen these pictures on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Inside Edition, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
“I'm just glad Mitt didn't choose Newt Gingrich for his running mate. We know the guy's been to the beach somewhere along the line, and there's just no way to ‘un-see’ a shirtless Newt when that photo gets out.”
[Click to read and post comments...]
|
|
|