washington, dc

The Democratic Strategist

Political Strategy for a Permanent Democratic Majority

Month: March 2012

Conservatives More Unhinged Than Ever?

At The American Prospect, Paul Waldman addresses a question one hears with increasing frequency these days, “Are Conservatives Getting Crazier?” Waldman quotes from Rick Perlstein’s Rolling Stone article on the topic that, “What’s changed is that loony conservatives are now the Republican mainstream, the dominant force in the GOP,” and adds:

You can still make the case that conservatives are crazier now, because the key factor isn’t the craziness of the craziest idea circulating among them–say, that Barack Obama was born in Kenya and successfully engineered a massive conspiracy to cover it up, as opposed to the idea that Dwight Eisenhower was a communist agent–it’s how widely those ideas are held, and by whom. The conspiracy theories and hate-driven beliefs find purchase not just on the fringe, but among elected lawmakers, influential media figures, and in many cases, a majority of Republican voters.
…Many conservatives never stopped believing that women who make their own sexual decisions are dirty sluts, but since so many Republicans won office in 2010, that belief translated into a torrent of legislation. In 2011, a record 92 pieces of state legislation restricting abortion rights were enacted, along with measures to restrict access to contraception and renew the failure that is abstinence-only sex education…in the Republican party of today, looniness practically operates on a ratchet, moving only in one direction…There are almost no moderates left in the party to push back.

Waldman is skeptical that even a humiliating defeat for the right in November will lead to the restoration of sanity and moderation in the GOP. “…Who is going to successfully argue that the party needs to turn its back on its nuttiest elements? All the moderates who have retired in disgust or been purged in primaries? They’re gone, and the Republicans who are left couldn’t care less what they have to say.”
When it comes to deciding whether the GOP has finally had its fill of self-destructive lunacy, the only prudent response is to spread your bets.


Political Strategy Notes

Dan Rivoli points out at International Business Times that the Supreme Court will decide the fate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) beginning March 26, “arguably its most anticipated case in years.” Rivoli adds that the High Court will deliberate about the ACA for 3 days, and “will address aspects of the law beyond the key question of whether the Constitution allows the government to force Americans to buy health insurance. The justices will also consider whether the law can stand without the mandate, expansion of Medicaid eligibility and whether it’s even proper for the court to hear the challenges to the insurance-purchase requirement before it takes effect in 2014.” Rivoli cites the new Kaiser Family Foundation poll indicating wide public misunderstanding about the ACA.
Democrats have a lot of work to do to educate the public about the need for the individual mandate in the ACA. According to Scott Clement’s WaPo report about a new Washington Post/ABC news poll, 42 percent “want the high court to throw out the entire law” and “25 percent want to do away with the mandate alone and a similar proportion wants the justices to uphold the entire law.” Clement adds that the above-noted Kaiser poll indicates that 51 percent believe that the mandate is unconstitutional, while only 28 percent believe it is constitutional.
Dems have begun addressing the merits of the health care reform law in their messaging, as Deirdre Wash reports at CNN.com: “Democrats will also argue that all the dire predictions GOP opponents warned about in 2009 haven’t materialized. Republicans said senior citizens would lose their health care coverage and private plans would be forced to impose massive hikes in premiums…”None of those things have happened, and in fact good things have happened — so that is a help to us,” claimed one senior Democratic aide coordinating the week’s activities. “People are seeing the good things and the crazy things Republicans said were going to happen didn’t happen.” …Congressional Democrats this week, with a major push from the White House, are planning a series of events to highlight the two major provisions of the law implemented in the last two years — rules extending health care coverage for those with pre-existing conditions and allowing young adults to remain on their parents’ plans until they turn 26.”
Kyle Kondik explains why those who are looking for an anti-incumbent tidal wave will likely be disappointed.
All talk of anyone other than Romney getting the GOP nod is starting to sound a little silly. As Brad Knickerbocker reports at the Monitor on Romney’s chances of victory in Illinois tomorrow, “Nate Silver of the New York Times’ FiveThirtyEight political blog gives him an 86 percent chance of winning. (The Intrade prediction market puts Romney’s chances of winning Illinois at 92 percent.)”
Need more persuasion that it’s Romney’s to lose? As Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik and Geoffrey Skelley report at the Crystal Ball, “Mitt Romney, appears poised to further pad his lead in delegates in upcoming Republican nomination contests, starting with Illinois next Tuesday and through a northeastern primary day on April 24…From now until the end of April, we expect Romney to win not only the majority of nominating contests, but also the majority of delegates awarded in these contests…Barring a massive, difficult to fathom shift in this contest, Mitt Romney has a better than 80% chance to be the GOP nominee. No amount of wild tapping on CNN’s magic wall will alter those odds.”
Political Wire’s Taegan Goddard cites good reasons why Dems should guard against overconfidence about President Obama’s re-election prospects.
Chris Cillizza writes about the VA Senate race in ‘the Fix’: “This may be the truest of the many toss-ups …In fact, when a recent poll showed former senator George Allen (R) leading by 8 percent, another poll soon showed former Democratic National Committee chairman Tim Kaine (D) leading by 9 points. The truth is probably right in between those two polls.” Dems who want to make sure Kaine has the resources to compete can help out at his Act Blue page.
The AFL-CIO has a great new user-friendly web page, with lots of tools for progressives to get up to speed on critical legislation, political issues and campaigns.


Tribal Conceptions of ‘Sacredness’ Driving Polarization

The New York Times has an interesting excerpt from Jonathan Haidt’s book, “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion,” arguing that much of the current political polarization is rooted in tribal conceptions of “sacredness.” As Haidt says:

Self-interest, political scientists have found, is a surprisingly weak predictor of people’s views on specific issues. Parents of children in public school are not more supportive of government aid to schools than other citizens. People without health insurance are not more likely to favor government-provided health insurance than are people who are fully insured.
Despite what you might have learned in Economics 101, people aren’t always selfish. In politics, they’re more often groupish. When people feel that a group they value — be it racial, religious, regional or ideological — is under attack, they rally to its defense, even at some cost to themselves. We evolved to be tribal, and politics is a competition among coalitions of tribes.
The key to understanding tribal behavior is not money, it’s sacredness. The great trick that humans developed at some point in the last few hundred thousand years is the ability to circle around a tree, rock, ancestor, flag, book or god, and then treat that thing as sacred. People who worship the same idol can trust one another, work as a team and prevail over less cohesive groups. So if you want to understand politics, and especially our divisive culture wars, you must follow the sacredness.

Haidt goes on to provide compelling examples on the left and right, and observes,

This is why we’ve seen the sudden re-emergence of the older culture war — the one between the religious right and the secular left that raged for so many years before the financial crisis and the rise of the Tea Party. When sacred objects are threatened, we can expect a ferocious tribal response. The right perceives a “war on Christianity” and gears up for a holy war. The left perceives a “war on women” and gears up for, well, a holy war.

it’s a useful model, as long as it’s not leveraged in service to false equivalence. As Haidt concludes: “The timing could hardly be worse. America faces multiple threats and challenges, many of which will require each side to accept a “grand bargain” that imposes, at the very least, painful compromises on core economic values. But when your opponent is the devil, bargaining and compromise are themselves forms of sacrilege.”


Dems Must Recruit More Diverse Candidates For Major Offices

This item by J.P. Green was originally published on March 15, 2012.
Jamelle Bouie has an important article, “The Other Glass Ceiling” up at The American Prospect addressing the dearth of African American elected officials in the age of Obama. Indeed, conservative advocates of eliminating section 5 of the Voting Rights Act often argue that it is unnecessary, since having an African American President shows that discrimination in voting laws are largely a thing of the past. As Bouie points out, however, Black Americans are still very much under-represented in our major political institutions:

…Since the momentous 2008 election, there has been no great flowering of black political life, no renaissance in black political leadership. In a year when the first black president is running for re-election, the only African American bidding for a top statewide office is Maryland state Senator C. Anthony Muse, who is challenging Ben Cardin–a well-liked incumbent–in a hopeless race for the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination. At most, by the end of 2012, two of the nation’s 150 governors and senators will be African American.
…If the number of officeholders was in line with African Americans’ share of the population–12.2 percent–there would be at least 12 African American senators and six governors. By contrast, the percentage of African Americans in the House of Representatives is nearly consistent with their share of the population–42 members, or almost 10 percent.

Bouie goes on to discuss plausible demographic and financial reasons for the shortage of Black candidates for these offices, as well as failed efforts by promising candidates, like Harvey Gantt’s bid for U.S. Senate in NC. He notes also the ugly racial stereotypes promoted in GOP ad campaigns designed to gin up irrational fears among white voters, such as GOP political consultant Alex Castellanos’s infamous “hands” ad, which helped Jesse Helms defeat Gantt.
Bouie stops short of exploring possible solutions, no doubt because there are not a lot of viable options available at the moment. Democrats, of course have done much better than Republicans in electing African Americans and other people of color, as well as women, to office. But there is no question that Dems have also failed to make much of an effort to achieve anything resembling proportional representation in terms of race and gender.
One thing that is needed is an active policy driven by a conscious commitment on the part of the national and state Democratic Parties to recruit, train and fund more African American, Latino and Women candidates. Some state Democratic parties do better than others, but there is enormous room for improvement everywhere.
Perhaps a special effort to recruit potential African American, Latino and women leaders from the ranks of organized labor and business would yield more viable state-wide candidates. But there has to be a real commitment to providing them with the needed financial and training resources.
One thing remains clear: The dearth of people of color and women candidates is an embarrassment to a party which bills itself as the hope of a more progressive society. All of the legitimate demographic and financial obstacles notwithstanding, Democrats must more forcefully address this issue at the national and state levels. In doing so, we just might find a pivotal asset in the struggle for a more permanent progressive majority.


Creamer: Gas Price Hikes May Backfire on GOP

The following article by Democratic strategist Robert Creamer, author of “Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win,” is cross-posted from HuffPo, where it was originally published on March 6, 2012.
Eight months before the fall elections, Republican strategists are in a dour mood.

The economy has begun to gain traction.
Their leading candidate for president, Mitt Romney, is universally viewed as an uninspiring poster child for the one percent, with no core values anyone can point to except his own desire to be elected.
Every time Romney tries to “identify” with ordinary people he says something entirely inappropriate about his wife’s “two Cadillacs,” how much he likes to fire people who provide him services, or how he is a buddy with the people who own NASCAR teams rather than the people who watch them.
The polls show that the more people learn about Romney, the less they like him.
The Republican primary road show doesn’t appear to be coming to a close any time soon.
Together, Bob Kerrey’s announcement that he will get into the Senate contest in Nebraska and the news that Olympia Snowe is retiring from the Senate in Maine, massively increase Democratic odds of holding onto the control of the Senate.
The Congress is viewed positively by fewer voters than at any time in modern history — and two-thirds think the Republicans are completely in charge.
Worse yet, the polling in most presidential battleground states currently gives President Obama leads over Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.

The one thing Republican political pros are cheering right now is the rapidly increasing price of gas at the pump and the underlying cost of oil.
The conventional wisdom holds that if gas prices increase, it will inevitably chip away at support for President Obama — and there is a good case to be made. After all, increased gas prices could siphon billions out of the pockets of consumers that they would otherwise spend on the goods and services that could help continue the economic recovery — which is critical to the president’s re-election.
But Republicans shouldn’t be so quick to lick their chops at the prospect of rising gas prices.
Here’s why:
1). What you see, everybody sees. The sight of Republicans rooting against America and hoping that rising gas prices will derail the economic recovery is not pretty.
The fact is that Republicans have done everything in their power to block President Obama’s job-creating proposals in Congress, and they were dragged kicking and screaming to support the extension of the president’s payroll tax holiday that was critical to continuing economic momentum.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell actually announced that his caucus’ number one priority this term was the defeat of President Obama. The sight of Republicans salivating at the prospect of $4-plus per gallon gasoline will not sit well with ordinary voters.
2). Democrats have shown that they are more than willing to make the case about who is actually responsible for rising gas prices — and the culprits’ footprints lead right back to the GOP’s front door.
Who is really to blame for higher gas prices?

The big oil companies that are doing everything they can to keep oil scarce and the price high;
Speculators that drive up the price in the short run;
Foreign conflicts, dictators and cartels — that have been important in driving up prices particularly in the last two months;
The Republicans who prevent the development of the clean, domestic sources of energy that are necessary to allow America to free itself from the stranglehold of foreign oil — all in order to benefit speculators and oil companies.

The fact is that the world will inevitably experience increasing oil prices over the long run because this finite, non-renewable resource is getting scarcer and scarcer at the same time that demand for energy from the emerging economies like China and India is sky rocketing.
Every voter with a modicum of experience in real-world economics gets that central economic fact.
That would make Republican opposition to the development of renewable energy sources bad enough. But over the last few months the factor chiefly responsible for short-term oil price hikes have been the Arab Spring and Israel’s growing tensions with Iran — all of which are well beyond direct American control.


Obama’s Apology Serves American Ideals, Protects Our Troops

This item by J.P. Green was originally published on February 27, 2012.
Juan Cole blogs today on the uproar over the burning of old copies of the Qur’an at the US military at Bagram Base in Afghanistan, which has already claimed the lives of U.S. serivice men, as well as Afghanis. The tragedy is made more horrific by demagoguery on both sides amplifying animosity in Afghanistan and the U.S.
We can’t control bigotry in other nations. But when it is practiced by Americans, it should be called out, as Cole does:

Newt Gingrich and now Rick Santorum have slammed Obama for apologizing. Santorum called the gesture weak. (This stance is sheer hypocrisy from someone who has complained that Obama is ‘waging war on religion’ !)

No one should be surprised by the reaction of Muslims in Afganistan and other Arab nations, nor that their protests would escalate into violent protests. It’s right to condemn those violent protests, but it’s also important to understand its causes, in this case the perception of Muslims that their sacred scriptures have been disrespected by an occupying military force from half-way around the world.
There is no question in my mind that President Obama did the right thing in apologizing for the Qur’an burnings. A cornerstone of American values must always be respect for all religions — that’s the American way of our best ideals. Not apologizing for the burnings would the equivalent of insulting millions of people who belong to one of the world’s most widely-practiced faiths. It would also exacerbate animosity towards American troops in Afghanistan and perhaps elsewhere.
The President did the right thing. But the most important lesson for the Obama administration would be that the longer we occupy Afghanistan, the greater the chances for such incidents to occur.
Meanwhile, Santorum, Gingrich and their Republican echo chamber enablers are playing a risky game for political advantage, and one which has the potential for endangering American troops. They should be held accountable by the media and the electorate.


Brownstein: Obama Gaining Cred with Public

National Journal’s Ronald Brownstein reports on a new Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor poll, indicating that President Obama’s approval rating rose to 51 percent, up 7 from December — “Obama’s highest approval rating in the Heartland Monitor since the survey taken immediately after the killing of Osama bin Laden in May.” Brownstein notes further:

…Obama’s support is strengthening but hardly yet secure, and the country remains divided closely enough on his performance and agenda to virtually ensure a competitive general election against the Republican nominee. Indeed, just 44 percent of registered voters surveyed said they intend to vote for the president’s reelection, while 49 percent said they will likely or definitely vote for someone else. A series of economic measures also shows that Obama is continuing to receive equivocal ratings, especially from whites.

But Brownstein sees considerable cause for White House optimism: “…The new poll found his approval rating rising by 11 percentage points among independents; 8 among nonwhites; 6 among all whites; 7 among both college-educated white men and women; and 9 among the so-called waitress moms–white women without a college degree. Only among noncollege-educated white men did Obama remain stuck in neutral with virtually no gain from December.”
Brownstein adds that the President’s approval rating “is approaching his actual share of the 2008 vote overall and among key voting blocs, including whites, Independents, white women. His current numbers “have surpassed his 2008 vote among Hispanics (72 percent versus 67 percent) and college-educated white men (44 percent versus 42 percent).” However, he is still “well below” his ’08 percentages with younger whites and white Independents.
The President’s approval ratings appear to be linked to “expanding optimism about the economy,” with 60 percent of Americans now saying they expect improvement over the next year, compared to 50 percent in October. A total of 56 percent now say that President Obama’s policies are moving the country in the right direction (45 percent) or that America is “significantly better off” (11 percent).
Brownstein notes that “Those numbers have remained remarkably stable through Obama’s presidency, and they suggest that through all the turbulence of the times, a majority of Americans has never entirely lost faith in him.” He concludes, “Judging by these latest survey results, the economy is slowly giving the president more ammunition to argue that such faith was not misplaced.”


Jonathan Bernstein: The perils of running against a fantasy Obama

Jon Bernstein makes an important point about the Republican “information bubble”

“…Want to see a great example of the closed GOP information feedback loop, and why it may prove dangerous for the Republican candidates?
Think about the two Barack Obamas that Republicans are running against. One of them is basically a fraud; he’s never held a job before he somehow wound up the Democratic nominee in 2008. Or, as Mitt Romney asserted today: “It’s hard to create a job if you never had one.”…The other Obama is the scheming, nefarious, stealth left-winger who any day now is going to unleash his radical socialist agenda.
…neither version builds a convincing case against supporting Obama in 2012. No one is going to buy that Obama is too inexperienced to be president; no one is going to buy that he has some secret agenda that remained secret during four years in the White House.
But Mitt Romney and the rest of the GOP field has have spent three years now speaking only to confirmed Republican voters. And those voters live in the world where reality is defined by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, in which all of that stuff makes perfect sense.
Even worse, the candidates and their operatives themselves live in that world, or at least spend an awful lot of time there. It wouldn’t be surprising if the Romney campaign believes (on some level) that Obama never held a job in his life before mysteriously winding up as president, or that he can’t get through a debate without a teleprompter.”


Latest from Chris Bowers. campaign director at Kos: Scott Walker has now lost the Republican majority in the Wisconsin state senate.

This morning it was announced that state Sen. Pam Galloway, one of the four Republican state senators facing recall, will resign her seat. Since Democrats had already winnowed the Republican majority to 17-16 with their two recall victories last summer, this now makes the Wisconsin state senate a 16-16 tie.
The recall election against Galloway will still move forward, although her name will not appear on the ballot. Republicans will nominate a different candidate, while state Rep. Donna Seidel, who was already challenging Galloway in the recall election, will be the Democratic candidate.
If we act fast, we can give Seidel a big head start in this election, and make sure Scott Walker never has a Republican majority to work with again.
Please, chip in $6 to Donna Seidel on Act Blue


‘Sith Lords of the Ultra-Right’ Back Santorum

At Politico, Kenneth P. Vogel posts on “Santorum’s Secretive Fundraisers,” a group which includes “some of the right’s richest and most powerful players.” Vogel explains:

…Its members have been credited with solidifying the rise of George W. Bush’s Republican presidential campaign in 2000 and working to undercut the 2008 bids of Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani…And, last weekend, when conservative bigwigs gathered in Houston for a meeting of the Council for National Policy, they helped raise $1.8 million in pledged donations for Santorum’s cash-strapped campaign and the super PAC supporting it…
…”Hopefully, this will just be the first of a number of these types of events where the conservative movement leaders are coming together and saying ‘this is our man,'” said Richard Viguerie, a founding member of the Council for National Policy and an organizer of the main fundraiser for Santorum, on the sidelines of the Houston meeting.
…”These people have large networks out there,” said Viguerie. “They have members, they have donors, they have supporters, subscribers, listeners, readers, and if they get engaged,” he said, it will mean “many, many, many seven figures” worth of contributions to Santorum and the super PAC devoted to him.
The council meets in secret three times a year under tight security. And while it bills itself as “a nonpartisan, educational foundation” that does not “lobby Congress, support candidates, or issue public policy statements on controversial issues,” gatherings of its members have played key roles in presidential politics.

Vogel adds that “The group’s rules forbid members from discussing it, and the media is barred from covering its meetings, even when top government officials speak…The secrecy has led to scrutiny and conspiracy theories from the left, with liberals demanding that Bush release audio of his 1999 address (he didn’t), and the lefty website DailyKos dubbing the group the “Sith Lords of the Ultra-Right.”
Not everyone is convinced of the groups effectiveness, as Vogel notes. But no one should be surprised if Santorum is soon rolling in dough from anonomous contributions.