September 23: About That House Republican Agenda
I’m certainly old enough to remember lots of these pre-election “agenda” documents, and couldn’t help but mock the latest one at New York:
In Thomas Pynchon’s 1965 cult novel The Crying of Lot 49, a character who has taken too much LSD decides that if everyone on earth repeats the marketing phrase “rich, chocolatey goodness,” it will represent the voice of God. With or without drugs, a lot of people in politics have a similar delusion that getting candidates to make the same noises like chirping cicadas will produce electoral victories. It’s a particularly strong belief among congressional Republicans, who share the dubious conviction that Newt Gingrich’s “Contract With America” is what flipped control of Congress in 1994.
With the assistance of Gingrich and former Donald Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, the House Republican Conference has released a new “agenda” document, entitled “Commitment to America.” The document, clearly designed for online consumption, has lots of bells and whistles and factoids about the hellish reign of Joe Biden and his “Democrat” Party. What it doesn’t have is a whole lot of specificity, unlike the unfortunate “agenda” that Republican Senate Campaign Committee chairman Rick Scott released earlier this year to the near-universal horror of his colleagues, who don’t want to be identified with the proposed sunsetting of Social Security and Medicare.
The relatively anodyne character of Kevin McCarthy’s pet project doesn’t mean it is entirely useless. Candidates mouthing the approved pieties will presumably not be expressing their pithy views on Jewish space lasers or repeating QAnon slogans.
Still, it’s hard to take seriously an agenda for the nation that does not mention climate change, Russia, or extremist threats to democracy — or one that suggests the sole cure for inflation is to cut “wasteful government spending” without explaining what that means (in the indictment of Democrats that accompanies the agenda, there is much criticism of direct stimulus payments, which Donald Trump preferred to virtually every other form of government spending).
Most interesting was how House Republicans handled a red-hot issue they dare not ignore completely, given the obsession it commands among a very big chunk of the GOP party base: abortion. You have to look pretty hard to find it, nestled as it is under the unlikely heading of “A Government That’s Accountable,” and the downright misleading subheading of “a plan to defend America’s rights under the Constitution.” And it simply says Republicans will “protect the lives of unborn children and their mothers.” So they checked off a box for anti-abortion activists in the manner least likely to draw curious or unfriendly attention to the extreme abortion views so many of them have expressed, which don’t poll well. Perhaps voters will be too mesmerized by the overall party message to notice. Repeat after me: rich, chocolatey goodness.
This really needs broader dissemination in all the liberal sites (which are too many to mention) that continue to argue that the vast majority of Obama to Trump voters (or abstainers) are incorrigible racists.
If “non-racist” white working class people voted for Trump – I got news for you, they’re racist. You only debase the democratic party by continuing your hopeless appeals to them.
This whole approach is silly. The Democrats do not need the “white working class” to win elections. They need to build a Progressive platform that appeals to first-time, second-time, YOUNG voters. YOUNG people of color and young women (not to mention young men) all turned out for Sanders, and would be willing to work just as hard for a truly Progressive Democrat as they did for Obama.
Harness the energy of the youth movement. Or keep losing elections by pandering to middle-aged racists who don’t think they’re racists. Your call.
No matter how much data is presented these two myths about racist voters and liberals being able to win with dwindling support from the white working class don’t seem to die.
Demographic projections about Hispanics not only continuing to grow as percentage of the population but also increasing their support for Democrats are speculative and dangerously prone to error.
Which of the 10 essays did you read to reach your conclusion?
So the 8% of African-Americans and 28% of Latinos who voted for Trump are all racists. Dang, who knew?