washington, dc

The Democratic Strategist

Political Strategy for a Permanent Democratic Majority

J.P. Green

Dems Must Recruit More People of Color, Women Candidates

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.


Political Strategy Notes

In the latest Fox news poll, Obama beats Romney 46-42 percent, whips Rick Santorum by 51-39 percent, Ron Paul by 50-38 percent and Gingrich by 53-35 percent. The new Bloomberg poll has Obama and Romney tied at 47 percent, and beating the other GOP presidential candidates. The new Pew Research Center poll has Obama ahead by 12 percent over Romney and 18 percent over Santorum.
The Pew poll has some other findings Republicans should find disturbing, including “Latinos, for example, view the Republican party unfavorably by a 2-1 margin (30% favorable, 60% unfavorable). By contrast, Latinos view the Democrats favorably, 56%-31%…The picture among Americans under 30 is almost as negative, 34% view the GOP favorably, while 53% have an unfavorable view. Their view of Democrats is almost the exact opposite, 54% have a positive view, and 35% negative. Among those with a college degree or more, only 31% said they had a favorable view of the Republicans, while 66% were unfavorable. That group, which was a key to Barack Obama’s victory in 2008, views Democrats favorably by 55%-42%.”
All well and good, but Nicholas Confessore and Michael Luo report at The New York Times on a serious problem facing the Obama campaign and Democrats in general — a huge fund-raising gap between Dem and GOP Super-PACs, noting that “few so far have written the kind of six- and seven-figure checks that Republican super PACs are collecting.” One notable exception is Bill Maher who gave the pro-Dem Super PAC Priorities USA Action $1 million.
At SLATE.com, Richard L. Hasen has a revealing update on the still growing impact of the Citizens United decision. Hasen notes: “A Center for Responsive Politics study found that in 2010 the percentage of “spending coming from groups that did not disclose their donors rose from 1 percent to 47 percent since the 2006 midterm elections,” and “501(c) non-profit spending increased from 0 percent of total spending by outside groups in 2006 to 42 percent in 2010.” The same report found that 72 percent “of political advertising spending by outside groups in 2010 came from sources that were prohibited from spending money in 2006.”
Jobless benefits claims dip to lowest level in four years.
In addition, “The jobless rate for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans has fallen to 7.6%, well below the overall U.S. unemployment rate of 8.3%, and nearly five percentage points below the 12.5% rate for veterans a year ago.”
Looks like Tomasky was right about House Republicans getting ready to break their budget agreement. As Steve Benen notes, “Reuters reports that House GOP leaders are “ready to break a hard-fought budget deal,” in large part because rank-and-file Republicans are insisting upon it. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) are now reportedly seeking a compromise on the compromise, asking Dems to accept an additional $19 billion in cuts, on top of the cuts Democrats already agreed to swallow.”
Just in case you thought Republicans were done with making stupid remarks that alienate women voters, GOP front-runner Romney comes up with a dilly — “Planned Parenthood, we’re going to get rid of that.”
Senate Republicans are also opposing renewal of the Violence Against Women Act, despite warnings by GOp women leaders.
Meanwhile Allison Yarrow reports at the Daily Beast on legislation being introduced by women state legislators to help males better understand how offensive and burdensome conservative meddling into women’s reproductive rights can be. Yarrow discusses bills to require “a rectal exam, celibacy lecture, and waiting period” before providing potency drugs to men. “Ohio joins states like Missouri, Virginia, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Georgia in…the race to concoct the craziest gag on men’s sex lives. Georgia state Rep. Yasmin Neal protested a colleague’s bill to end late-term abortions without exception by parrying with vasectomy regulations.”


Political Strategy Notes

Susan Saulny reports on what could be a huge game-changer in her New York Times article,”Centrist Women Tell of Disenchantment With Republicans.” Saulny notes: “From 1992 to 2008, Democrats won the overall women’s vote in every presidential election…But in the 2010 midterm election, women swung to the Republicans. Now there are signs of another shift: in a New York Times/CBS News poll last month, the president finished ahead of Mr. Romney among all women by 57 percent to 37 percent. He held much the same advantage over Mr. Santorum.”
Janet Hook’s Wall St. Journal article, “GOP Loses Sure Grip on Some Senate Seats,” has some good news for Dems regarding the Maine Senate race: “The picture was clouded early last week with the decision of popular former Gov. Angus King, a left-leaning independent, to run. He was widely seen as the instant front-runner…Mr. King, who didn’t respond to requests for comment, hasn’t said whether he would caucus with Democrats or Republicans if he were elected, but no one in either party sees much chance he would opt for the GOP. Although he backed George W. Bush for president in 2000, he supported John Kerry for president in 2004 and Mr. Obama in 2008..”
It might be a good idea for Dems to start breaking down the “it’s the economy, Stupid” thing into its component parts while formulating strategy. At least that’s one conclusion you can draw from an Elon University/Charlotte Observer poll of North Carolinians, reported by McClatchy Tribune News service. The poll found that “Losing my retirement fund” was the top economic fear (25 percent), followed by “losing my health insurance” (25 percent), “losing money in the stock market” (24 percent). “Losing my job,” presumably a top fear during the depths of the recession, was named by 19 percent. as for “which aspects of the economy most concerned them,” 70 percent said the price of gas, followed by the national debt (55 percent), the cost of health care (53 percent), the job market (40 percent) and the ability to retire comfortably (38 percent). On the plus side, 67 percent said the economy will stay the same or get better.
WaPo’s Dan Balz and Jon Cohen report on the adverse impact of rising gas prices on the president’s approval polling, particularly among the working-class. “The downshift is particularly notable…among white people without college degrees, with disapproval among this group now topping approval by a ratio of more than 2 to 1, at 66 versus 28.”
An ABC News/Washington Post poll indicates that 60 percent of Americans say the war in Afghanistan is not worth its costs, and Republicans are evenly divided on whether the war has been worth it. In all, 54 percent of Americans want the U.S. to pull its troops from Afghanistan.
Steven Greenhouse’s “Labor Leaders Plan to Apply New Clout in Effort for Obama” in the Sunday New York Times should put a little zing in the steps of Democratic leaders. Greenhouse explains how the Citizens United ruling gives unions increased political leverage in deploying ground troops, and adds “With unions representing 11.8 percent of all workers, labor volunteers canvassing in previous elections could often just knock on one in 10 doors. They might knock on a door and then have to walk two blocks to the next union household. But now they can knock on every door in a neighborhood.” Greenhouse quotes Stephen J. Law, president of American Crossroads, the GOP super PAC, who says “Their ability to be totally unified and focused on their message will make them ultimately the most decisive single player in the political landscape this year…Groups like us, we don’t have millions of members that we can readily deploy. We tend to be more active on the airwaves and mass communications.”
David Jarman takes a wonky look at “The PVI/Vote Index: Quantifying good Democrats, bad Democrats and ugly Republicans” at Daily Kos and summarizes the utility of the index in a nut graph: “Most congresspersons, in fact, do perform about how you’d expect, but it’s the ones who don’t who are the interesting ones and deserving more of our attention. We can use this method to spot Democrats who are underperforming their districts and might benefit from a primary challenge to straighten up or get out; we can also use it as a means of finding below-the-radar Democrats who are voting more liberally than their districts would warrant, and giving them some encouragement. It can also help us spot potentially vulnerable Republicans, the wingnuts hidden in swing districts whose records provide ample ammunition for a general election attack.”
You probably knew that the GOP primaries and caucuses have been dominated by older white guys. But it’s likely you didn’t know the extent of their domination. For that, you can read Perry Bacon Jr.’s post at Red, Black and Blue, in which he notes: “The Ohio electorate in the GOP primary last week was 96 percent white and a quarter over 65, compared to 83 percent white and 17 percent over 65 in the general election four years ago.”
CNN.com’s Brandon Griggs mulls over a curious phenomenon, the lack of conservative political comedy. It’s not like we Dems aren’t occasionally ridiculous.


Political Strategy Notes

All of Romney’s glaring weaknesses notwithstanding, his Ohio win feeds an image of a competent winner, which can only grow as he clinches the nomination. As Greg Sargent notes at the Plum Line: “Dems have not undermined impressions of Romney’s competence at all — which may loom larger in the general election than anything else.”
Yet more indications of Romney’s weakness with working class voters continue to surface: Tom Curry reports at MSNBC.com that “On Tuesday in Ohio, early exit poll data indicated that Romney won 34 percent of those without a college degree, lagging behind former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who won 38 percent of those voters. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas won 12 percent of those voters and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich won 14 percent…When exit poll interviewers asked voters which candidate best understands the problems of average Americans, Santorum led by 33 percent to 22 percent for Romney.”
There was no possibiity of a happy outcome for Dems in the Kaptur-Kucinich House race, which had to result in a net loss of a Democratic House seat. Progressive Dems lost an eloquent voice in the House with the defeat of Kucinich to the more moderate Kaptur, who reportedly brought home the bacon. The outcome provides a regrettable, but instructive lesson in the importance of redistricting as a political weapon to divide and disempower the opposition. Kucinich joins Barney Frank as a leading progressive House member undone by redistricting, though in Frank’s case it was Democrats who did the damage.
NPR has that handy chart you’ve probably been looking for, classifying the GOP primaries and caucuses ahead by winner-take-all vs. proportional delegate selection. Hint: It’s hard to see how Romney can blow it.
Jonathan Merrittt writes in The Monitor that “Religious pollsters and demographers have long warned that young people were leaving churches in alarming numbers…according to Notre Dame professor David Campbell and Harvard professor Robert Putnam, the fusion of faith and partisan politics – particularly the conservative type – is at least partly to blame…”The best evidence indicates that this dramatic generational shift is primarily in reaction to the religious right,” they wrote in the latest Foreign Affairs in an essay titled “God and Caesar in America: Why Mixing Religion and Politics is Bad for Both.” They explain: “And Millennials are even more sensitive to it, partly because many of them are liberal (especially on the touchstone issue of gay rights) and partly because they have only known a world in which religion and the right are intertwined…In effect, Americans (especially young Americans) who might otherwise attend religious services are saying, ‘Well, if religion is just about conservative politics, then I’m outta here…”
TDS Co-Editor Ruy Teixeira has a post, “Can Obama Recapture the Hispanic Vote?” at The New York Times, as part of a forum on “The last gasp of the GOP?” Says Teixeira: “…It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the current anti-immigrant tilt of the Republican Party, especially as displayed in the primaries, has decisively turned off Hispanic voters and thrown them into the arms of the Democrats.”
At The Daily Beast, Wayne Barrett makes a strong case that Romney’s limp critique of Rush Limbaugh’s misogynist meltdown was likely attributed to Clear Channel’s generous support (over $726K) of Romney’s campaigns. In addition, “Romney’s former company, Bain Capital, acquired Clear Channel in 2008 with another Boston-based investment firm, Thomas H. Lee Partners (THL)…The $26 billion merger, which was launched simultaneously with Romney’s first presidential candidacy in late 2006…placed Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and much of the talk-show right under Bain/Lee control…”
Guess who is paying for the broadcast of Limbaugh’s daily bile-fest to the American Forces Network? That would be you.
Limbaugh may have given a hot-foot to a sleeping giant as Steve Kornacki argues at Salon.com: “It’s also worth noting that single women tend to participate in elections at a lower rate than married women. The Voter Participation Center estimates that if turnout levels were equalized at the married rate, roughly 6 million new unmarried women would head to the polls. In demeaning an intelligent, well-spoken 30-year-old single woman, Limbaugh is doing his part to wake these nonvoters up.”
Gerald F. Seib of the Wall St. Journal flags some interesting stats from a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll indicating that President Obama loses the male vote by 6 and 4 percent against Romney and Paul, respectively. But Obama wins the male vote by 6 and 5 points against Gingrich and Santorum respectively.
George Monbiot of Guardian UK has a post “How Ayn Rand Became the New Right’s Version of Marx” at Reader Supported News. Monbiot observes “…The belief system constructed by Ayn Rand, who died 30 years ago today, has never been more popular or influential…Ignoring Rand’s evangelical atheism, the Tea Party movement has taken her to its heart…She is the guiding spirit of the Republicans in Congress…I wonder how many would continue to worship at the shrine of Ayn Rand if they knew that towards the end of her life she signed on for both Medicare and social security. She had railed furiously against both programmes, as they represented everything she despised about the intrusive state. Her belief system was no match for the realities of age and ill health.”


Political Strategy Notes

Clare Malone and Jamelle Bouie have “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Super Tuesday” up at The American Prospect. Frank James of NPR.org weighs in with “Super Tuesday: What to Look For.”
The Nation’s Ben Adler elaborates on “Rick Santorum’s Elite background” in stark contrast to his working-class pretensions, first noted at TDS by James Vega. As Adler notes, “His fraudulence as a working class candidate, both biographically and substantively, hasn’t stopped him from making reactionary appeals to anti-elite resentment…There’s no doubt that Santorum is more adept at appealing to cultural and class resentments of working class voters than Romney. But that doesn’t mean he is actually working class himself, and the media should not indulge this fantasy any more than they should have let George W. Bush pretend he was a brush-clearing cowboy.”
Former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland has some interesting advice for President Obama in his Ohio campaign. As Pete Hamby writes at CNN’s Political Ticker: “If I were the president, I would talk about the Cayman Islands, I would talk about Swiss bank accounts. What could persuade a man running for president to have Swiss bank account?
Sue, Sandra sue!
Turns out Rush Limbaugh’s oft-cited ratings are a lot of baloney, alleges Cenk Uygur. Writing in HuffPo, Uygur says: How many listeners does Rush Limbaugh have? Well, in the press there are only two numbers you’ll ever see — 20 million or 15 million. Those are large numbers, so that is why Limbaugh is taken seriously and is believed to be influential…I’ve got news for you — those numbers are a total fabrication. They’re made up out of whole cloth…” Uygur explains how listener ‘ratings’ are determined and concludes “Rush’s audience is a myth. He is a paper tiger. Do some people listen to him? Of course. Is it anywhere near the hype? Not remotely. Talk radio is a dying business. I wouldn’t be surprised if his daily listeners didn’t even reach a million…”
Looks like Dems’ initial optimism about taking Snowe’s Senate seat was a little premature, reports Steve Kornacki at Salon.com. A popular former Governor Angus King, is now preparing to run as an independent. King is one of two Maine Governors who have been elected as Independents.
A new CNN/ORC poll has President Obama tied with a generic GOP nominee — in Georgia, reports Atlanta Journal Constitution Political Insider Jim Galloway.
Dems, don’t even think about tilting toward a little austerity, now that the recovery seems on track, argues Nobel laureate Paul Krugman in his ‘Conscience of a Liberal’ blog entitled ‘Not Again With The Pivot.’ Krugman offers five compelling reasons, including: “…it just isn’t true that structural adjustment, to the extent that we do need it, proceeds faster and more easily when the economy is depressed. Workers won’t leave jobs if they aren’t reasonably sure of finding others; firms won’t invest even in useful new technologies unless there’s adequate demand. Keeping the economy weak is a way to postpone good changes, not accelerate them…”
Women trending blue, says NBC’s Chuck Todd.
Ambreen Ali has a post up at Roll Call Politics, “GOTV a Mission of Hispanic Media,” which ought to chill Republican leaders. According to Ali, “Last month, Univision partnered with Hispanic advocacy groups and smaller media outlets in a campaign called “Ya Es Hora,” or “It Is Time,” to broadcast information on how to register to vote, comprehensive campaign coverage and news segments on issues such as immigration and jobs…A similar campaign ahead of the 2008 elections helped naturalize more than 1.4 million people, according to the network…Telemundo launched its own campaign with advocacy groups in November, called “Vota por Tu Futuro,” or “Vote for Your Future,” and has even worked political plots into its steamy soap operas…Univision and Telemundo both reach more than 90 percent of Hispanic households, giving them access to a much-coveted bloc of swing voters.”


GOP’s Limp Response to Limbaugh May Hurt in November

If there is anything more disgusting than Rush Limbaugh’s revolting misogynist diatribe and his ‘apology,’ it would have to be the weasel word responses of Republican and conservative ‘leaders.’ For example:

Mitt Romney said Limbaugh’s remarks were “not the language I would have used.”
“…Rick Santorum said Limbaugh’s comments were “absurd,” he said the radio host was an “entertainer” and “an entertainer can be absurd.””
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Limbaugh was “right to apologize,” but still missed the point, blaming the “elite media” for exacerbating the controversy.
“It sounded a little crude the way it came across to me,” Paul said. “I don’t know why it has to be such a political football like this, so you have to ask him about his crudeness.”
Former Republican presidential candidate John McCain says it’s “totally unacceptable” for Rush Limbaugh to call a law student a “slut”
“Republican strategists, speaking anonymously out of fear of Rush’s power, have pointed to how his sexual shaming strategies “hurt Republicans.”

At least one conservative showed some integrity in commenting on the Limbaugh fiasco. As George Stephanopolis writes in his blog at ABC News:

ABC’s George Will told me Sunday on “This Week” that GOP leaders have steered clear of harshly denouncing Limbaugh’s comments because “Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh.”
“[House Speaker John] Boehner comes out and says Rush’s language was inappropriate. Using the salad fork for your entrée, that’s inappropriate. Not this stuff,” Will said. “And it was depressing because what it indicates is that the Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh. They want to bomb Iran, but they’re afraid of Rush Limbaugh.”

I assume the calculation of Republicans in voicing such tepid criticism is about not wanting to alienate the tea party yahoos, coupled with an assumption that all will be forgotten in a couple of months. They may be right. Too many American voters have a short memory about expressions of bigotry, which partly explains the popularity of Ron Paul. But if they are wrong, they will pay a huge price on election day, in which case America will owe a debt of gratitude to women voters.


Political Strategy Notes

Richard Wolf of USA Today reports a new poll by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation shows that 58% of Americans “trust Obama to make the right decisions on the 2010 health care law and on Medicare. By contrast, only 43% trust his closest Republican rivals on those issues.”
Robynn Tysver ‘s “Kerrey’s entry raises stakes” in the Omaha World-Herald preview’s the former Democratic Senator’s prospects, which may not be a cakewalk. MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell has an excellent report on what Kerry’s candidacy can do for Democrats, with interviews with Robert Reich and E. J. Dionne, Jr.
Meanwhile, Nate Silver makes the case that “Democrats Favored to Pick Up Snowe Seat.”: Silver says “The retirement of Senator Olympia J. Snowe of Maine is about as damaging to a party’s electoral prospects as these things get, turning a seat that Republicans were very likely to retain into one they will probably lose. Despite the possibility of a “nasty primary fight,” Silver argues that “Conceived as a two-candidate race, however, Democrats are heavily favored in Maine, perhaps having an 80 percent chance of picking up the seat in a head-to-head race against one of the Republicans.”
Former Secretary of Education William Bennett has a CNN post making a credible case that Santorum’s not toast just yet, despite Romney’s big wins this week. It has to do with early voting in MI and Santorum’s edge in upcoming Ohio.
At The Daily Beast Amy Sullivan makes a compelling argument that “Rick Santorum Would Use Presidency to Help Forge an American Theocracy.” Sullivan says “Unlike George W. Bush, Santorum is a frightening theocrat who does not believe in the separation of church and state and who would use the White House to protect his ideal of a Christian America…That Santorum has largely escaped questioning on his theocratic beliefs so far suggests that we still can’t tell the difference between a religious politician and a truly frightening one.”
WaPo’s Amy Gardner reports on the unusually high stakes on the Ohio GOP primary: “No Republican has ever won the presidency without winning Ohio. Thus, the challenge for the GOP candidates is to win the primary next week without turning off voters who they’ll need to carry the state in the fall…Ohio’s economy relies heavily on the auto industry, and Romney’s high-profile opposition of the government bailout of the industry is not likely to be received warmly by many voters. He supported an effort last year by Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) to restrict public unions’ collective-bargaining rights — an effort that was overwhelmingly overturned in the fall by voters in this union-heavy state.”
Demos has an interesting post on “Federal Appeals Court Ruling Finding NM Officials in Violation of National Voter Registration Act.” The “motor voter” bill requires public assistance agencies, not merely to provide voter registration forms to citizens, but to offer them the forms. Up till now, the law has been poorly enforced across the nation.
Aaron Gould Sheinin explains why “Candidates pile up endorsements, but their impact is questionable” in the Atlanta Journal Constitution.
In the Wall St. Journal, Andy Kessler ponders “When Will Social Media Elect a President?” Kessler says “This viral marketing is what corporate and political campaigns increasingly thrive on, and today it’s mostly free. By the 2016 election, it’ll surely steal some of the $3 billion in TV ad money…For years Google has ranked Web pages according to an algorithm called PageRank. Now there’s a new field of study around ranking users in social networks–PeopleRank–according to their influence: how many of their tweets are read, re-tweeted, include links that others click on, etc…Those with social-media “influence” are most likely to help campaigns convert interest into votes. Finding them in the haystack of the real world is tedious and expensive. But harnessing fast servers and constantly upgraded algorithms to find them on social networks is already happening–and it’ll definitely sway who becomes our next president.”
California’s independent redistricting commission bags the House Rules Committee Chairman.


Political Strategy Notes

Nate Silver’s forecast model rates the Michigan GOP presidential race “too close to call,” as a result of Santorum’s late momentum
Romney is understandably bent out of shape about Santorum’s robocall urging Dems to cross over and vote for him. Kos has a different take: “…If Santorum and Romney end up trading charges back and forth about how Michigan turned out, then good! That’s the point! This GOP nomination contest is a clown show. Anything that keeps it going, keeps Republicans in a state of chaos, and keeps Obama looking better and better in comparison is a win for us.”
Their policies toward Illiegal immigration have done serious damage to GOP 2012 hopes, especially in Arizona. But Adam Nagourney warns in the New York Times that it appears to be fading as an issue of concern, at least in comparison to unemployment and economic distress.
At the Daily Beast Howard Kurtz explores the prospects for Santorum’s bogus “class-based” pitch in MI and AZ. “…Does it really make political sense for Santorum to call President Obama a “snob” for saying everyone should have a chance to go to college? Will that line have particular resonance in Michigan, where the auto assembly line is no longer a guaranteed ticket to the middle class and whose voters are well aware that Santorum, as well as Romney, opposed the GM/Chrysler bailout?”
E.J. Dionne, Jr. sounds a convincing warning against Democratic overconfidence caused by the follies of the GOP primary circus. He sees the GOP cave on the payroll tax holiday and the recent correction of VA Republicans on the pre-abortion ultra-sound requirement as symptoms of a possible awakening of a new realism.
The Monitor’s Gail Russell Chaddock assesses the prospects for Dems’ holding retiring Ben Nelson’s Senate seat in her article, “If Bob Kerrey runs for Senate, can he save the majority for Democrats?
NBC Politics discusses the politics of rising gas prices in light of GOP fear-mongering: “A new Associated Press-GfK poll shows that though Obama’s approval rating on the economy has climbed, 58 percent disapprove of what he’s doing on gas prices.” Rick Newman’s US News post “Why $4 Gas Will Hurt Less This Time” takes a counter-intuitive look at the issue.
In her post, “What Do Republican Presidential Candidates Say on Foreclosure Crisis? Not Much,” ProPublica’s Lois Beckett flags a significant blind spot of the GOP presidential candidates Dems should leverage to their advantage.
The Morning Plum’s Greg Sargent has another good post on the white working class vote, this time on Romney’s inability to connect with it, explaining, “Among non-college whites across the board, Romney’s favorability rating is also at 37 percent. (Obama’s favorability among these voters is the same; yet a competitive Republican is supposed to have a very significant advantage over a Democrat in presidential elections.)”
The Nation’s Ari Berman has an optimistic data-driven answer to the question, “Who Will ‘Reagan Democrats’ Support in 2012?.” Says Berman, “Obama has a 43 percent approval rating among working class whites in the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, higher than it was in 2008. At the beginning of 2011, Romney led Obama by around twenty points among blue-collar whites in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin, according to internal polling by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner. At the end of last month, Romney led the president by only three among such voters in these Rust Belt battleground states, a seventeen-point swing over the past year. “White non-college voters in these states moved drastically away from Obama and Democrats between 2008 and 2010, but since then they have come back to basically the same levels they gave Democrats in 2008,” says GQR vice president Andrew Bauman.”


Obama’s Apology Serves American Ideals, Protects Our Troops

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.


Is ‘Border’ GOP Dog-Whistle for Latino-Bashing?

As I mentioned yesterday, “Border” was the most frequently-uttered word in the last Republican presidential debate in Arizona. CNN.com’s LZ Granderson explores some of the implications of the term in his post, “Does ‘secure the border’ mean ‘keep America white’?“:

Now there will be plenty of other buzz words and euphemisms that will be tossed around during the debate, but since it is being held in Arizona, chances are the most popular phrase will be “secure the border.”
…The candidates will argue that it’s a matter of national security. That it isn’t just the friendly illegal immigrants looking for work we must worry about, but terrorists, drug lords and other criminals who seek to make their way through our porous border. They will say if they were president they would build walls, add troops, even commission a Death Star to keep this country safe.
Newt Gingrich has promised to build a double fence along the entire southern border, adding, “”The United States must control its border. It is a national security imperative,”
Ron Paul said “If elected president, I would move to quickly end foreign nation building efforts and use many of the resources we waste playing world’s policemen to control our southern border.”
They all will receive applause, and it will all sound great … until you realize that “secure the border” is slang for “keep the Mexicans out.”

If that sounds a little overstated, consider the border with Canada, as Granderson explains:

…The Canadian border is largely ignored in this dialogue despite being more than twice the size of the Mexican border and less than 1% secure, according to a 2011 report by the Government Accountability Office. Even if we were to disregard the 1,538 miles between Alaska and Canada, the 3,987 mile border connecting the lower 48 to our neighbors up north is still much larger than the 1,933-mile stretch that connects us to Mexico.