In recent weeks, with increasing evidence of a sputtering economic recovery, it’s become abundantly clear that the Democrats see their path to victory in the 2012 elections in attacking and marginalizing the GOP. Because the Democrats have made their intentions abundantly clear, Republicans should have an easier time running against the president’s party.
That said, failing an effective counteroffensive, the Democrats’ attacks could work. Yet, it remains a high-risk strategy for the party currently in power. Instead of offering hope for a less-divisive, shall we say, post-partisan politics, the president and his party will attempt to label the GOP as the party
- reluctant to tax “millionaires and billionaires,” refusing to ask the superrich to pay their “fair share” of federal income taxes.
- of extremists out of step with middle American, particularly the “middle class”, and
- the party of “No,” unwilling to compromise and failing to offer a jobs plan of its own.
Republicans should be able to counter the 3rd line of attack, if the House passes a jobs bill and Republican leaders remind voters of the details of the plan–and if the Republican nominee offers a plan of his own.
Over at the Washington Examiner, Philip Klein reminds us that Democrats have tried a similar attack strategy in the past, smearing the Republican nominee in order to distract voters from an incumbent Democrat’s record. “With his ratings in the tank, President Carter [in 1980] attempted to raise fears about Ronald Reagan.” Remember, the left did not always see the Gipper as a genial conservative pragmatist, indeed, Carter’s team that year hoped the California Republican would win the GOP nomination as many thought him too much a right-winger to win a general election.
The attacks on Reagan were actually effective in keeping the race competitive until the very end – and that’s when the two candidates debated, and Reagan came off as reasonable, informed and likeable, which was a contrast with the way he was being portrayed. Everybody who follows politics knows about Reagan’s famous “there you go again” retort to Carter during the debate, but few remember what Reagan was responding to. As it turns out, it was a similar line of attack that we’re now seeing against Perry.
Similarly in 2012, the Democrats’ attacks could backfire if the Republican nominee can convince voters he is not the extremist of the Democratic narrative. Indeed, that contrast, between the Republicans’ actual policies and the Democrats’ over-the-top attacks could make a more conservative nominee even more electable.
Just think about it.
A lot of the scare tactics were focused on Ronnie being reckless with nukes or militarily provocative. Not sure how Obama scares the public on Perry with that approach.
That leaves trying to scare people on the economy:
“Perry will make it worse” – rings hollow
Scare the women and social liberals:
“Perry will take away choice, homophobic polices” – Perry seems to be cool with states making these choices. This will work with Democratic women and Dem queers, not sure it will work with independents, Republican women, especially in this economy.
That leaves the environment. Might work with young people to some extent.
In the end it all seems trumped by the economic catastrophe of President Obama. If anything Perry can turn it around and scare people about another four years of Obamanomics. The modern day catch phase equivalent of 1980’s “Voodoo economics”.
OT: Notice that Obama returns to DC, speaks about hurricane Irene and the storm gets downgraded. 😉
Back in 1980, I think the media at least tried to maintain a veneer of objectivity. They didn’t try to spin the economic reality in order to help Carter the way they spin it today to help the SCOAMF. In the present era, they don’t even try to hide the fact that they are the PR wing for the Democrat Party.
The Republican front runners (Romney, Perry and Bachmann and sometimes Paul) don’t excite me.
The social conservatives are pushing for a rollback of the calendar, since the demise of DADT and the fact that a REPUBLICAN legislature in NY legalized same-sex marriage. They are pushing for things I don’t want. (Though the economy will be issue 1.)
Paul has some good ideas, but some are too far outside the mainstream for the average American – the average doesn’t cherish liberty anymore, wants their government to protect them. Even from themselves.
What’s to get excited about the Neolib Paul?
This libtard playbook is 30 years old. And since the Dhimmicrats can’t think beyond their own backyard, they’re pulling it out again.
To them, liberals = educated, conservatives = dumbasses.
Education in the best colleges doesn’t mean you can be a leader. Look at Exhibit A in the White House.
In fact, speaking as a college prof, I can attest to the fact that the more educated you are, the less ability you have to function in the real world.
I know profs who have doctorates in math, physics, computer design etc., but they can’t even operate the copier or the coffee maker without someone showing them how to do it, step-by-step.
Talk about irony.
Regards,
Peter H.