Question
Reading this kinda "nothing article," I got to wondering to what degree the Washington environment reinforced/amplified the GOP's opposition?
I mean, they got so collectively amped up to be "opposition," did they get into a group think on the Stimulus Bill that is perhaps separate from some of their individual interests?
I mean, they got so collectively amped up to be "opposition," did they get into a group think on the Stimulus Bill that is perhaps separate from some of their individual interests?
posted by mikevotes at
7:46 AM
7 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
-epm, at 8:15 AM
Their opposition is for opposition's sake only. They are left with unsubstantiated, irrational statements of "It won't work. It's full of pork." When pressed they are forced into a corner whereby they refer to unemployment extensions and low-income healthcare subsidies as "waste." Indeed, the GOP seems to be homing in on unemployment subsidies as the boogey man in the package. Because, you know, folks outa work are just lazy bastards suckin' at the government's teat. Except that's bullshit. And every working class stiff knows it.
What we're seeing, I think, is that GOP congressmen are becoming increasingly hostile to their own constituents. At least those constituents who think the government has a role in economic recovery.
By
-epm, at 8:16 AM
Kind of an interesting Politico piece this AM on Republicans reaching back to '94 for strategy.
Gonna link it either here or the next post.
And, they're playing to the base. The question is, does the message reach outside that, because they can't win with just their base.
(I'd bet no at this point.)
By
mikevotes, at 8:21 AM
I think this past election proved that the GOP cannot win with just their base. (I suppose the same is true for the Dems as well).
The problem I have -- and I think many independents have -- is that the GOP is all about the negative. About vilification of fellow Americans. (Again look back to statements made about "real" America.) In the 80's and 90's it was welfare queens, or gays, or Americans who weren't Christian... or the right kind of Christian. But as more and more people get over these prejudices and as more and more people identify with financial insecurity (including health care insecurity), I don't know if this sort of Good American vs. Bad American thing will work to draw in the independents. From a social-economic perspective I think most independents fall into a category that the GOP may be vilifying. (employment/health insecurity, needing/wanting strong (smart) government intervention, etc.)
The Gingrich model won't work because time and events have shifted. It would be like trying to resurrect a black-face minstrel show for a political campaign, just because it worked in 1923, you know.
By
-epm, at 8:51 AM
I agree with you. The reason Repubs stayed this type of negative is because it worked.
It resonated with a large section of white America as a reaction against the social advances from the 60's. B
But the demographics have turned against them, and it's hard to do something else after minstrel show.
By
mikevotes, at 10:33 AM
The Republicans really have nothing left to define them beyond "We hate Democrats!" and, to a lesser extent, "We believe in God!".
This stimulus opposition is somewhat "playing to the base", but to a greater extent it is the base clamouring to be led. These are not "independent thinkers" we are talking about. The "base" desperately needs a semi-coherent good/evil narrative on a constant basis. Up to now they have only been thrown the usual "hate Obama" stuff and "socialism"; both of these narratives have the stink of failure on them from the campaign.
It is truly astonishing that the media has allowed the GOP to get away with "hitting the reset button" on their own history. The Party has just, in effect, claimed that Bush, Cheney, and McCain are not "one of them", and they have apparently gotten away with it.
But the "Angry White Male" has gone the way of the "Security Mom". The demographics, as you state, no longer support a return to the "Gingrich Model".
By
Todd Dugdale , at 3:04 PM
Republicans also have the "We love money!" crowd.
Nationally, Republicans love to rail against "pork." But locally they love to brag about "bringing home the bacon." That's what makes this stimpak so tricky for them... it has some big spending, but each state gets a piece of the pie. So how do you hate the stimpak, but slap yourself on the back for bringing fed dollars into your state/district? That's why they've decided to focus only on the unemployment: a) in helps the "other" (theoretically), b) it's possibly puts some quid pro quo on the states, thus "states rights" issues.
By
-epm, at 5:57 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home