The midterm election results have put the Democrats in a tough position with regard to the issues. There are issues that any Democrat must address and support if he or she is to represent the party that not only no longer work but which also actually hurt the candidate. How will the Democrats deal with this in 2016?
A good example is the War on Women nonsense that focused on abortion and birth control. The birth control issue was a totally phony one that was raised for the first time by the media in a question to Mitt Romney in a Republican presidential debates during the 2012 primaries. Romney was surprised that he was being questioned about an issue that was determined 50 years earlier when the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not limit access to birth control, so Mitt brushed off the question. This was followed by a major onslaught from the Democrats with phony claims about how the Republicans wanted to prevent women from getting birth control. This lie helped president Obama earn his narrow victory over Romney. It also helped many other Democrats down the ticket.
In 2014, however, attempts by the Democrats to recreate the War on Women theme and particularly the birth control issue were total duds. Senator Mark Udall in Colorado went so heavily on the issue that the media in Denver renamed him "Senator Uterus" and mocked him for focusing on such a phony issue. His Republican opponent (and the ultimate victor in the election) Cory Gardner short circuited the issue at the beginning of the race when he came out in support of the sale of birth control pills over the counter with no need anymore for a doctor's prescription. So Gardner proposed easier access to birth control (as did many other GOP candidates) but Udall still pounded him as being anti-woman for this position. Similar attempts in other races to use the war on women theme backfired for the Democrats.
Another important issue for the Democrats was global warming in all its manifestations. Billionaire Tom Steyer spent over 100 million dollars supporting candidates who opposed the Keystone Pipeline. Almost every candidate supported by Steyer lost. The voters either tuned out the discussion of global warming or used it as a basis for voting against the Democrat.
A third important issue for the Democrats was race and racism. Many Democrats ran campaigns that said racism was increasing and they said how they were fighting against it. Democrat senator Mary Landrieu in Louisiana even told her state's voters that her expected poor performance in the election was the result of the racism and sexism across the state. In North Carolina, Democrat Kay Hagan said that a victory by her GOP opponent Tom Tillis would mean a return of the Ku Klux Klan. These sorts of appeals were meant to energize black voters to come to the polls. They may have worked in some small measure. The problem, however, is that the tactics also offended many more white voters who then abandoned the Democrat for the GOP.
These are not issues that it will be easy for the Democrats to jettison in 2016. After decades of endless claims by the Democrats about racism, many black voters will expect to hear a continuing stream of argument about just how terrible racism is in America. If Hillary (or whoever the Democrats pick as their nominee) remains mostly silent on this point, the Democrats will likely find that the turnout by African Americans will fall dramatically from the percentage who voted in 2008 and 2012 when Obama headed the ticket. Global warming true believers is another important Democrat constituency that would abandon the party for the Greens if the presidential candidate does not emphasize it sufficiently. And, of course, there are the NARAL and NOW voters who expect to hear about the War on Women whether or not it actually exists. Each of these issues bring an important bloc of voters to the Democrats, but if 2016 voters react the way 2014 voters did to them, they drive a larger group to the Republicans.
In many presidential elections, the key is not the issues but the candidate. President Obama won in 2008 much more because of who he is and very little because of his positions on the issues. In 2016, unless things change, the Democrats will not have that benefit with Hillary Clinton. The exit polls from last Tuesday make this clear; voters thought by 59 to 40 that Hillary would not make a good president. In other words, Clinton does not have a charismatic hold over the electorate; basically, they don't like her. Once she has an actual opponent, she may still win, but the issues will be much more important than they were in the last two elections.
It will be interesting, indeed, to see if the issues discussed above will turn into killers of the Democrats' chances in 2016.
A good example is the War on Women nonsense that focused on abortion and birth control. The birth control issue was a totally phony one that was raised for the first time by the media in a question to Mitt Romney in a Republican presidential debates during the 2012 primaries. Romney was surprised that he was being questioned about an issue that was determined 50 years earlier when the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not limit access to birth control, so Mitt brushed off the question. This was followed by a major onslaught from the Democrats with phony claims about how the Republicans wanted to prevent women from getting birth control. This lie helped president Obama earn his narrow victory over Romney. It also helped many other Democrats down the ticket.
In 2014, however, attempts by the Democrats to recreate the War on Women theme and particularly the birth control issue were total duds. Senator Mark Udall in Colorado went so heavily on the issue that the media in Denver renamed him "Senator Uterus" and mocked him for focusing on such a phony issue. His Republican opponent (and the ultimate victor in the election) Cory Gardner short circuited the issue at the beginning of the race when he came out in support of the sale of birth control pills over the counter with no need anymore for a doctor's prescription. So Gardner proposed easier access to birth control (as did many other GOP candidates) but Udall still pounded him as being anti-woman for this position. Similar attempts in other races to use the war on women theme backfired for the Democrats.
Another important issue for the Democrats was global warming in all its manifestations. Billionaire Tom Steyer spent over 100 million dollars supporting candidates who opposed the Keystone Pipeline. Almost every candidate supported by Steyer lost. The voters either tuned out the discussion of global warming or used it as a basis for voting against the Democrat.
A third important issue for the Democrats was race and racism. Many Democrats ran campaigns that said racism was increasing and they said how they were fighting against it. Democrat senator Mary Landrieu in Louisiana even told her state's voters that her expected poor performance in the election was the result of the racism and sexism across the state. In North Carolina, Democrat Kay Hagan said that a victory by her GOP opponent Tom Tillis would mean a return of the Ku Klux Klan. These sorts of appeals were meant to energize black voters to come to the polls. They may have worked in some small measure. The problem, however, is that the tactics also offended many more white voters who then abandoned the Democrat for the GOP.
These are not issues that it will be easy for the Democrats to jettison in 2016. After decades of endless claims by the Democrats about racism, many black voters will expect to hear a continuing stream of argument about just how terrible racism is in America. If Hillary (or whoever the Democrats pick as their nominee) remains mostly silent on this point, the Democrats will likely find that the turnout by African Americans will fall dramatically from the percentage who voted in 2008 and 2012 when Obama headed the ticket. Global warming true believers is another important Democrat constituency that would abandon the party for the Greens if the presidential candidate does not emphasize it sufficiently. And, of course, there are the NARAL and NOW voters who expect to hear about the War on Women whether or not it actually exists. Each of these issues bring an important bloc of voters to the Democrats, but if 2016 voters react the way 2014 voters did to them, they drive a larger group to the Republicans.
In many presidential elections, the key is not the issues but the candidate. President Obama won in 2008 much more because of who he is and very little because of his positions on the issues. In 2016, unless things change, the Democrats will not have that benefit with Hillary Clinton. The exit polls from last Tuesday make this clear; voters thought by 59 to 40 that Hillary would not make a good president. In other words, Clinton does not have a charismatic hold over the electorate; basically, they don't like her. Once she has an actual opponent, she may still win, but the issues will be much more important than they were in the last two elections.
It will be interesting, indeed, to see if the issues discussed above will turn into killers of the Democrats' chances in 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment