Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- When You're Cutting Social Security, 'Wealthy' Begins at $25K
- In Blind Poll, Republicans Choose Progressive Budget Solutions Over Their Own Party's
- Not Guilty By Virtue of Videotape, Which, Unlike the Police, Doesn't Lie
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- Manning: Before Wikileaks, Leaked Docs Offered to NYT, WaPo
- Yoga Wlll Turn Kids Into Godless Sun-Worshipping Pagans, Lawsuit Charges
- A Better Plan Than 'Endless Growth': Enough Is Enough
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- Big Winner in Italian Election? The Five Star Movement
- In Blind Poll, Republicans Choose Progressive Budget Solutions Over Their Own Party's
Popular content
Today's Top News
Election 2012: The Return of 'Culture Wars'
Until now, we thought this campaign would be all about the economy. It still will – but 'values' voters are going to count, too
No wonder the Republicans have lost their way. For a party that considers itself socially conservative with a base that takes the bible literally its moral compass is seriously askew.
After a slew of women came forward to accuse one presidential candidate, Herman Cain, of sexual harassment, his poll standing actually edged up a little. When one woman accused him of having a consensual affair, his numbers plummeted and he dropped out of the race. A couple months later, in South Carolina, the most conservative state to vote so far in the Republican presidential nomination contest, Newt Gingrich's fortunes improved after his second wife revealed that he threatened to leave her unless she accepted an "open marriage" with his now third wife, with whom he was having an affair at the time.
Santorum speaking at CPAC yesterday (photo: chuck holton)
They're so busy sinning, repenting and then sinning again, it's a wonder they can find time to cast the first stone, over and over again.
The upshot is peculiar. For most of last month, the two frontrunners were the thrice-married Catholic convert Gingrich, who tried to have a polygamous relationship, and Mitt Romney, a Mormon who has practiced lifelong monogamy.
Before last week, none of this seemed to matter. When Rick Santorum arrived in New Hampshire, fresh from victory in Iowa, and started arguing with hecklers about gay marriage, he looked like a kook, even to Republicans. Meanwhile, Romney has been intent on riding to the White House, with nary a hair out of place, not so much as president, but CEO of America Inc.
But over the last week, the ground on which this race has been run has shifted. I am not referring here to Rick Santorum's victories in Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri – although they may actually have been a symptom; but rather, two, countervailing and apparently unconnected story lines, that might shift the tectonic plates on which the logic of both the primaries and the general election are grounded.
First was the economy, which appears to be improving. More important was the unexpected fall in unemployment rate to 8.3%; a sharp decline, given it was 8.5% in January and 9.1% in August. But that was just the beginning of an impressive week, which saw consumer credit rise in December, suggesting growing confidence, a report claiming that the housing market may bottom out this year and, Thursday, a survey showing that the number of Americans seeking unemployment aid neared a four-year low.
This does not mean all is well. No president since the war has won re-election with an economy in this bad shape. But what it does do is change the trajectory of the national story from descent into unremitting gloom to emergence into nascent, fragile recovery. Americans still disapprove of Obama's handling of the economy, by 59% to 38%: but that's up from 30% in November and 26% in August. The Republican playbook has been written with decline in mind. Now, it has to be rewritten.
James Carville's adage: "It's the economy, stupid" still holds. It just may not be the economic story everyone was banking on.
Elsewhere, however, other news provided more excitement for the Republican base. First came the flap over contraception after the administration ordered that employers, including religious hospitals and universities, must provide insurance for contraception including the morning after pill. According to the New York Times, around 147 bishops in 195 dioceses have issued personal letters against the measure, emphasising religious freedom. The White House looks as if it will be forced into some retreat on the issue.
Meanwhile, Washington state's legislature approved gay marriage, sending a bill to the governor that will be signed into law on Monday; and a federal appeal court overturned the ban in California on gay marriage that had been enforced by the Prop 8 referendum in 2008.
This is unlikely to force the "values" agenda to the top of the nation's priorities. At present, no more than 3% of the country ranks abortion or family values/morals as a priority – that's within the margin of error of zero. Even in conservative South Carolina, only 8% said abortion was the biggest issue for them. But the emergence of these issues does throw red meat to a Republican base that has, so far, been uninspired by the actual candidates, and it shifts the conversation during this relative lull (with just one caucus and no debates for a couple of weeks).
It would be too crude to suggest that this is why Santorum won big last Tuesday. He does well in caucuses, where turnout is lower and people have to be more motivated, seems to hold a particular appeal in the midwest and, in any case, won by too wide a margin in too many places to attribute his victory to any single cause. But it would be naïve to suggest it's irrelevant. It can only help Santorum; can only hurt Gingrich and Romney, since it offers the opportunity to emboss characterisations of the former as a philanderer and the latter as a flip-flopper in the public imagination.
What does it change? Ultimately, in the Republican primaries, little. Romney is still most likely to win. But the process may be even more painful for him than it already was. At present, he has the worst of both worlds: all the downsides of being a frontrunner without being able to stay out in front.
In the general election, if events of the last week became a long-term trend, it could matter a great deal. Not only will Romney be a thoroughly battered nominee of a party that would clearly nominate anyone else if it could, but the weaker he is, come the nomination, the more sops he has to throw to the base in terms of rhetoric, policy and vice-presidential pick – thereby alienating independents and moderates.
A shift of focus from the economy to social issues would also mitigate the primary basis on which he has framed his candidacy – who needs a turnaround man when things are on the upturn? Conversely, it may turn out Republicans who would otherwise stay at home – not because they love Romney (they're indifferent to him), but because they are passionate about gay marriage or contraception.
This hardly makes for plain sailing for President Obama. With approval ratings so low, unemployment so high and the economy so precarious – any number of things could blow this mild recovery off course – he's lucky not to have a Democratic primary challenger, and even luckier that the Republicans have yet to make peace with the choices they have.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



2 Comments so far
Show AllWhat else can the yapping puppets in the Republican primary Punch and Judy show offer working-class voters except "culture wars"? This bullshit comes to the fore every presidential election year, race-baiting, gay-bashing, the suppression of women's rights, theocratic government, pick your flavor, folks. Did we expect them to discuss the corporate highjacking of our Constitution and government, the looting of our Treasury and commonwealth or our unaccountable military industrial complex? Not a chance.
Tony Vodvarka
If the S. Ct. takes up and affirms the 9th Circuit's ruling regarding gay marriage, there will be such a frenzy on the right to elect a Republican (who will promise to nominate a social conservative to the next open spot on the S. Ct. to remedy the situation, but of course will just be using that as cover to nominate a corporatist extremist) that Barry will not stand much of a chance, given that his base is lukewarm about him and that will likely remain the same. The danger is that Barry will then do something really stupid like start a war with Iran to change the dynamics of the race.
As for those who think the S. Ct. would not affirm the 9th Circuit, the vote would come down to the Republican Kennedy, who often votes with political consequences in mind, and I suspect that he would realize that voting to affirm would help the Republican candidate.