Watching House Republicans steer their party straight into a ditch over their failure to pass a version of the payroll tax cut has been like observing a car crash in slow motion. But along with the backbiting and second-guessing that have done little to enhance the reputation of the GOP House caucus or that of their leaders John Boehner and Eric Cantor, the debacle also ought to illustrate to Republicans the political resiliency of President Obama and the fact that a GOP victory in the 2012 election is not a foregone conclusion.
That’s an important lesson. Many Republicans have approached the presidential nomination process as if any GOP candidate with a pulse could beat Obama. The ease with which the president has run rings around Boehner on the payroll tax cut not only should bring back disturbing memories of how Bill Clinton beat Newt Gingrich like a drum back in the 1990s but should also show what happens when ideological inflexibility on the part of the GOP allows the Democratic incumbent to play to the center as well as to the left. A few more debacles like this one and Obama won’t have to channel Harry Truman in order to portray his opponents as do-nothing losers.
Republican optimism about 2012 is rooted in a situation that ought to make them the odds-on favorites next year to win back the White House. The president has historically low poll numbers and a terrible economic record. Even the Obama-friendly New York Times conceded this morning in a front-page article that hopes for a recovery are misplaced and economic growth will likely ground to a halt in the first half of 2012.
But as poor as his leadership has been, Obama has all the advantages of incumbency. He also has the ability to demagogue congressional Republicans in a manner that can help shape the contours of the coming election. A campaign that tilts as far to the left (as his appears to be doing) may have trouble attracting independents. But what Obama is trying to do is to set up his opponents as being not merely a band of right-wing extremists who care nothing about working people but also as a pack of incorrigible incompetents.
Such charges may be as unfair as the Democrats’ Mediscare attacks on Paul Ryan’s attempt to reform entitlements, yet after the ill-managed debt-ceiling crisis and this month’s tax cut shenanigans, it’s a label that may well stick.
It’s no surprise that the GOP presidential candidates have run for cover on the payroll tax cut issue. But above all, this episode should concentrate the minds of Republicans on the fact that the general election will be the fight of their lives, not the walkover some partisans expect.
Unfortunately, Peter Wehner is guilty of encouraging Republican overconfidence–every day he does this on Contentions. Reading Wehner one would have to be amazed that Omaba is still president at all, much less the odds on favorite to win against Romney or Newt or any other actual candidate.
Charles Krauthammer was spot on when he said that the House GOP is right on the policy, but will likely lose the politics. However, it's doubtful this has much staying power. It'll be long forgotten by election, assuming, as Tobin suggests, that they don't keep getting themselves in these tangles. n nEveryone is always banging on about "playing politics." The House and Senate GOP would be well advised to start getting in the game and, at least until the election, play to win.
Tobin and all the other "squishy" Republicans cannot admit that the republicans will always lose the public relation war. It is a chimera to think that the republican position will ever get the attention it deserves. The only way to come out a victor in these wars is to stand firm on the merits of the case. if the American public is too stupid to see the difference between demagoguery and truth, we will not win in any case.
If I remember correctly, John McCain got more (popular) votes than any other presidential candidate in history, other than Barack Obama. Assuming that everyone who voted for McCain will vote for the Republican candidate in 2012, the question is whether President Obama can get everyone who voted for him in 2008 to vote for him again. n nAmong those who voted for Obama in 2008, there are independents and there are those who didn't generally vote in Presidential Elections prior to 2008. I believe that even if every independent who voted for Obama in 2008 votes for him again in 2012, it will still come down to those who generally don't vote in Presidential Elections. I don't think that the payroll tax issue is going to make much of a differnece in whether they vote for President Obama in great numbers in 2012 or stay home.
The recent GOP fight with the White House and Senate reminds me of the saying in the sports car industry of the importance of not only function but of form also. It is easy to make a fast and beefier car, but it's important to not overlook beautiful too. If form is forgotten few will be interested in buying. n nThe GOP were not wrong to fight for greater substance, but seem to have overlooked the importance of looking good while at it.
It's easy to lose sight of the fact that a politician's livelihood matters to him too. n nThat said, the GOP had the perfect opportunity w/election of 2010 to rethink some things and to at least try to educate the public as to what conservatism means and how it can take us from where we are to where we want to be as a Nation. Am I missing something? Was that attempted? n nI'm a registered Conservative because at some point in the recent past Democrats became a malign force. n nI will tell you this, Mr. Tobin, I will vote for President Obama if Ron Paul is the nominee. And I'll make it a point to tell everyone I know of his newsletters and his drive (conscious or not) to weaken our Union. n nMitt Romney has the best chance of beating President Obama and mostly due to superficial reasons. But he won't get my vote either unless he begins to act like man and not run from his convictions. Even if they should diverge from my own, that's not a deal-breaker but his unwillingness to lay bare those covictions is.