Perception, it is often said, is reality in politics.
Sometimes over the past few decades, certain myths about the Republican Party having a few traditional advantages have taken hold in the public's imagination. Whether any of them are based on historical fact or, the result of lies repeated often enough to be perceived as the truth, is arguable.
Regardless of the veracity of these assertions, it is becoming increasingly clear that the public may well be wising up to these "statements of fact" one hears often enough in the media.
Long masters of style over substance in politics, the GOP has benefited from the oft-repeated below assertions.
- Myth #1: Republicans Are for Efficient Government
Under this scenario, the thinking goes, that since the GOP is business-friendly and produces several politicians who've entered politics after successful careers in the business world, then, the same "efficiency" will carry over into how they conduct the country's affairs. The 2008 financial collapse and economic recession that capped the eight years of George W. Bush proved otherwise.
If this were a Republican advantage, then, how is it that organizing primaries and caucuses in the 2012 political season has been an utter disaster for the GOP? If a political party cannot even conduct the basics of democracy transparently and with everything out in the open, why should it be trusted to lead the country?
Political Wire wondered just today about this gap between perception and reality
Why So Sloppy?
The Republican presidential campaign has been one of the sloppiest in memory.
Mitt Romney was declared the winner in Iowa until several days later miscounted votes were "found" which put Rick Santorum ahead. Romney was named the victor in Maine without all caucus votes counted because they were "lost" in someone's email. Now, the Michigan delegate count was changed two days after the primary either due to sloppiness, ambiguity in the rules or a backroom power play.
It sure makes you wonder.
|
- Myth #2: Republicans Are Better At Conducting Foreign Policy.
Some believe that only the Republican Party has the experience and will to deal with international terrorism, defend the country, and conduct an effective foreign policy. Democrats, on the other hand, are believed to be too wishy-washy and ambiguous in their approach towards handling foreign policy crises. For now, this one has been laid to rest with the killing of Osama Bin Laden and the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.
Only a few weeks ago, a Fox News analyst wrote about President Obama's advantage in this area
In 2012 Race It's Advantage Obama Over Republicans On Foreign Policy
Gallup reported recently that when it comes to handling wars, terrorism and diplomacy the president gets "largely positive reviews," from the American people.
The president has a 63 percent approval rating on his handling of terrorism. And that is as high as it was in the immediate aftermath of the president’s decision to approve the successful U.S. mission to kill bin Laden...
The president also benefits from the success of his support for the international effort that led to the death of Libyan dictator Khaddafi. In an October poll 75 percent of Americans approved of his decision to remove U.S. troops from Iraq and in the latest polls 52 percent approve of his overall handling of Iraq.
|
- Myth #3: Republicans Will Steer the Country Towards a More Moral Course.
Many Republicans embrace organized religion, celebrate it openly, and perpetuate the fact that personal morality (even if practiced in saintly fashion) is a good indicator of how the party in power perceives public morality. In recent weeks, this has been turned on its head with regressive policy proposals about issues pertaining to women's rights, outright hostility towards LGBT rights, and an incredibly offensive demand made just today by the spiritual leader of the party, Rush Limbaugh, as pointed out in this diary by elwior.
Ta-Nehisi Coates of The Atlantic takes Limbaugh to task for it
Cruelty Cont.
Earlier today I wrote that arguably the dominant trait of the conservative movement was cruelty. I obviously meant that word "arguably" to be there...
There is a way of conveniently marginalizing Limbaugh as a "radio host" who doesn't really speak for any aspect of the present conservative movement, or any element of the GOP electorate. It's a strange position given Limbaugh's immense popularity, the timidity elected Republicans show when asked about his comments, and the prominent role he's been given in the past at C-PAC. The deference he enjoys stands in stark contrast to his apparent status as an old uncle who just happens to say incredibly cruel things which say nothing about the greater family.
Nevertheless, influence or not, it is worth calling this what is is - the normalization of cruelty - and asserting, no matter how redundant, that is wrong and evidence of the lowest aspects of humanity.
|
The 2012 Election is over eight months away and given the fragile (though improving) state of the economy, few doubt that it will be a close one - although a narrow margin in the popular vote may not necessarily reflect the same closeness in the electoral college. I wrote in my last diary - "My God, What a F&#*@ng Mess" - Senior Republican Strategist - that many in the Republican establishment are very concerned with the constant infighting, quality of their 2012 presidential field of candidates, and the lack of a viable alternative to President Barack Obama.
The GOP ought to be concerned about something else: its political brand is being severely damaged. This will have long-term consequences that does not bode well for the party's continued political health.
In the long run, perception has a way of resembling reality in domestic politics.