Home / General / Evil non-genius

Evil non-genius

/
/
/
471 Views

As readers of this blog know, I (like many people) was outraged by the attempts to gin up a “scandal” over Kerry’s invocation of Mary Cheney. If you have any doubt that this is the phoniest pseudo-scandal to come down the pike in many a moon, consider the ratio of reactionaries who have long opposed gay rights to gay people among those feigning outrage. Given that it’s roughly 100-0, I think it’s pretty clear that it’s a bullshit smear job. That it’s extremely irritating, however, does not necessarily make it effective. If you assume that the media would be flogging Bush’s “ex-ag-er-ation” about his priorities, perhaps it is. But I don’t see much basis for that assumption.

As Matt Yglesias points out an a brilliant post, however, one thing is certain: there’s no reason to assume that it will work out because one fears Karl Rove’s political genius. I think I speak for my blogmates when I say that Rove’s reputation as a political mastermind is almost as phony as his latest manufactured “scandal.” MY gives a thorough analysis, but let me add a few things:

  • However this election turns out, the Republicans have been completely out-campaigned. A Republican incumbent in a non-recessionary part of the business cycle during wartime has massive inherent advantages. And while many people (most certainly including myself) have underrated Kerry’s political skills, he’s nobody’s idea of a star national candidate. If the Democrats had someone of anything like Clinton’s political abilities running, Bush would be in for a monumental ass-kicking. But whether Bush ekes out a narrow victory or loses, this is the second time in a row Rove has been outgunned in a presidential campaign. By Bob “at least he’s not Susan Estrich” Shrum. If that’s a political genius, I’m starting game 3 of the ACLS for the Red Sox tonight.

 

  • On the FMA, I think it’s easy to say why it’s been a King-Midas-in-reverse move. Gay marriage, in general, is (regrettably) still a good issue for Republicans, one of the few cultural issues where their position is still popular with a national majority. Campaigning on a vague sentiment against gay marriage could have made an effective wedge issue. The FMA, however, is much less popular. Moreover, by shifting the issue to a (dead-in-the-water) constitutional amendment, Rove gave Democrats who need to win in swing states (including Kerry) invaluable political cover, enabling Dems to frame their opposition in terms of states’ rights or political prudence and in so doing effectively straddle the issue. I suppose it’s true that the jury’s still out, but the fact that even some of the most notoriously spineless Senate Dems opposed it from the get-go convinces me that it was a serious political blunder.

 

  • The overall point dovetails nicely with the point MY recently made about how it’s hard to hide domestic policy that works out badly. As ill-informed as voters are, they know when policy that directly affects them isn’t working. The ghastly Meidcare policy failed because seniors were presented with an impenetrable system that didn’t make their prescription bills cheaper. People out of work because of Bush’s awful economic policy don’t care about clever manipulations of unemployment data. Which is at least a sliver of good news for democracy; there is at least an outer boundary of how cynical policy can be and achieve political benefits.

 

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar
Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views :