Jeb Bush, facing campaign headwinds, takes a somewhat stronger stance against same-sex marriage (although the New York Times may be overstating what is essentially a change in tone).
All the GOP contenders are competing to the right in the primaries (and particularly in the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, dominated by the religious right). But it will haunt the eventual nominee in the general election, and even goes against the shifting views of GOP voters overall.
21 Comments for “The Iowa Factor?”
posted by Houndentenor on
Nixon’s old strategy of running to the right in the primaries and to the center in the general won’t work in the internet age. Are any candidates going to break from the pack on gay issues? Even a minor candidate with no hope of the nomination?
posted by Jorge on
All the GOP contenders are competing to the right in the primaries
They want money.
If us moderates don’t give them money, they won’t run.
If us moderates do give them money, they’ll run and lose.
I say withhold the money until the candidate declare. Power needs to follow money, not the other way around.
Beyond that, zzzzz
posted by Lori Heine on
No matter what spin this blog puts on it, there will be no Republican candidate in 2016 who is pro-LGBT. It simply isn’t going to happen yet.
Hope is a wonderful thing. But delusion is not hope.
posted by Anastasia Beaverhausen on
That’s why we have the LP to vote for. Just please let it not be recycled Gary Johnson
posted by clayton on
Why are they so obsessed with. Iowa? When was the last time that the winner of the Iowa straw poll actually won the election? And why parade their anti-equality nona tides in one of the earliest states to adopt marriage equality?
posted by Tom Scharbach on
And why parade their anti-equality nona tides in one of the earliest states to adopt marriage equality?
Republicans in Iowa have not accepted marriage equality. The party led the fight to remove Iowa Supreme Court justices that ruled in favor of marriage equality, and was successful in a number of cases. The party proposed a state anti-marriage amendment to nullify the court’s ruling, banging its head against the wall year after year. The Iowa Republican Party is among the most socially conservative in the country, and clearly is the most socially conservative in the northern states.
The candidates are parading anti-equality because anything else will not do if the candidate intended to compete in the Iowa caucuses.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
All the GOP contenders are competing to the right in the primaries (and particularly in the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, dominated by the religious right). But it will haunt the eventual nominee in the general election, and even goes against the shifting views of GOP voters overall.
Governor Bush (oppose same-sex marriage, recognize Supreme Court ruling as law of the land but continue to resist without defiance/nullification, support conservative Christian rights for special discrimination, support states’ rights) has calibrated about as far to the center as is possible in today’s Republican Party without losing conservative Christian support in the general election. His most recent statement (“recognize but resist without defiance/nullification) seems to be an adjustment to the right., although his careful choice of wording is more dog whistle than substance.
Governor Bush is not alone in moving to the right. Governor Walke has moved from an “its a distraction” shrug six months ago to signaled support of a federal marriage amendment, and the other “moderates” seem to be moving rightward, as well, little by slowly.
Although the politics of shape-shifting are interesting — and as someone who has managed campaigns, I love watching the sausage getting made — but I think that it is important to remember words/positions make a real-world difference.
The Supreme Court will issue a decision in the next six weeks or so. Republican presidential candidates will have to react. None will support the ruling if the Court comes down on the side of marriage equality, because none can support the ruling and remain viable in Republican primaries.
The question, and the only, question, is whether/how the candidates will signal resistance.
I hope that at least one candidate will take the position that President Eisenhower took with respect to Brown v. Board, and say: “The Court has ruled. This is the law of the land, although I don’t agree with the ruling. I call on all Americans to support our constitutional system and accept the ruling.” Doing so, assuming that the candidate obtained the nomination, would spare the country years of back fighting over the issue.
I am not hopeful in this regard.
I think that the most we can expect is a call for back-door, defacto nullification, under the guise of “religious freedom”, that is, a call for enacting laws that, no matter how worded, are understood to have been designed to permit and encourage conservative Christians to ignore the ruling, and granting state-sanctioned approval of that course of action.
Governor Bush is clearly taking that path, and he is the most moderate of the candidates at this point. The rest are calling for outright defiance or overturning the decision in various forms.
posted by Jorge on
I’ve come to realize that whenever people use the term “dog whistle”, it’s usually a tell of a bias or distortion in thinking or argument, if not outright bigotry.
I think that the most we can expect is a call for back-door, defacto nullification, under the guise of “religious freedom”
And there we have it.
posted by Houndentenor on
Jeb Bush has been imploding. I knew that would happen, but I never imagined it would happen this soon or this dramatically. And here I thought he was the “smart” Bush brother. LOL
posted by Kosh III on
What would you prefer to call it?
posted by Tom Scharbach on
But it will haunt the eventual nominee in the general election, and even goes against the shifting views of GOP voters overall.
The most recent iteration of the Gallup trending poll on same-sex marriage shows yet another increase in support — 60% at this point.
The most interesting information in the poll is that Republican support has finally risen above 30% — it is now at 37%. Obviously, that percentage varies regionally, but I won’t be surprised if the troglodytes running for President start running into trouble with Republicans in a few states this election cycle.
It is about time.
posted by Mike in Houston on
And now we have Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) declaring that he will use an Executive Order to implement the “religious freedom” act that just died in a Louisiana legislative committee.
It’s pretty clear that the siren call of the religious-right base has been heard and answered.
posted by Doug on
I guess Bobby Jindal wants to ensure that the GOP continues to be ‘the party of stupid’ .
posted by clayton on
Jeb recently had a radio interview in which he said that he didn’t see how the nation could succeed if SCOTIS went for marriage equality. So he’s not calling for open defiance of the law–just predicting a national collapse. And this is what passes for moderation on the right.
posted by Lori Heine on
The GOP presidential primary field is a clown car. Not one of those people is competent to hold the office. None of them deserves to win.
That includes Rand Paul, who’s still a panderer to social conservative fascists.
Unless she completely implodes before election day (always a possibility), Hillary Clinton will be president come 2017.
I’m not saying that because it makes me happy. I’m saying it because it’s simply true.
posted by Houndentenor on
She’s not my first choice either. Too corporatist and too hawkish. But I don’t see anyone who beats her. The GOP field is horrifying. Where are the sane Republicans? Are there even any left?
posted by Jorge on
Lindsey Graham and Rick Santorum want to run, but they don’t know if they have enough money yet.
I must question why you think a Democrat being corporatist and hawkish is a bad thing after this country’s disastrous past two terms. Everything President Obama has tried to move the economic system in a different direction has turned to either dirt, or dust. His attempt to “lead from behind” in foreign policy has resulted in Russia, Palestine, Israel, and even Saudi Arabia becoming more militarily aggressive, not to mention that civilians from Lebanon and a host of European and north African (I think) countries have now entered proxy wars in the Middle East. This is not the work of Jeb Bush’s brother. This is Barack Obama’s broken toaster. How can you call the only Democratic candidate who has a good enough head to fix it “too hawkish”?
posted by Doug on
With all due respect everything that is now happening in the middle east can absolutely be traced back to George Bush lying us into the Iraq War.
posted by Houndentenor on
Exactly, Doug. And a war with Iran and/or Syria is at least as bad an idea as the war in Iraq has been. As for the economy, things have been improving but not enough because the Republicans have obstructed the President every step of the way. Obama’s biggest mistake has been going too easy on the criminal bankers because they are back to their old tricks only the banks are now bigger and failier than ever.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
I am probably a bit more “hawkish” then other self-identified “progressives”, but then again I also do not really have much use for a lot of what self-identified hawks advocate.
1. Frankly, their is actually little that ANY President can do with regards to Saudi Arabia. It is a major oil producer. It has a horrific human rights record, but can be useful in promoting regional peace and security.
2. Russia — under Putin — is also got a horrific human rights record. President Bush said that he looked into this man’s soul and saw goodness (or something to that effect). Has to be one of the dumbest things President Bush said (and that is saying a lot).
I would have probably advised the President to go to the Olympic games (although I doubt that has much to do with Russia-US relations), mainly because the boycott didn’t really help LGBT Russians. Their very viable alternatives to government in Russia and it is basically very similar to the American wild west.
3. The Israeli/Palestinian problem is probably going to be a mess for a very long time.
No one President is going to be able to fix it. Heck, no one nation is going to be able to fix it.
4. Some positive things are happening in Cuba — have been since Fidel basically gave up all or most of his power to his brother.
5. Hillary Clinton is certainly in the position to be the centrist candidate, mainly because the only other Democrats in the race (that we hear much about) would be Bernie Sanders (or if he running as an Independent?) and none of the main GOP candidates seem interested in appealing to the center.
6. It still too early in the campaign season to make any serious predictions. A lot can happen in the coming months.
7. Both the Clinton and Bush families have — based on past experience — been very skilled at running presidential campaigns (or rather hiring people that can deliver “results”).
posted by Lori Heine on
I’m beginning to think that Hillary will win in a landslide. (Again, to me this is not good news.)
The GOP hopefuls are attempting to intimidate the Supreme Court justices into ruling against marriage equality. Some are making wild and highly irresponsible remarks about disobeying any pro-equality ruling that comes down. The great majority of voters in this country are going to think this is irresponsible, if not downright nuts. Anyone with a record of making such remarks (as Houndentenor says, this IS the Internet age) will be viewed as dangerous by any general election voter not drunk on the right-wing Kool Aid.
FOX news can dig up all the skeletons it wants on the Clinton family. The fact remains that the loose-cannon GOP candidates are undoing FOX’s efforts as quickly as they can be made.