mykeystrokes.com

"Do or Do not. There is no try."

The GOP Conundrum: An Aversion To ‘Too Many Facts’

Republican pollster Ed Rogers recently reflected on “the psychology of GOP activists,” most notably in the context of the presidential nominating contest. (via DougJ)

Our team wants someone authentic, creative, fresh, bold and likeable. And we don’t have much tolerance for too many facts or too much information. In politics, a bumper sticker always beats an essay. Cain’s 9-9-9 is a bumper sticker; Romney’s economic plan is an essay. Perry’s rationale for giving the children of undocumented workers in-state college tuition rates is an essay. No hand-outs for illegal aliens is an effective bumper sticker.

It may seem rather insulting to rank-and-file Republican voters to hear a prominent GOP pollster say they have an aversion to “facts” and “information,” but that only makes Rogers’ candor that much more refreshing. His assessment may be mildly impolite, but it seems fair given what we’ve seen in Republican politics of late.

My larger concern, though, isn’t limited to Republican voters’ discomfort with evidence. The real problem, it seems to me, is that these voters are represented by Republican policymakers who also “don’t have much tolerance for too many facts or too much information.”

I continue to believe the radicalization of the Republican Party is the most important political development in recent decades, but it’s accompanied by a related trend: GOP officials who simply don’t take public policy seriously.

With Rogers’ assessment in mind, it’s tempting to think Republican lawmakers in Congress, for example, simply dumb things down for public consumption. They avoid depth of thought because these officials know their supporters “don’t have much tolerance for too many facts or too much information.”

But are they dumbing things down or are the shallow sound-bites a reflection of their own limited understanding of contemporary debates?

It would seem this dynamic contributes to the “wonk gap” — which has been evident for quite some time — leaving us with conservative “experts” who don’t even fully appreciate the details of policy debates in their own fields.

I’m reminded of something Jon Chait wrote in January, after National Review published a defense of a health care policy argument that was, on its face, ridiculous.

Most people are not policy wonks. We rely on trusted specialists to translate these details for us. This is true as well of elected officials and their advisors. Part of the extraordinary vitriol of the health care debate stems from the fact that, on the Republican side, even the specialists believe things that are simply patently untrue. As with climate change and supply-side economics, there isn’t even a common reality upon which to base the discussion.

Paul Krugman added at the time the wonk gap goes well beyond health care: “Monetary policy, fiscal policy, you name it, there’s a gap…. [T]o meet the right’s standards of political correctness now, you have to pass into another dimension, a dimension whose boundaries are that of imagination, untrammeled by things like arithmetic or logic.”

The issue is not just someone on the left thinking those on the right have the wrong answers. Rather, the issue is the lack of intellectual seriousness on the right, making it impossible to get beyond the questions. Much of this, I suspect, is the result of an entire party that doesn’t “have much tolerance for too many facts or too much information.”

By: Steve Benen, Contributing Writer, Washington Monthly Political Animal, October 31, 2011

November 1, 2011 Posted by | Elections, GOP Presidential Candidates | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Michele Bachmann’s Mis-statements May Be Catching Up To Her

Michele Bachmann was laying out a tough immigration policy recently when she  veered off script to make a point that she said underscored the national  security implications of a porous border.

“Fifty-nine thousand this year came across the  border, as was said in the introduction, from Yemen, from Syria. These are  nations that are state sponsors of terror,” the Minnesota congresswoman and  Republican presidential candidate said, citing a report she had heard. “They’re  coming into our country!”

There were two problems with Bachmann’s passionate assertion. Yemen is  not a state sponsor of terrorism, according to the State Department. And the  Border Patrol report to which Bachmann referred said that while 59,000  apprehended illegal immigrants came from countries other than Mexico, only 663  had ties to countries with links to terrorism.

Voters here frequently say they are drawn to support Bachmann’s  presidential campaign by the litany of statistics and facts that stud her  speeches. Yet what she says is often inaccurate, misleading or wildly  untrue.

All politicians occasionally shade the facts to their advantage. The  danger for Bachmann is that her misstatements are so pronounced and so numerous  that they erode her effort to regain footing in the presidential race. (Asked  for reaction, a campaign aide provided information unrelated to the statements  in question.)

Some of her misstatements have registered as eye-rolling blips, such as  when she confused actor John Wayne with serial killer John Wayne Gacy on the day  she entered the campaign in June. Others have damaged her candidacy.

She won points in a September debate when she assailed Texas Gov. Rick  Perry for supporting a proposed requirement that young girls be vaccinated  against a sexually transmitted disease. But then Bachmann told a post-debate  television audience that the vaccine had caused mental retardation, a conclusion  drawn from a brief meeting with a weeping mother. Bachmann’s hit against Perry  was lost in howls of dismay from physicians who said her untrue remarks would  discourage vaccination and endanger children.

On recent campaign swings through Iowa, she continued to trip over  matters large and small.

In Sioux Center, Bachmann said high corporate taxes and crushing  regulations had made the United States less competitive than other countries, a  mantra common among GOP candidates. But then she went further.

“If you want to have a business in China today, if you want to build a  building, you just build it, you don’t go through all the permitting process  that we do here,” she said.

Businesses have to apply for multiple permits in China. A 2008 World  Bank publication found that China was among the most difficult places anywhere  to obtain construction permits, ranking No. 176 of 181. The publication ranked  the best and worst places, and the United States fell in neither category.

At a rally in Denison, Bachmann touted her plan to slash federal taxes  and implied that taxes are higher now than when she was young.

“How many of you think that the taxes are too high in the United States?  We got any takers on that?” she said as the crowd roared in approval. “I grew up  in this wonderful state and I’ll tell you, the tax rate was completely different  years ago from what it is now, wasn’t it? They’re very high.”

In 2011, a married couple filing jointly would have paid 35 percent of  their income in taxes if they made $379,150, the lowest income in the top  bracket, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. Fifty years ago, when  Bachmann was a child, the same couple would have paid 59 percent in federal  taxes. The lowest federal tax bracket today is half what it was then.

The candidate bases at least some of her assertions on obscure  conspiracy theories.

In Estherville, after a supporter asked her position on the Second  Amendment, Bachmann said she supported Americans’ rights to own guns and that  she had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

But then she added: “I don’t believe in the U.N. taking that right away  from us, as well. There are international treaties that want to do that.”

The United Nations is drafting an arms treaty, but it is aimed at  stemming illegal international gun sales. While many gun manufacturers are  concerned that such a treaty could lead to broader gun registration, only a  narrow fringe purports that Americans could see their guns taken away by the  U.N., which has no authority over constitutional rights.

Bachmann’s mistakes predate her entry into the presidential race. In  November, she told a national television audience that a trip by President  Barack Obama to India cost $200 million a day. The report was based on an  anonymous quotation in an Indian newspaper.

The White House does not release cost figures for security reasons, but  people involved in travel by presidents from both political parties said the  number was grossly exaggerated.

An embarrassing correction also marked a recent Bachmann move on Capitol  Hill. Earlier this month, she introduced a bill requiring any woman considering  an abortion to undergo an ultrasound that pinpoints the heartbeat of the  fetus.

“A study by Focus on the Family found that when women who were undecided  about having an abortion were shown an ultrasound image of the baby, 78% chose  life,” Bachmann said.

That prompted a news release from the conservative organization, which  said that while it supports the legislation, it had produced no such report.

“We don’t have any ‘studies,’ and we don’t publish any percentages like  that,” Kelly Rosati, Focus on the Family’s vice president of community outreach,  said in a statement.

A Bachmann aide said the candidate got the statistic from a Des Moines  clinic. The aide also cited a report that appeared in the Rocky Mountain News of  Denver that cited a Focus on the Family statistician for a similar claim.

By: Seema Mehta, McClatchy-Tribune News Service, October 23, 2011

November 1, 2011 Posted by | Conservatives, Elections | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rick Perry And His Rivals Serve Up Scare Tactics And Drivel

Rick Perry should have backed off. Instead, he doubled down, and in a way that was doubly illuminating — about Perry himself and the degraded state of modern politics.

The issue, amazingly enough, is President Obama’s birthplace — months after the release of his long-form birth certificate should have laid the matter to rest.

In an interview with Parade magazine, the Texas governor declared Obama’s place of birth a “distractive” issue even as he happily latched on to the opportunity to distract.

“Well, I don’t have a definitive answer [about whether Obama was born in the United States], because he’s never seen my birth certificate,” he said. It was classic Perry, combining logical incoherence and a smarmy cheap shot.

A smarter candidate would have stopped there. Perry, in an interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, kept going, despite Harwood’s repeated invitations to walk back his silliness.

“Look, I haven’t seen his,” Perry said. “I haven’t seen his grades. My grades ended up on the front page of the newspaper, so let’s, you know, if we’re going to show stuff, let’s show stuff. “

Is this a presidential campaign or a middle-school playground? I’ll show you mine if you show me yours? By the way, if I had Perry’s grades, I wouldn’t be mentioning them. Certainly not if I were running against a former president of the Harvard Law Review.

But then Perry, as is his style, let on what this was really about. “But look, that’s all a distraction. I mean, I get it. I’m really not worried about the president’s birth certificate. It’s fun to poke at him a little bit and say, ‘Hey, how about, let’s see your grades and your birth certificate.’ ”

The matter of the president’s birthplace, Perry added, is “a good issue to keep alive.”

You might think this was the candidate cannily trying to have it both ways: a nod to the birther crazies with a simultaneous wink at those who know this is a ridiculous distraction. Except that Perry managed to step on his real message of the day: his unaffordable and unfair proposal to “simplify” the tax code — by grafting a flat-tax alternative onto the existing system.

Perry’s acknowledgment of his interest in benefiting from birther mania was reminiscent of his artless dodge, during the last debate, about whether he thought the 14th Amendment should be changed to abolish birthright citizenship. “You get to ask the questions,” he told moderator Anderson Cooper. “I get to answer like I want to.”

Note to candidate: It’s better not to narrate your own stage directions. Just because your debate coaches tell you to answer the question you want to answer, not the one that’s been asked, doesn’t mean you should announce that’s what you’re up to.

Now we have Perry, who has a decent if fading shot at the Republican presidential nomination, openly practicing politics as poke-fest. The point isn’t to debate whose solutions are best for America — it’s to get under the other guy’s skin.

Thus Perry needling Mitt Romney on immigration: “You hired illegals in your home and you knew about it for a year. And the idea that you stand here before us and talk about that you’re strong on immigration is, on its face, the height of hypocrisy.”

As it happens, Perry is righter — that is, more correct — than Romney on immigration, at least when it comes to the question of the DREAM Act and the ability of the children of illegal immigrants to obtain in-state tuition rates.

But Perry’s jab at Romney was below the belt. The former Massachusetts governor employed a landscaping firm that, the Boston Globe discovered, had hired illegal immigrants. Romney told it to stop. When it turned out that the company hadn’t, he fired the firm.

The matter of Obama’s birth certificate should be a closed case. It is astonishing that a sitting governor, no less a serious candidate for president, would stoop to playing this game.

Then again, 2012 is shaping up to be an astonishing campaign. Witness Herman Cain’s bizarre, substance-less new ad in which the candidate is endorsed by, yes, the candidate’s campaign manager. Who is actually smoking (literally) during the ad.

“I really believe that Herman Cain will put United back in the United States of America,” says the aide, Mark Block.

The country is facing serious problems. This will be a fateful election. Voters deserve better than scare tactics and drivel.

By: Ruth Marcus, Opinion Writer, The Washington Post, October 25, 2011

October 29, 2011 Posted by | Class Warfare, Conservatives, Democracy, Elections, GOP, Ideologues, Ideology, President Obama, Republicans, Right Wing, Teaparty | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Divided And Undisciplined”: The GOP Circus 
Is In Town

Even Republicans have to be laughing at the circus sideshow the GOP presidential candidates are putting on. The Mitt-Rick-Herman act was so comical this week it looks concerted, almost like they collaborated with the Democratic National Committee. Team Obama is grinning so hard its ears are hurting, because 10 weeks out from the Iowa caucuses, the Republican Party is divided, the candidates are undisciplined and the voters don’t love any of them. Just in time for the real ugliness to begin a few weeks from now.

The marquee moment belongs to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, of course, indulging in birtherism on Monday night so that he could step on Tuesday’s rollout of his flat-tax plan. Sure, Perry tried to discount the birth-certificate controversy — sort of — while throwing some greasy scraps to the Trumpsters who still believe a U.S. president has actually released a fake certificate.

“I’m not really worried about the president’s birth certificate,” Perry said in an interview with CNBC. “It’s fun to poke at him a little bit and say, ‘Hey, how about, let’s see your grades and your birth certificate.’ ” Perry made sure to mention that Donald Trump recently said he didn’t think the birth certificate was real. And he said it’s “a good issue to keep alive.”

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney could have jumped all over that — if he hadn’t been busy shooting himself in the foot in the battleground state of Ohio. Yes, Romney decided a fresh flip-flop was in order, despite the fact that his critics are happy to savor his many others. While at a Republican call center in Ohio, he refused to comment on an Ohio law limiting collective bargaining that he had expressed support for months ago. After being pummeled by conservatives, Romney reiterated his, um, previous support.

Herman Cain, who tops the GOP field in a new CBS/New York Times poll, spent the last few days telling reporters who asked tough policy questions that he needed a little more time to think of an answer. He learned the hard way by saying on CNN that abortion is a family’s choice. Whoops — better to leave details out of this whole thing. Cain still can’t really be found on the campaign trail. No, the motivational speaker was in Texas selling books and giving a speech. And despite Perry’s attempt to beat Cain at his 9-9-9 game with a flat-tax plan, Cain-world still scored much buzz with a weirdo Web ad featuring his campaign manager Mark Block smoking into the camera. It already has more than 387,000 hits on YouTube.

With that kind of juice, who needs to endure the icy winds of the door-to-door campaigning Iowans demand of their caucus winners? If Cain continues to surge without leaving the book tour, then we will know that talking to voters in town-hall meetings and asking for their support is no longer necessary. In fact, perhaps televised debates aren’t, either. Perry told Bill O’Reilly in an interview on Fox News on Tuesday that while his debate performances have been disappointing, the debates themselves are a mistake. “If there was a mistake, it was probably ever doing one of the campaign [debates] when all they’re interested in is stirring up between the candidates instead of really talking about the issues that are important to the American people.” His campaign said Perry will attend one more in Michigan, but beyond that he might be a no-show.

That’s understandable. Questions at debates about serious policy matters — like what his response would be to the Taliban gaining control of Pakistani’s nuclear weapons — just aren’t Rick Perry’s idea of “fun.”

 

By: A. B. Stoddard, Associate Editor, The Hill, October 26, 2011

October 28, 2011 Posted by | Bigotry, Birthers, Class Warfare, Democracy, Democrats, Economy, Elections, Ideologues, Ideology, Income Gap, Libertarians, Middle Class, Right Wing, Teaparty | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Leaders Know How To Take A Stand, Unless You’re Mitt Romney

Gov. Romney, Republican voters booed a U.S. soldier serving in Iraq; are you comfortable with that? No comment.

Gov. Romney, Ohio Republicans are fighting to undermine collective-bargaining rights; do you agree with them? No comment.

Gov. Romney, your top rival for the Republican presidential nomination is questioning the president’s citizenship status; is this a legitimate subject for debate? No comment.

I thought it would be worth asking the campaigns of the two frontrunners — Herman Cain and Mitt Romney —for comment on [Rick Perry’s birther comments]. Are they willing to condemn it? After all, Romney has vouched for Obama’s U.S. citizenship in the past and has made Perry’s unelectability central to his campaign, and it seems likely that Perry’s flirtation with birtherism will fuel doubts about whether he has the gravity and temperament to be a good general election candidate.

No luck.

Both campaigns declined to address Perry’s comments. “We’ll pass,” Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon emailed. A Romney campaign spokesperson also declined comment.

Remember, this isn’t one of those 11th-Commandment-style dynamics; Romney criticizes Perry comments all the time. But when Perry dabbles in unhinged conspiracy theories, the Romney campaign prefers to remain silent.

Greg Sargent added, by the way, that some major players in the party — Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, Karl Rove, and others — have all said Perry’s comments were, at a minimum, out of line.

So where’s Romney as his top rival is taking heat from within the party?

There’s going to come a point next year when the Obama campaign is likely to say, “Mitt Romney lacks the courage and the character to be a leader.” And the criticism will sting because it’s based in fact.

Romney can end this talk very easily and demonstrate that he’s more than a craven empty suit. There are some basic yes-or-no questions — Do you condemn the booing of honorable American soldiers? Would you endorse Paul Ryan’s budget plan? Do you support public workers’ collective bargaining rights? — that the former governor could answer directly without looking for wiggle room and without a bunch of caveats to cling to later.

He just doesn’t seem to have the guts.

By: Steve Benen, Washington Monthly Political Animal, October 25, 2011

October 26, 2011 Posted by | Bigotry, Class Warfare, Elections, GOP, GOP Presidential Candidates, Ideologues, Republicans, Right Wing, Teaparty | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment