Republicans worried about being labeled bigots

It never struck me as especially complicated. Once there was a clear Democratic presidential nominee, the Republican National Committee would label him or her weak on terror, liberal (on everything), and desperate to raise your taxes. Throw in some references to 9/11, a few pictures of menacing-looking Middle Easterners, and a dash of immigrant bashing, and voila!

But it appears the RNC is hesitating, not because they’re unsure how to attack, but rather, because they want to avoid being labeled bigots.

Top Republican strategists are working on plans to protect the GOP from charges of racism or sexism in the general election, as they prepare for a presidential campaign against the first ever African-American or female Democratic nominee.

The Republican National Committee has commissioned polling and focus groups to determine the boundaries of attacking a minority or female candidate, according to people involved. The secretive effort underscores the enormous risk senior GOP operatives see for a party often criticized for its insensitivity to minorities in campaigns dating back to the 1960s.

The RNC project is viewed as so sensitive that those involved in the work were reluctant to discuss the findings in detail. But one Republican strategist, who asked that his name be withheld to speak candidly, said the research shows the daunting and delicate task ahead.

Republicans will be told to “be sensitive to tone and stick to the substance of the discussion” and that “the key is that you have to be sensitive to the fact that you are running against historic firsts,” the strategist explained.

“You can’t run against Barack Obama the way you could run against Bill Clinton, Al Gore or John Kerry,” said former Rep. Jack Kemp, the 1996 GOP vice presidential nominee. “Being an African American at the top of the ticket, if he makes it, is such a great statement about the country. Obviously you have to be sensitive to issues that affect urban America…. You have to be careful.”

It’s a really interesting report, and I don’t mean to dismiss it, but I’m having a difficult time believing this story.

Let me put it this way: I’m supposed to believe that the Republican National Committee, which has never shown so much as a hint of concern about propriety in modern political times, is not only worried about crossing lines of respect when it comes to diversity, it’s also leaking word to the Politico about being only worried about crossing lines of respect when it comes to diversity? The RNC?

It seems a little far-fetched.

Look, RNC officials know the difference between a clean attack and a dirty one. They recognize when an attack is driven by race-based politics, and when one is substantive and above-board. The only reason they would need a focus group to help them out on this is if they planned to walk right up to the decency line, and wanted to know how far they could go without crossing it.

“Republicans will need to exercise less deafness and more deftness in dealing with a different looking candidate, whether it is a woman or a black man,” Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway said. “But at the same time, really charge back at any insinuation or accusation of sexism or racism.

“You can’t allow the party to be Macaca-ed,” she continued, referring to a much-publicized remark made by former GOP Sen. George Allen that played a significant role in his 2006 defeat. “I think the standards are higher and the bar is lower for the Republican Party.”

Oh, you mean because the Republican Party has gone out of its way to exploit racial divisions for partisan gain for generations? And now it’s causing a little anxiety because the margin for error will be lower?

This is going to be difficult, given that they are the party of White Supremacy and Misogyny. “Bigot” is about the least you can say about your average winger.

  • They are the party of hypocrisy and bigotry. Without attacking the messenger they have nothing to run on. Theirs is the message of disaster…demonstrated. If they have to run on the issues they haven’t a chance…but then they haven’t a chance anyway. My dream is every republican up for office loses…for blindly following Bush’s disaster right off the cliff and trying to get us to follow them.

  • Republicans have always appealed to white racial anxieties without making those white people *feel* like they are racist. Very few Americans want to consider themselves racist, so appeals to racism have to be relatively ‘unconscious.’ If Republicans appeal too directly to racist fears, they will lose a lot of voters.

  • Isn’t McCain the oldest non-incumbent Republican nominee ever, too? That’s another historical first 😀

  • I really hope one of the pollsters calls me. I plan on lying through my teeth and say nothing will offend me. I’m with ya CB, they want to find exactly where the line is and walk right up to it, And they’ll allow the 250Million $ 527’s hop across, a la the “Call me Harold” ads of 2006.

  • “You can’t allow the party to be Macaca-ed,” she continued…

    Go ahead and replace that M word up there with a few other racially charged epithets; maybe one that starts with N or K, and say it again Kellyanne, you fucking bigot.

  • Look for subliminal messages — an ad slamming Obama for, say, wanting to raise taxes and showing him smiling at an attractive blonde, a shot where the contrast between their skin colors is strong, even photoshopped. To GOP racists, it’s a reminder that Obama’s African-American and not really qualified to be president and the “White” House really should be kept white.

  • To bad the Republicans aren’t afraid of being bigots.

    I think we can assume Steve is feeling better. I can barely keep up with him today.

  • You can’t run against Barack Obama the way you could run against Bill Clinton, Al Gore or John Kerry
    Yes you can, you just can’t inject racism or radical counter feminism into the debate. Obviously I expect either candidate to be attacked on the same issues of tax, immigration, foreign policy… Let’s also remember the race and gender card only comes out when someone is facing discrimination specifically because of what demographic they belong to.

  • Obviously you have to be sensitive to issues that affect urban America…. You have to be careful.”

    If he wants to be careful, Kemp might want to start with a recognition that not all urban dwellers are black and not all blacks are urban dwellers.

    This is like one of those suburban record stores that puts hiphop and R&B music in the category of “Urban Music,” as if the songs are about street cleaners or skyscrapers.

    No, no. No need to refer to black people as black people. The local news euphemism of “inner-city residents” will do just fine.

  • Look, RNC officials know the difference between a clean attack and a dirty one. They recognize when an attack is driven by race-based politics, and when one is substantive and above-board. The only reason they would need a focus group to help them out on this is if they planned to walk right up to the decency line, and wanted to know how far they could go without crossing it.

    The Republicans are masters at dirty political tricks. After all, they polled and discovered that “Democrat party” gets a less positive response than the “Democratic party”. Now all Republicans and even some in the corporate controlled media use the Republican version rather than the accurate version.

    Republicans have been in a steady downward slide toward compete lack of principles since Nixon. During Nixon the ethical standard declined from doing what’s right to “It’s not illegal!” During Reagan, it declined further to “No one was indicted!” Under Bush, the standard has become “We didn’t leave enough evidence behind to be convicted!” Now, amazingly, the McCain campaign has found a way to go lower, with “We’ve sabotaged the enforcement body, so there are no more rules!”
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/02/24/dnc-to-file-fec-complaint-against-mccain

    Obama and the Democrats will have to be careful. Claiming that the Republicans are using racist tactics can backfire. If Bill Clinton hadn’t been so ham-handed, Obama’s campaign might have had more trouble responding to the former president’s attacks.

    The way to counter a veiled or coded racist appeals is to be polite and positive and respond with humor. If Republicans talk about “the party of Jesse Jackson,” Obama should say, “Oh, I’m sure that the Republicans weren’t referring to race. It’s just that there are so few blacks in their country clubs that they just can’t come up with the names of other prominent African-Americans.” If the Republicans suggest Obama isn’t in touch with “real” Americans, Obama should respond, “My mother was from Kansas and my father immigrated (legally) to this country searching for a better life. You can’t get more American than that. Maybe if Sen. McCain visited farms and coffee shops sometime other than during an election, he would know what ‘real’ Americans are looking for from their president.”

  • Pardon me while I compose myself after laughing myself silly. Are you kidding me?! George Allen, Phyllis Schlafley, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh…ad nauseum. The party’s base IS racist and mysogynistic. Oops, I almost forgot homophobic. Any campaign that doesn’t appeal to them will draw a big yawn and the base will stay home in November. They wouldn’t recognize the ‘line’ if Piccaso drew it.

  • Bring it on assholes. Nasty or not, you’re going to lose this election. So the uglier you get, the longer people associate “Republican” with throwing up in their mouths a little bit.

    That’s all I have to say to the Republican Party.

  • If the RNC gets hold of an effective race-based attack, they’re not going to let it go. They’ll just hand it off to their 527 allies, and let them do the swift-boating.

    And of course, the article says nothing about concerns of religious bigotry. That’s likely seen as a much more viable attack, especially when religious intolerance doesn’t have the same taint in this society that racial intolerance does. Count on seeing plenty of “Barack is a Muslim” and “Muslims can’t be trusted” emails filling your inbox in the near future.

  • I guess the GOP wants to avoid the trap that Bill Clinton placed himself in South Carolina. It doesn’t have to worry about running against a woman because it’s pretty clear she won’t be the candidate.

  • Obviously you have to be sensitive to issues that affect urban America…. You have to be careful.

    I was going to make basically the same comment as TR about this, but hadn’t considered the “Urban Music” comparison. Songs about street cleaners and skyscrapers! Awesome! I hadn’t ever thought of looking for Petula Clark in “Urban Music,” but hey, if the shoe fits…

  • Michael7843853 OBAMA in 08 said:
    I think we can assume Steve is feeling better. I can barely keep up with him today.

    Whew! I agree.

    I meant to include in my earlier post that I think most Republicans aren’t racists themselves but they are willing to use anything, including racist appeals, to win. I don’t know whether that makes them less loathsome or more.

  • We have police and we have the IRS. Not coincidentally, the vast majority of citizens are law-abiding and pay their taxes. For me, that is good enough, and I will leave to others, more perfect than I am, to discern the real motives of those who obey the laws and ‘render unto Caesar.’

    By analogy, if the public mood now serves to keep the RNC within what could be called politically correct discourse, then perhaps it might be appropriate to call that a good thing, and set aside our efforts at mind-reading our political opponents, an exercise, which at all times, oddly enough, results in “us” concluding that “they” are demons.

  • The RNC worried about bigotry? Isn’t that like the KKK worried about air pollution caused by burning crosses? Or a wife-beater worried about what the neighbors think? On a gay basher worried about the victim’s mother.

    A kinder, gentler RNC? Really? The braindead media never get it, do they.

  • Republicans will be told to “be sensitive to tone and stick to the substance of the discussion”

    Are you kidding me? Stick to the substance? The only way these chumps work is by avoiding the issues and substance altogether and use their only two weapons fear (Clinton/Obama soft on The Big Bad Terroists, Obama’s a secret Muslim who will turn the US into a Islamic Caliphate, not the Christian Theocracy we all yearn for) and Hate (African-Americans, Women, Clintons, Tired, Poor, and of course, what the party really hates, the Huddled Masses yearning to breathe Free). I have Republican friends, and have to ask them, is this REALLY what you stand for? Does this party represent your beliefs? And ultimately that’s the question that needs to be placed in the mind of every “Reagan Democrat”, “moderate”, or other person who only votes in election years…

  • I have already had to refute the Osama is a Muslim lie twice in the past 2 days.
    The RNC will use the swift boat groups and others. Rush, Savage, Coulter and the other Cretins are already at work!

  • It seems like only yesterday that RNC chairman Ken Mehlman apologized to one of the nation’s largest black civil rights groups, saying Republicans had not done enough to court blacks in the past and had exploited racial strife to court white voters, particularly in the South.

    “It’s not healthy for the country for our political parties to be so racially polarized,” said Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman.

    Apparently, John McCain never got the message because GOP scumbag operative, Terry Nelson, is a member of his campaign. Nelson’s last claim to fame was the infamous ad attacking Harold Ford in which a seemingly naked white woman claims she met Ford at the Playboy Club.

    It’s going to get ugly.

  • Eh, tend to agree. First of all, these “worries” didn’t stop them with Harold Ford, Jr. What they’re up to is trying to find out exactly how far they can push it without a critical mass of people becoming pissed off.

  • Solution! Howzabout Republican wear little pins under their little flag pins that say “I’m no bigot you silly macaca!” That would satisfy the Bill Kristols of the world.

    It says a lot about how Republicans deal with things that they are focusing solely on the wordsmithing and the veneer of bigotry and not focusing instead on changing the underlying structure that they are essentially a white male controlled party. The U.S. is looking less and less like them and they would be a healthier party if they evolved into something that resembles this nation more. But then again, evolution is a dirty word to these guys.

  • My guess is that if this is real, they’re A) doing it for CYA to say “look, we tried” and B) are scared some of the looser cannons (Coulter, etc.) are going to fire off and they want to be able to neutralize it or claim they didn’t condone it or C) are actually so ignorant they’re not sure.

    Probably all 3 in a way.

  • As a side note, to all those who have voiced concerns about the “Call Me” ad that was run against Harold Ford in 2006, I have a feeling that similar attacks won’t stick to Obama the way they did to Ford. First of all, Ford, being single, was ripe for portrayal (or at least implied portrayal) as the “predatory black man,” a caricature that strikes fear into the hearts of bigoted white citizens. Obama, on the other hand, is happily married and has two adorable children. While that does not completely defuse the bigoted reaction, it does soften it a bit. Second of all, Ford made numerous mistakes on the campaign trail– the unexpected shouting appearance at his rival’s press conference stands out as one such mistake– proving that he was an inept politician, to whom attacks could easily stick. Obama, by contrast, has made relatively few mistakes (the “you’re likable enough” gaffe against Hillary was probably his worst moment on the campaign trail this year,) and has effectively responded to all the charges hurled at him. He’s got some serious Teflon going on! Based on what we’ve all seen so far, Barack & Co. have been able to fight back effectively against the attacks. Granted, I know the Republican attacks will be far harsher than what the Clintons have dished out. But it’s not as if the Clinton camp has gone about this in a mild manner. Obama has proven himself to be a strong candidate, ready for whatever mud gets slung his way. I’m elated– and relieved– that our first minority presidential nominee is well-prepared for the road ahead.

  • You folks are missing the dog-whistle here. You see, it was ok for Republicans to wear purple band-aids mocking John Kerry, because Sen. Kerry had insulted vets with his “winter soldier” testimony. Actually, he had not, but the Republican-owned media had twisted it into that (1st hand knowlege via one brother-in-law).
    What was this message actually saying? Just because you could slide on insulting most vets, DON’T go the convention wearing minstrel black-face! It won’t work this time! We don’t have “them” trained like the American Legion!
    Otherwise, they won’t trouble their beautiful minds with real race problems (see New Orleans, Katrina)

  • We might wish to consider that the worry isn’t their overt (or barely concealed) bigotry and appeal to voters’ latent (or unabashed) prejudices.

    In as far as it is understood—if rarely discussed—that the GOP would not have been successful at the Presidential level since before Nixon without this appeal; along with the increasing use of out and out disenfranchisement (the real culprit in Fla [2000] and Ohio [2004], not the inclusion of any minor parties on the ballot); it might be this that motivates this soul searching.

    It is certainly doubtful that they posses the ability to delay gratification, but it is certainly worth considering that it would be better for the GOP to lose one election and preserve an ability to employ these tactics, than to use them against a black candidate and risk losing the ability to use race without much scrutiny for many, many cycles to come.

  • “You can’t allow the party to be Macaca-ed,”

    What a fascinating reworking of history. How was the GOP “macaca-ed”? Not that that is a verb, but if it was, didn’t Allen “macaca” himself?

    Theoretically, the easiest solution to the problem of appearing to be a party of ignorant bigots is for your members to stop being ignorant bigots. Too bad theory and practice lie so far apart.

  • “You can’t run against Barack Obama the way you could run against Bill Clinton, Al Gore or John Kerry,”

    Why not? I find this very hard to believe.

    How about a better explaination – you don’t want to be a Republican anymore. Because it’s pretty obvious to everyone what the Republicans have done to our country in the last eight years – run it into the ground.

  • The republicans are just staking out territory to claim victimhood in the event they are labeled racists, and to preemptively neuter any accusations of racism they get. They are constantly accusing other groups of silencing criticism. Think of Ann Coulter and the 9/11 widows — she accuses them of using their loss to supposedly bludgeon people who disagree with them … when really the only bludgeon is Coulter. They’re setting up the same type of dynamic with Obama. This way, they can make a nasty attack, and when the storm of complaints ensues, they’ll cry that their legitimate criticisms are being silenced. Kinda tenderizing the electorate for the attacks to come. The only question is, who will this work on? Only a certain type of white male who was probably going to vote for McCain anyway?

  • “You can’t allow the party to be Macaca-ed,”

    By this, she means get caught. The problem wasn’t that the racist George Allen was using racism to drum up votes from racists, it’s that he got caught doing it (and oh by the way barely, barely lost to a military hero centrist Democrat).

    “I think the standards are higher and the bar is lower for the Republican Party.”

    Dude, flag lapel pins.

  • Tamalak said:

    Isn’t McCain the oldest non-incumbent Republican nominee ever, too? That’s another historical first 😀

    Well, at least we can assure ourselves the Republicans are not ageist. That’s SOMETHING.

    EDR said:

    I have already had to refute the Osama is a Muslim lie twice in the past 2 days.

    The one time I had to do this, I took a shortcut that left the asserter babbling with no where to go. I said: “So what if he is?” (Because honestly, it’s a pointless assertion to claim he’s muslim. I’m an atheist, all religions of the book are more or less the same, and per the constitution the question itself is void.)

  • All republicons I know are racist pieces of shit , but thats just my experience .
    Oh and they all consider themselves christians .

  • All republicons I know are racist pieces of shit , but thats just my experience .
    Oh and they all consider themselves christians .

  • The real problem for the RNC is that they want to court the Strom Thurmond vote, but also want to keep their hands clean. Just like the way the Bush team smeared John McCain with the “black child” stories int he 2000 presidential primaries.

  • The only reason they would need a focus group to help them out on this is if they planned to walk right up to the decency line

    What a perfect insight. It just kills me. They WANT to cross the line, they know they can’t, they NEED to figure out precisely which outrageous, unethical, racist things they can say and do that will not backfire. They are not interested in the substance of sensitivity, just the form.

    Also–Kellyanne whatshername? What an idiot–she’s a stupid talking head on cable. Her Macaca remark? What an outrage. By using it the way she did, she suggests that response to his racism was inappropriate. Unbelievable. Like his whole assumption that someone with dark skin couldn’t possibly be American was an overreaction or something. She should remind everyone that prevention of “being macacaed” might involve actually not BEING racist to begin with. They might start there.

  • Comments are closed.