05:39 pm
Reactionary Nostalgia
My earlier post on Iowa got me thinking about the McCain’s strategy and tactics.
According to press reports, the McCain campaign has adopted a defensive stance, more intent on defending Bush-2004 states than winning over Kerry-2004 states. This is problematic because, right now, they are so far behind in a half-dozen Bush-2004 that it’s going to be hard for them to defend them all successfully. Without a significant pick-up — such as Michigan would have been or Pennsylvania still could be — McCain really has no chance of winning.
One thing this approach does explain is the campaign’s turn toward hateful rhetoric. If they think the only way they can win is by rallying the base in Bush-2004 states, then the best way to make it happen is to scare the s**t out of rally the base. The problem with this approach is that fear only works if it’s the biggest fear out there. And right now, fear of an economic meltdown is trumping fear of an African American man with an Arab name. McCain may be able to move a few voters, but I haven’t run across a single sane member of the commentariat — not even on the right — who think that three weeks of venom can win this thing for him.
So given these facts, and given the assumption that McCain still thinks he can win, what are we missing here? Occam’s Razor says that the simplest solution is usually the right one (and yes, philosphy majors, I am oversimplifying it a bit). The answer is, of course, that McCain believes this is his only path to winning.
But winning what? That’s the question no one is asking.
I think the most plausible answer is that he thinks he can win in the electoral college even if he loses the popular vote. This has him winning enough of the Bush-2004 states plus New Hampshire and/or Pennsylvania to eke out a win. This would explain both the defensive posture and the rhetoric. If he can whip up the base enough in these states (plus Pennsylvania and New Hampshire), he might be able to keep Obama from winning over the one, two, or three states he needs to secure a win.
The only other possible explanation is that McCain has decided that if he can’t win, he must do everything he can to deny Obama a mandate, even if it means worsening the divides that have made governance so difficult over the past forty years. Clearly he is absolutely convinced of his righteousness, meaning anything he says or does is merely speaking truth to terrorists power.
As I’ve said earlier, he’s moving onto very thin ice here. Another blogger — I no longer can find the post — said earlier today that McCain is moving into territory which only George Wallace has chosen to go — open appeals to racism. Rick Perlstein has pointed out, correctly, that both Goldwater and Nixon resorted to similar tactics: “This is how conservatives roll.”
I think Perlstein is right, but I think he and others miss something important here. Contrary to expectations, we once again are having a referendum on the 1960s. Except this time it’s not about Vietnam, it’s about civil rights. And it’s not the Democrats who are wallowing in hippie wish-fulfillment but rather Republicans wallowing in what can only be called reactionary nostalgia.
The fundamental problem with the Republicans fighting the 1960s over again is that most Americans don’t give a rat’s ass anymore, especially given the current economic crisis. And those that do — those that remain unhappy about the triumphs of Parks, King, Abernathy, Lewis, Young, and other heroes of the civil rights movement — decided not to vote for Obama a long time ago.
So where does that leave McCain?
He’s riling up a reactionary base (to call it racist ignores the reality that only some of these folks are racist) in such a way as to guarantee that undecideds and independents are more likely to vote for Obama. To put it another way, the more he appeals to the worst instincts in Americans, the more Americans will want to demonstrate the content of their character. At the same time, he’s leaving a residue of hatred and distrust that’s going to make it much harder for Obama to govern.
McCain only needs to look at the state of this year’s Senate races to see that this election is much more about the economy than it is about Obama or himself. The Republicans are losing ground so rapidly that pollsters are having trouble keeping up with the collapse. Although a sixty-seat majority still appears unlikely, it is more of a possibility than it was even a week ago. Should that trend continue, we be witnessing the biggest collapse of a major party in the United States since 1932.
And that, my friends, is change we can believe in. For others, like those in the video above, it is change they will never accept.