Early last year, I discussed the Republican Party’s “Growth and Opportunity Project,” and spent some time on their recognition that they needed to reach out to women voters. They were, and still are, very upset that the Democratic Party was able to paint them as conducting “a war on women.”
5. Republicans should develop a more aggressive response to Democrat rhetoric regarding a so-called “war on women.” In 2012, the Republican response to this attack was muddled, and too often the attack went undefended altogether. We need to actively combat this, better prepare our surrogates, and not stand idly by while the Democrats pigeonhole us using false attacks. There are plenty of liberal policies that negatively impact women, and it is incumbent upon the party to expose those and relentlessly attack Democrats using that framework.
They’ve been doing that, and in the past month have been vigorously conducting aggressive responses explaining how liberal policies negatively impact women, and then explaining the Republican position.
I have a genetic disability. It’s nothing that generally impacts my life, although it has kept me out of certain fields. I have deuteranomaly. What’s that? It’s a form of color blindness. I really can’t see the color green. I also have some issues with faint shades of red, or mixed shades. What the majority of people in this country see as “green,” I’ll see as brown, tan, or gray, depending on the shade of green it is. It’s sometimes embarrassing when people point out that I just called something “gray” which is obviously green (to them), but outside of that, I manage to get along. So what does that have to do with conservatives? They have a different sort of disability.
Back in the early days of this blog, I defined my stance as a pragmatic liberal:
I’m a pragmatic liberal and a realist. What that means is that I will always go with “what works” over an impractical solution, or take what is achievable for now versus doing without anything in the vague hope that “the perfect” will somehow happen. I recognize that “all or nothing” often means nothing, and that if nothing hurts a lot more people than something, I’ll take the something – every time.
One of the things I’ve noted is that purists tend to be quite willing to propose impractical solutions, or accept nothing at all, if it means “not perfect” is the alternative according to their lights.
After the government shutdown, Republicans took a big hit in the polls. A very, very large hit in the polls in fact. It turned out that while various people are willing to talk about what they don’t like about “big government,” there are even more things that the government provides that they do like. While Republicans thought they had a “winning strategy” by using the shutdown to attempt to repeal “Obamacare” (for the 40′th plus time), it turned out that the public thought it was really stupid, particularly when all those things like national parks had to close. Add in a lack of action on any substantive issues, the unpopularity of various Republican governors, and some losses in elections they thought were winnable, and things are starting to get tense for them.
In my previous post, I talked about how Republicans broke an “unwritten rule” when it came to the filibuster. While I’m not alone in saying “It’s about time!” I’m also aware of the various reasons behind the Senate’s unwillingness to change the filibuster rules. This is not, by any means, a “new discussion,” in that filibuster reform has been talked about for quite some time, with serious pushes being made by Senator Merkley over the past two sessions. So why do it now?