Opinion: The Republican ‘Pledge’: Who does the GOP think Americans are?
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
The much-anticipated ‘Pledge to America’ by Republicans is out, and it’s a doozy. The policy points have already been dissected elsewhere, so I’ll focus on the curious assumptions that underpin the proposals.
The paper is laced with the kind saber-rattling language that would lead one to believe the GOP is running against the British Empire. There’s Thomas Jefferson-inspired talk of governing with the consent of the governed -- as if the Democrats obtained power via royal blood instead of elections -- and all Americans being endowed with certain rights and liberties by their capital-C Creator. The Republicans believe, apparently, that something resembling a revolutionary fervor has swept over America.
They’re right about Americans being angry. The unemployment rate remains at a stubbornly high 9.6%, and the Obama administration’s ‘recovery summer’ ended with lingering speculation about a double-dip recession. But on policy, Republicans would do better than to assume that ‘tea party’ radicalism indicates a broad voter affirmation of GOP values.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll released earlier this month delivered good and bad news to the GOP: Though a strong majority of respondents indicated that they would vote for the Republicans in November, a plurality said they believe that Democrats represent our values better (Kevin Drum at Mother Jones originally flagged the contradiction; I wrote about it too). The point was that the election may end up being an expression of voter angst over the economy and not a reliable indicator of Americans’ political values. Granted, the GOP’s ‘Pledge’ may just be a cynical attempt to co-opt the tea party, a topic a Times editorial will address on Friday. But the Republicans’ broad statements about what Americans believe aren’t backed up by the polls they presumably use to accuse Democrats of governing without the consent of the governed.
-- Paul Thornton
