Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
If you think of the pounding the Democrats took 16 years ago in 1994, one thing that comes to mind quickly is the GOP Contract with America.
If nothing changed between now and November and the Republicans romp the Democrats the way they are predicted to do, what will come to mind 16 years from now is ‘Tea Party.”
Today the GOP will release their Pledge To America. A review of a draft of the document shows it is modeled somewhat after the Declaration of Independence, which started with a statement of beliefs and followed with a list of grievances against King George. The pledge does the same but then adds a plan for repair of the US government.
The document doesn’t break new ground; it states what Republicans have always said. So why do it now? Here are some ideas (what are yours?):
The GOP wants to steal the Tea Party thunder (cynical); or
The GOP is finally moving toward the Tea Party (less cynical); or
The GOP honestly thinks the Pledge will help them win (deferential).
Bonus question: When I’m winning in court, I stop speaking. Might the pledge be misquoted/misinterpreted to give the Dems talking points?
SMITH > The GOP's "Pledge to America"
- Comment (15)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
I agree that there's a bit of a danger providing specifics that Democrats can attack but I believe at least part of the goal is to establish specifics to their mandate after the election.
The safe play would be to bash the Dems from here to November but that is not what the country is in the mood for - or willing to accept anymore.
I like it. It shows some cojones as Paladino might say.
Jun '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Not a fan. The Contract With America was 869 words. This is twenty-one pages, and what does it tell us? Erick Erickson at Red State has a pretty good metaphor:
"Yes, yes, it is full of mom tested, kid approved pablum that will make certain hearts on the right sing in solidarity. But like a diet full of sugar, it will actually do nothing but keep making Washington fatter before we crash from the sugar high."
Jul '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
I don't think the Pledge is trying to steal anything from the tea party, it's trying to feed the perception that the Republican Party is in line with some of the core beliefs of the tea party. With Murkowski's write-in campaign, D'Amato's anti-Paladino letter and the uproar over O'Donnell, the House Republican leadership seems to be concerned, and rightly so, that voters will start viewing the tea party as separate from the Republican party, even though most tea party candidates are running as Republicans. This document is not meant to fight the Democrats; it's meant to solidify the perception of ideological parity between the tea party and the Republican Party.
Sep '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Can I suggest another question? If there were no Tea Party, would there be a Pledge?
Count me as very cynical of the GOP. I believe they are trying to co-opt the Tea Party platform to solidify their current lead in the polls. I'm much less interested in a Pledge than I am in what they will do with their new found power.
May '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
I agree with Humza that the main audience is Tea Party voters. The GOP is trying to say they share the same goals and values. For most Republican incumbents, I expect it's political gaming, rather than a heartfelt pledge.
But you're absolutely right, Tommy, that Republicans, years from now, will cite this Pledge and not the Tea Party movement as the cause of their gains.
Frankly, I'm doubtful. As Rush said the other day:
May '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Are any Tea Party candidates not running as Republicans? I can't think of any. The Tea Party is the future of the GOP, and the Tea Party needs a national organization to actually legislate. So it works out, though not all DC types are on board. Like Cicero said of Octavian "he is to be praised, applauded, and then discarded." The leadership in place now don't think that way (Cantor especially), but a few do.
Bonus answer: We can win (probably more easily) by being the party of Hell No. Neal Boortz thinks it's a mistake, because we're shifting the focus away from the loathed Democrats and on to the loathed Republicans. However, it may be intended to put people on record and reassure the Tea Partiers that we're all on the same page. There's still some mistrust out there.
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Kennedy Smith
Bonus answer: We can win (probably more easily) by being the party of Hell No. Neal Boortz thinks it's a mistake, because we're shifting the focus away from the loathed Democrats and on to the loathed Republicans. However, it may be intended to put people on record and reassure the Tea Partiers that we're all on the same page. There's still some mistrust out there. · Sep 23 at 8:56am
"Aren't you the Party of No!" "No! We wrote that thing, over there." "What thing?" "That, remember? Remember that thing?" "Oh. Not really, no, but okay. What were we talking about again?" "Democrats!" "Right! Boo Democrats!"
Jul '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Pretty words, such pretty, pretty words.
Now, if the GOP takes the House or Senate, we shall see the same old dinosaurs - Orrin Hatch comes to mind - installed in the seats of power.
The Gentlemen's Club will remain the Gentlemen's Club until we, the People, chase them from office with pitchforks.
Jun '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Count me in the too-soon-to-tell camp with regard to this pledge document. Or maybe somewhere between the cynical and less cynical positions (say, "the GOP giving the appearance of moving toward the Tea Party").
If nothing else, I suppose the document gives us a means to measure their progress if they do gain control of the House. The stick to measure them by, or maybe to beat them with.
Jul '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
I think it's a bit early to tell what will actually happen. The GOP needs to stand FOR something other than "hell no," which is attractive this year and this is a pretty decent start in the right direction. OTOH, the Tea Party is likely to be here to stay (and I think Dick Armey has it right, we're in the midst of a hostile takeover of the GOP by the TPers, a good thing, to be sure). If there isn't follow through, then this will be the first cycle of squishy RINO defeats of many: even the Maine ladies seem to be paying attention right now. At this point, I'd say intent is secondary to performance if and when control is assumed. It may very well be that we have two full years of completely stalled government until The One is (hopefully) defeated in re-election; standing for "no" until then will only redound to the GOP benefit. No more damage!
Aug '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
I'm not buying it, and the short explanation is the first obvious difference since 1994: the titles, "Contract" vs "Pledge".
A contract is an enforceable, finely detailed, binding agreement between two parties of equals. A pledge can be vague, rhetorical, asynchronous. Contracts aren't something you break lightly... but politicians are famous for breaking pledges and promises.
The Contract in 1994 wasn't a legally binding document, but the GOP treated it as one. It listed specific bills, specific actions, and bound the party to the agenda. But the Pledge reads as a list of bullet points, drawn from an intern's executive summary of this year's blog posts, with the words "We have a plan..." tacked in front of it.
Anyone remember Kerry's "I have a plan..." follies in 2004? Why are Republicans taking communication cues from John Kerry, of all people?
I know, I know, "what's in a name" and all that. But in this case, the titles do reflect the content, and the respective authors' temperaments and likelihood to deliver match the connotations of their chosen format of promises.
Aug '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
Same thing as comparisons from last year: the Constitution plus Amendments is 20 pages long. The 2009 stimulus bill was 973 pages long, and health care reform was somewhere around 2000 pages (depending on whose format you use).
I would argue the magnitude of difference in length is the same as the difference in quality.
Jul '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
It's perfect for the Washington Establishment as Casey Taylor has pointed out.
It's Twenty One pages long. It's language is written with the same flair as a House resolution on recognizing the Boy Scouts. It promises nothing but uses key phrases that intended to mollify the base. It's like a second belly button.
The question is this: Who's going to talk about this in a bar, except in generalities?
Jun '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
I heard a caller on Dennis Miller's show the other day who put it pretty well:
"Maybe instead of acting all embarassed and trying to defend themselves, maybe somebody in the Republican Party should stand up and say, yeah, 'No' is what an adult says to their child when the spoiled little brat wants to spend all their money."
Sounds pretty good to me.
Jun '10
Re: Is The GOP Pledge Designed To Steal Tea Party Thunder?
BlueAnt
I would argue the magnitude of difference in length is the same as the difference in quality. · Sep 23 at 11:45am
The first time in history that's ever been true. He says with a straight face.