View Story | 32 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
They need to look for party ID for ammo. I think the protests at soldiers' funerals is ammo enough.
That said, he presents the rest of the field with a tough choice: repudaite Phelps, and risk alienating the base (which not only can cast a shadow over the primary, but can also hurt GOTV efforts in the general), or let Phelps lead them down the garden path to marginializtion. Either way, Phelps's issues are too important to too many Republicans from him to simply be written off as crazy.
I Am Hussein and So Can You
by Goldfish on Wed May 31, 2006 at 01:46:49 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
Phelps issues may be important to them, but I think the shear level of Phelps crazy will let them off the hook for dismissing him as crazy
Lying can never save us from another lie - Vaclav Havel
by Muwarr90 on Wed May 31, 2006 at 01:51:13 PM PDT
"I agree with the Rev. Phelps on a number of key issues, but I think he's batshit insane."
I'm not saying it can't be done, but I am saying it will be very hard to do without talking in John Kerry.
by Goldfish on Wed May 31, 2006 at 01:55:58 PM PDT
It's the first skill needed for the job.
.
by Muwarr90 on Wed May 31, 2006 at 02:00:17 PM PDT
Due to the state of the modern Republican party, Phelps is a test that redlines that ability. I mean, you can try to marginilize him, and you'll be able to, no problem. But you're going to get asked what you think about the things Phelps says, and it's going to be extreamly difficult to show how you're not also crazy, while at the same time not alienating the vaules voters. In point of fact, dealing with Phelps carries the danger of pissing of elements of the Christian Right who aran't as extream as Phelps, but also aran't going to like it if you don't look like you're 100% behind their issues.
Phelps is a bear trap for Republicans, any way you look at it.
by Goldfish on Wed May 31, 2006 at 02:05:50 PM PDT
I think any repub who gets asked about Phelps is simply going to say something along the lines of "I disagree with his actions at the funerals at our fallen service men and women who have so nobley served our country in Afghanistan and Iraq."
And that's all they'll have to say.
by Muwarr90 on Wed May 31, 2006 at 02:08:30 PM PDT
So what's going to be their answer when someone follows up and asks "But aside from that, do you agree with the Rev. Phelps position on..."
My point is putting distance between a candidate and Phelps is easy. Putting distance between what Phelps stands for is a lot harder.
by Goldfish on Wed May 31, 2006 at 02:13:16 PM PDT
I just don't think Phelps is an issue with much legs. Both sides have the crazies in the wings that get shrugged off.
by Muwarr90 on Wed May 31, 2006 at 02:17:06 PM PDT
I don't think that Phelps will win significant support, even from the far right - he's just too extreme. But if he does, it poses an interesting problem for the Repugs even before the votes are counted. Will they include him in the debates? Even appearing on the same stage with a guy who pickets funerals will be embarassing when it comes time for whoever wins to pretend to be a moderate.
by Cal4Clark on Wed May 31, 2006 at 03:21:54 PM PDT
He's a non-starter as far as candidates go and would be lucky to get 1% in New Hampshire, but if he's even on the field then there's no way for the other candidates to avoid dealing with the guy.
And unlike the Dems and LaRouche, they can't just ignore him, because he's A) much better at getting attention from the media than LaRouche B) dare I say it, much more lucid than LaRouche, and C) he repersents something that a lot of Republicans agree with, even if they don't agree with his methods or like him.
So, then you have the problem of marginalizing Phelps, without looking to socially liberal. That's a dance I'm sure glade none of our candidates will have to do.
by Goldfish on Wed May 31, 2006 at 06:07:58 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 32 comments