What are the Republicans really up to?

These are strange times.

In the past two days, the rec list has contained no less than three diaries pointing to some prominent Republican endorsing one of our two candidates. Everyone has by now seen the Ann Coulter clip so I won't bother to repost it here. If you've managed the stomach to sit through Joe Scarborough lately, you've more than likely seen something like this:  

Even when they haven't been praising our own guys, they've kept themselves busy eating their own.

So all this has got me thinking: what's really going on here? Are we to believe that Ann Coulter really thinks Hillary Clinton is "stronger on terrorism than Mccain"? Does Nixon's former speech writer really find Obama  "Burkean"?

I've come up with three possible explanations:

1.  The Republican really has, as Rush put it, fractured. The old factions are all backing different candidates and EVERYONE is trying to distance themselves from Bush. In the midst of this scramble, a few moderates are scrambling to align themselves with the democratic party in a desperate attempt to remain relevant. If this is the case, I'd say we stand a pretty good chance in November.

2. Good ol' fashioned mischief. I started to get that sense when Karl Rove began to weigh in on the debates. Rove and Coulter are names that inspire pretty heated reactions from a lot of liberals (okay, let's be honest, being in their general vicinity is enough to give a newborn ulcers) and having them campaign for you could be a real kiss of death. It could be they're trying to stir the pot and encourage division within the party in order to seal a win in November.

3. They're talking nice now, but when the election rolls around they'll suddenly remember where they put the keys to the smear machine and back Mccain all the way through the next 100 years in Iraq and beyond.

On a case by case basis, you could argue that all three are true. But 1 and 3 present us with a dilemna. Obama has spoken often about being open to disaffected Republicans but all these years of party war have brewed a lot of deep-running emotions. To say that progressives are suspicious of the Republican party would be like saying Paris Hilton "has an occasional need for attention." I'm sure a lot of people resent the idea of "rescuing" our "enemies", even if in the final count, they are sincere. If they aren't sincere, it spells trouble if Obama gets the nomination and the prophecied migration never comes.

I have no real concrete proclamation to make here, but I thought I'd put up a poll and see what everybody thinks:

•  Obama's migration

  is from non voters to voters.  He's bringing in a whole new group of young and energized voters and activists.  He's not depending on Republican's votes to win.

  Rove gets entirely too much credit.  He isn't god.  He's not some master manipulator who can control his horde of Repub talkers.  They are genuinely fractured.  They are not playing games when they mention that Hillary will be the one thing that will galvanize their party back together.  Barack they don't know how to beat.

  by recusancy on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:02:40 AM PDT

  •  thanks again Rush for Missouri

    and giving us control of the Senate with your dumbass Michael J Fox comment.

    He doesnt know what the hell hes doing.

    by Garbear on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:05:21 AM PDT

  •  The media is dancing his dance

    He was once Barak Hussein the muslim who grew up learning to hate Christians in a madrassa. Suddenly he's their darling. BULLSHIT. They are dividing us.

    by JamesBrown4ever on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 08:23:02 AM PDT

•  I agree that all possibilities need examination.

  If experience teaches anything, it is that the Republicons never do anything without some motive, usually a hidden agenda.  Take them at their word?  Well, that is like taking a snake without its coils -- whether the coils are wishful or otherwise!

  by wgard on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:03:18 AM PDT

  •  To think otherwise would be to have learned

    NOTHING from the last 7 years.

    by doinaheckuvanutjob on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:06:04 AM PDT

  •  precisely

    why all talk of bi-artisanship gives me the whips and jingles.  

    I know, I know, Obama-- who's had my vote for a while now-- is addressing people, voters, moderates.  But the last years of national politics (I include the blood wars waged against the Clintons) have taught me to be on my guard, wits at the ready, determination honed, and if we are to win this election and chase the fuckers out, so must we all stay sharp and wary.

    Fascists don't compromise, they dissemble, subvert, lie, cheat and steal. And, damned if they're going to get away with it again.

    by Tulip on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 05:59:01 AM PDT

•  You need to add an option to your poll

  "Genuinely disaffected"

  by recusancy on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:03:57 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    I have been fascinated by the diaries and comments in the past few days about writers' right wing, Republican relatives, friends and co-workers who like Obama and are saying they will vote for him in Nov.  Something is happening.

    George Bush has ruined the Republican name and there are a lot of disaffected Republican (akin to former Regan Democrats) who are looking for a leader who can bring us together and move us forward.

    by EJP in Maine on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 03:17:36 AM PDT

    •  My family is mostly made up of Independents

      My mother switched officially from Republican to Independent last year, although she's been voting the Dem ticket for the past several years.

      Talking to my sister last night about Super Tuesday, she said, "I know that McCain is a Democrat but I just don't like him. Who should I vote for?"

      Yikes!

      I've got some work to do.

      by Lovo on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:02:42 AM PDT

•  i just think they're desperate to stop mccain

  and they're failing.

  But they'll get behind him if he wins, when all is said and done.

  As for Hillary?  They just assume she'll be the nominee at this point.

  by thereisnospoon on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:04:27 AM PDT

  •  but if they stop McCain . . .

    who the heck do they want to run?  Mitt's a mess and Huck?! or, are they all gonna rally behind Ron Paul! lol!~

    by nycstray on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:22:43 AM PDT

    •  And they love to stir up stuff on us.

      That's their JOB people. Who do you think Rush is? What is Ann C and Joe Scarb about? And Rove.

      These guys are all paid operatives. They don't express their cute little opinions like ordinary citizens searching their conscience for what to do.

      No, these are tactical moves. Remember who the players are here, and separate them in your mind from the ordinary Repub voters-- two different animals entirely that have NOTHING in common. The operatives speak to the Repub voters in attempt to influence them to do their bidding or stir up crap among us on our side. They are not simply reflecting the conscience of their voters-- for that go read Politico.com comments or talk to people in your town. Operatives and voters are two different animals.

      by doinaheckuvanutjob on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:10:08 AM PDT

•  One of the retired sisters at Sacred Heart

  monastery is Joe Scarborough's favorite high school teacher when she was in Florida.  

  I don't have cable, so don't know all his "sins" , but she shakes her head when his name is mentioned.  But she corresponds with him maybe six times per year.  Currently most of the sisters are on the HRC side of the democratic duel, but once the nomination becomes clear, they will be all Obama.  

  (many of the Sisters don't even know there is a GOP side of a ballot).

  There is going to be a LOT of pressure put on pundits, from old teachers to their own family & children, to cut the bullshit and give Obama a fair chance.

  by Theghostofkarlafayetucker on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:18:59 AM PDT

•  I didn't vote in your poll

  Because Obama isn't trying to reach people like Rush Limbaugh or the dirty trick operatives.

  Those people are hopeless and some belong in an International Court for enabling the world-wide disaster that is Bush-Roveco.

  Obama is just trying to facilitate regular republican voters defecting to our side this particular electoral cycle as things are just so hopelessly screwed up in their party and in the country. THIS is the time to grab defects! HRC can't do it!

  by Judgment at Nuremberg on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:25:26 AM PDT

  •  I meant grab "defections" not "defects"

    although if they were Republican they were "defects" too. LOL!

    (That's the difference between me and Obama - He would never call them "defects" as that would alienate them)

    by Judgment at Nuremberg on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:28:28 AM PDT

    •  When you think Obama/Al Franken on stage together

      in Minnesota, you can just sense the worry for milquetoast like Norm Coleman, how his contributors will see him as a rathole to throw money at.

      Obama is coat-tails !!

      by Theghostofkarlafayetucker on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:32:47 AM PDT

  •  He's calling "bullshit" on Limbaugh et al

    that is the way to do it, when the madrasa meme rolls around say "Shrub lied us into war with crap like that, and you are a FOOL to swallow more lies".

    by Theghostofkarlafayetucker on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:30:02 AM PDT

•  Well...

  what's really the difference from here?  There are alot more anti-Hillary (okay, yes to be fair, anti-Obama) diaries here than Red State.  It's funny how if you want to hear garbage about Democrats, go to Democratic sites, and if you want to hear garbage on Republicans, go to Republican sites.

  by scionkirk on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:34:11 AM PDT

•  It's a couple of things. First, they hate Hillary

  with a passion. They don't like the wishy-washy centrism that Bill Clinton represented. Secondly, and as an outgrowth of that dislike of centrist compromise, there are a number of Republicans who are drawn to "conservatism" less because of an ideology--which I think I've mentioned in a diary somewhere is actually an absence of ideology because conservatism is nothing more than a reaction to Classical Liberalism--and more because conservatism offers the world as drawn by crayon. I don't mean that it necessarily offers stupid ideas, but it is like Peter Lynch's investment guideline: never invest in anything that can't be explained using a crayon. Some conservatives are very drawn to that. so while part of the world is worried that Obama isn't being specific enough in laying out policies, others (including me!) actually find it refreshing to have a politician who is capable of talking in bold strokes. This is what drew many conservatives to Bush. It wasn't so much his ideas--which frankly everyone has always understood at least quietly were those of someone who was basically an idiot--but it was the fact that when facing Gore or Kerry, those two politicians ended up looking waffling and overly-nuanced because of their wonkiness. Both men easily won debates where they clearly understood facts and substance more than Bush did, but Bush was able to explain his issues with a crayon, and Gore and Kerry weren't. Conservatives might well have, in some numbers at least, supported Gore if he had been able to talk about social security and global climate-change with a crayon approach more than a wonk approach. Obama is not a wonk, or at least knows how not to speak to people like a wonk (which as a teacher I can testify a LOT of people interpret as having someone talk down to them). That plays well.

  by steve davis on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 05:08:42 AM PDT

•  All of the above

  The Republican Party is truly breaking up and flailing about.  There is no long one leader keeping them all together, and no longer one strategist behind the scenes keeping them on the same page.  So the various factions are all spliting off and trying different desperate strategies.  It's not all one coordinated action as in the past.  It's truly a free for all.  Some are trying to cause mischief, some are just looking out for their own interests, some are really pissed off at the party (for a variety of understandable reasons), and some are just trying to play nice now with that thought that they'll get slimy and nasty in the fall.  But McCain is not the person who is gonna be able to unite them all to victory; I predict they'll all keep flailing about and the Republican meltdown will continue into November.  The one caveat: most Republicans really do hate Hillary, that is true.  So if Hillary is our nominee, that would unite them more than anything else in November.  But it still probably won't be enough to help the GOP stop the bleeding.

  by davidkc on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 05:19:47 AM PDT

•  Running away from Bush

  is not something Republicans expected to be forced into, but that's where they are for all the obvious reasons.  I would say there is a fear from conservatives that McCain will Bush-whack them again, in a couple of ways:

  1. Conservatives claim to despise nation-building, so how do you explain Iraq?  And with McCain we could go through it again with Iran.

  2. Conservatives claim to be fiscally responsible above all else, so how do you explain the big spending and the budget deficits under the Bush administration?  McCain admits that economic issues aren't his thing.

  3. Conservatives demand a specific type of judge, of which Harriet Miers definitely did not qualify.  Will McCain, of their hated Gang of 14, let them down too?  

  So I think the fracturing is real, and they are in too much trouble to be able to plan out mischief.  But enough of the GOP establishment will settle for McCain to end the current chaos, leaving enough time to crank up the smear machine for the general election.

  by Fortschreitend on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 05:25:19 AM PDT

•  Wait

  Are we actually supposed to take something that Ann Coulter said seriously?

  by VaBreeze on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:07:22 AM PDT

•  Depends on the pundit.

  For YEARS, the Republicans were complacent because they assumed that they were going to run against Hillary Clinton in 2008.

  For them, this was an easy election. I contend still that Hillary Clinton would mean another republican president.

  But then came the rise of Barack Obama.

  The far right nut jobs are freaking out.  They are panicking and eating their own as a result.  If they could merge McCain and Romney and infuse a little Huck, they might have a candidate that could beat Obama.  But they don't and they know it.  So, they think Romney is their only hope.  Or at least they think with Romney they'll stand on principle.

  But the moderates, like Scarborough for example I believe are genuine in their praise.  It is often qualified with the notion that they don't agree with Obama but he inspires them and think that he's got great character and that he's the kind of Democrat they wouldn't mind being President.

  That's a big deal.  It reflects what's going on out there with Indies and the moderate Republican voters who are switching.

  Best listen carefully.  I know many of you want to call conspiracy but these people are on their heels as it pertains to Obama.  

  by broui on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:52:30 AM PDT