Obama’s Southern Strategy
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Barack, Obama, Republicans
With the appointment of yet another Republican to his cabinet yesterday, one can’t help but think that there’s a secondary strategy to this string of bi-partisan moves. Because whether it’s intentional or not is beside the point since the net effect is fewer Republicans in elected office and more opportunities for Democratic pickups come 2010.
Political Wire points out the appointments so far…
- Naming Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL) to his cabinet.
- Appointing Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman (R) as ambassador to China
- Choosing Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) as secretary of the Army
- Getting Sen. Arlen Specter to switch parties
- Nearly getting Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) to accept a cabinet appointment
Politico digs into the more cynical side of these appointments…
Since taking office in January, Obama has made an effort to convert GOP moderates in nearly every region of the country, ranging from a former Midwestern congressman, Ray LaHood, who became transportation secretary, to Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who was recently named ambassador to China.Obama also made a play for two of the four remaining Northeastern Republican senators — meeting with success in the case of party-switching Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter and near-success in the case of New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, who initially accepted the president’s appointment as head of the Commerce Department before backing out.
And with McHugh’s appointment, Obama has managed to cut New York’s ever-shrinking GOP House delegation by one-third. The state delegation now includes just two Republicans in its 29-member contingent — down from 10 as recently as 2004.
So why go after these folks?
Two words: Southern Strategy…
“Boxing the Republicans into a South-dominated party is very good strategy, because the more you reduce the Republican Party, the more conservative and reactionary it will become, and thus less attractive to moderates,†said Tom Schaller, a University of Maryland-Baltimore County professor and the author of “Whistling Past Dixie: How Democrats Can Win Without the South.†“The Midwest and the Northeast are the places where there are still remnants of old-line Rockefeller Republicans. And these are the places where the Democrats will build durable majorities.â€
Personally, I’d like to think that these are simply bi-partisan moves with unavoidable and understandable consequences for the Republican party. After all, nobody’s forcing these politicians to take these posts. Case in point, Judd Gregg. He ultimately didn’t think he could serve in a Democratic administration, and that could ultimately be the case with these folks too. Still, it’d be foolish to not consider that smart political operators like Barack and Rham didn’t factor the electoral upside into these moves.
So it probably comes down to how cynical you are. And I’m not to the point where I think these appointments were made specifically to pull these Republicans out of their offices.
At least not yet.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009 and is filed under Barack, Obama, Republicans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:23 am
I don’t think this is a strategy on his part because several of his earlier appointments hurt the Democrats. Napalitano was replaced by a Republican as Governor of Arizona. With redistricting coming up that hurts us. Bad.
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:33 am
I think with Obama the answer is generally: (E) All of the above.
June 3rd, 2009 at 11:07 am
During the previous 8 years, the GOP was represented by a incurious man who rode into office on his daddy’s coattails.
It is refreshing to now have a President who is extremely intelligent and educated.
Obama is playing chess while his Republican opponents have yet to figure out checkers.
June 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 am
An attempt to weaken the republican party by putting these members into more important positions in government. I think not. Consider each appointment a kindness.
June 3rd, 2009 at 11:29 am
We can discuss Obama’s motives behind these actions – is this a defined “southern strategy”, is he selecting the best talent for the position, or is he striving to meet his promise of having an increased bipartisan government? Any of these reasons are signs of an intelligent leader.
June 3rd, 2009 at 11:30 am
Exactly how did the president “get Sen. Arlen Specter to switch parties?” I didn’t hear every single remark made by Specter, but my impression is that the switch had less to do with any kind of “attractiveness” of Obama and/or the Democrats… and much more to do with Republican extremism and isolationism. And then there’s the little bit of business about Specter trailing in the primary polls, against a more-extreme GOP challenger.
I’d love to see some of Specter’s quotes on this, if anyone has ‘em.
“I have found myself, recently, at odds with the Republican philosophy.” (video)
June 3rd, 2009 at 11:35 am
Personally, I think even if Obama is doing it as a part of a political calculus to weaken the Republicans, I can’t see a downside to it. The country is getting some good moderates in positions where they can do more good (come on, do you think a moderate republican has any pull in the party anymore?) In addition, the Republicans as the become more pure, more extreme, will either understand and move back to the middle, or continue their death spiral, taking that last ultra conservative theocratic rump into a party that competes with the Green party.
Of course, there needs to be a viable third party, or a schism in the Democrats (which could happen) in order to finish the Republican party off once and for all. Then, maybe we can have a center right party that isn’t poisoned by the nutcases out there.
Personally I wish the libertarians would get crackin, but they’re still fighting with their own purists to really take advantage of things.
June 3rd, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Assuming that you were a politician who truly cared about your country and you were on the fringes of your party, wouldn’t trying to work for someone who gave you a chance to do a job be better than staying on the outside of a very weakened party? Specter may be the most calculating of the bunch but I would think any Republican politician can read the tea leaves for a moderate and the trend has not been good for them for some time.