Thirty years ago Ronald Reagan came along and was seen by a majority of the American people as an authentic and original politician (even though he was an actor). He won two presidential elections and is still revered by many on the right and a few in the center as being a decent and admirable president. To the right, he is the patron saint of conservatism, the icon every Republican bows down to, every right wing politician tries to imitate.
One thing that can be said of Reagan is that he was an original. That, more than anything is what captured the imagination of the American public.
Ever since then, however, much less original and less talented Republicans politicians have relied on tricks to stay in power. These tricks have included carefully crafted, focus group tested words and talking points, clever advertising, their own television network, and dominance of the talk radio market with propaganda.
For years, Democrats have been flustered with the success of politicians they consider wrong headed in terms of policies that are bad for the majority of Americans. And so Dems have tried to hire better advertising firms. They tried to jump ahead with technology. They started their own think tanks and tried to put together their own buzz words and talking points and they even ventured unsuccessfully into talk radio. None of this really worked. Even Bill Clinton wouldn't have been elected had it not been for the entrance of Ross Perot into the race and the recession that George H. W. Bush ignored. Bill Clinton may have been a good president, but he didn't interrupt the Republican machine.
Then along came Barack Obama, the most unique and original politician since Ronald Reagan, to capture the imagination and the trust of the American people. Sure he had good advertising companies making good commercials. And he had good speechwriters and good policy proposals. But more than anything else Barack Obama was a unique and new person on the political stage when the American people were ready for change. As for the Republicans - their old reliance on the ghost of Ronald Reagan to carry them to success one more time didn't work. The voters are younger now and many don't even remember Ronald Reagan, whose ghost has finally been exorcised.
So now the Republicans are humorously engaging in "me-tooism." Or at least some of them are. A group of them is engaging in wing-nuttery this weekend at the CPAC conference in Washington D.C., talking about revolution. But the mainstream of the Republican Party has, for the past year or so, engaged in "me-tooism," trying to imitate the appearance of the leaders of the Democratic Party.
Seeing the popularity of Hillary Clinton in the presidential primary, even though she lost, they decided to imitate the Dems by nominating a woman to be their vice presidential candidate. Somehow they thought this would woo over all the women in the Democratic Party, angry that their candidate lost. What it did instead, because Democratic women are smarter than that, was make them angry and determined to vote Democratic. Democratic women looked at Sarah Palin, and to paraphrase Lloyd Bentson, said "Governor, you're no Hillary Clinton."
Then Republicans elected Michael Steele to be their national chairman. Steele, a rare African American Republican, immediately said he was going to woo all those hip hop voters and prove to them how cool the GOP could be. Republicans not only think a woman is a woman is a woman, they also think a black man is a black man is a black man. Apparently they must believe the only reason people voted for Barack Obama is because of the color of his skin. That would be akin to saying the only reason people voted for Reagan was because he was an actor. It would be denying the talent of the politician and the message he represents.
Finally, me-tooism was evident in the response to the president's address to Congress by Bobby Jindal. The set imitated the White House press conference venue, and the choice of a dark-skinned speaker was their way of saying "See, we have a blackish guy too."
The Republicans are where the Democrats were for the past thirty years: in the wilderness, unable to compete. But the Dems were in the wilderness because they couldn't overcome the stagecraft, the talking points, the propaganda, the advertising slogans - the outward trickery - of the Republicans.
The Republicans, on the other hand, are in the wilderness because they have no ideas, because Ronald Reagan no longer captivates younger voters, and because they think all they have to do is imitate the outward appearances of the Democrats.
The difference, of course, is that the Democrats are sincere in their embrace of minorities and women for public office, and in their search for real ideas. Republican ideas, which once seemed fresh, have all failed.
All they can do now is play "me-too."
