tip off

Local lessons from the US: social issues really count

The US elections reflect how important social issues can be in the hands of deft politicians. Barack Obama successfully tapped into minority issues and progressive values.

There are parallels for Australia in the results of the US elections this week, not so much in the race for the White House but in some of the smaller races in the Senate and state polls where gay rights and women succeeded and influenced the votes in unprecedented numbers.

At the same time, right-wing billionaires couldn’t spend their way to a Republican victory. Rupert Murdoch and his Fox News attack dogs failed to have an impact; all the billions raised and wasted by America’s mega rich — from the reclusive billionaire Koch brothers (who have financed much of the anti-Obama and pro-Tea Party campaigning in recent years) to Mitt Romney’s biggest individual backer in ancient gambling mogul Sheldon Adelson — went for nought. Old white conservative billionaires lost, and lost badly.

One of the common messages is that Obama succeeded despite a weak economy and high unemployment. And yet, as The Guardian reported, exit polls say otherwise:

Early exit polls showed the economy was the dominant issue for voters, with four out of 10 saying the economy was getting better — more than in 2008. Forty-six per cent said the country was headed in the right direction, while 52% said it was on the wrong track. More than half of those surveyed blamed the economic mess on George W Bush.”

Those same polls recorded eight out of 10 voters as having made up their minds by September, meaning neither the presidential debates nor Sandy played a key role.

Drill down into the other elections in the US and there was, as the conservative UK Telegraph admitted, a massive turn towards a liberal America on Tuesday on issues like gay marriage, cannabis and healthcare, plus the election of Tammy Baldwin, America’s first openly gay senator, Wisconsin.

Then there were gender issues. The outrageous r-pe comments by GOP candidates in Missouri and Indiana, and the increasingly hardline anti-choice views held right up to the top of the Republican Party (Paul Ryan), plus the deliberate targeting of female voters by the Obama campaign, mean women were a major force. Obama recorded a 10 percentage point margin among female voters, a huge gender gap. Elizabeth Warren, the new Democratic Senator in  Massachusetts, who beat Tea Party favourite Scott Brown, had an 18 percentage point margin among women.

But no one would have expected the clean sweep by female candidates in New Hampshire, where the state’s two seats in the House of Representatives and two seats in the Senate are now all occupied by women — the first time a US state has sent an all-female delegation to Washington. And the state governor will be a women from 2013. New Hampshire used to be a right-wing bastion with the state’s main paper, the Union Leader and its owner, William Loeb, considered kingmakers among conservative Republicans.

Before this election there were 17 female senators in Congress. If all the late counts go the way they were going on Tuesday night, they will be joined by six more, taking their number to the highest ever, 23. The newcomers will be Democrats and seemingly more in tune with what America really thinks than what the media says it is.

And then there were the votes from Latinos. Latinos are the fastest growing-segment of the US population. Their share of the vote expanded from 9% in 2008 to 10% in this election. The president won 67% of the vote four years ago — that increased to 71% this year. As CNN reported:

Latinos were crucial in helping Obama win the battleground states of Colorado and Nevada, and in putting the president in the lead for Florida’s 29 electoral votes. And they were just as important in turning the former swing state of New Mexico into what appears to be an increasingly safe state for the Democrats.”

Indeed, some polling may have been wrong because of the failure to poll in Spanish as well. For Latinos, the issue of immigration looms large, meaning Republicans — who, with some exceptions like Jeb Bush (and his brother George) aside, want punitive hardline measures against illegal immigration — will increasingly struggle.

There are some lessons for Australia in all this. Even if social issues like gay marriage and gender issues like reproductive choice don’t rank as high, they have a disproportionate symbolic value and are potent weapons when it comes to characterising political opponents. Democrats successfully charged Republicans with waging “a war on women”, no matter how often Romney castigated GOP candidates who made light of r-pe. Here, too, Tony Abbott has been the target of a highly-successful campaign by Labor to typecast him as a s-xist, and Julia Gillard appeared to catch lightning in a bottle with that speech on misogyny that cut through like nothing has for most of this parliamentary term.

The power of conservative media figures is overrated and in decline. Rupert Murdoch has remained silent since Obama won, although perhaps Donald Trump was channeling him when he tweeted a demand for revolution in outrage at the result. Murdoch’s news arms, at least in Anglophone countries, are aimed at older white conservatives, particularly men — while this might work as a business model for electronic media, as a model for political influence its limitations are becoming clearer.

The old, white, wealthy male, shrilly outraged that his traditionally unchallenged right to dictate to the rest of society is under attack, looks an increasingly isolated figure.

There is much for local conservatives to contemplate in the wake of the US elections. Little of it is good.

13
  • 1
    The Pav
    Posted Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    I am an old , wealthy white male (OWWM) and Murdoch et al do not represent me not=r does Alan Jones and his ilk.

    I suspect OWWM’s are not all as the article suggests but the pperception created by a couple of prominent ones

    Being an OWWM does not eradicate one’s social conscience

  • 2
    klewso
    Posted Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Murdoch has balancing competition for “edited news high-lights” there.

  • 3
    SusieQ
    Posted Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

    It was so much fun watching Fox News for even just a few minutes yesterday to see the disappointment and the bitterness……..

  • 4
    Salamander
    Posted Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

    It’s reassuring to know that mad politics in a “democracy” can finally go too far so that eventually reality bites! The extreme right wing might have finally overreached itself in the insanity of the Tea Party. In spite of the House of Reps, it looks a bit more hopeful to me.

  • 5
    Tom Jones
    Posted Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

    What is interesting is how similar the views about women are with those held by the Taliban. Almost a mirror image except that women of the old rich white men are allowed to be seen and heard if they are saying how great said men are.

  • 6
    Wayne Carveth
    Posted Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 11:05 pm | Permalink

    Barack Obama’s re-election was a relief. The humiliation of Rupert Murdoch & Donald Trump was pleasure.

  • 7
    beachcomber
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 12:02 am | Permalink

    There is much for local conservatives to contemplate in the wake of the US elections. Little of it is good.” Especially not for Abbott.

    Obama won with massive unemployment, minimal growth and a looming financial crisis, none of which Gillard is burdened with.

    Social issues are an albatross around Abbott’s neck, and he can’t shrug them off. He will now be replaced in the New Year.

  • 8
    MJPC
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    I am surprised that this article did not broach the subject of the GFC and the matter that Romney (and his teaparty supporters) represented everything bad about capitalism. I believe that rampant capitalism is a failed philosophy in the US, because the GFC showed that the ordinary worker in the US was roundly taken to the cleaners and the big end of town was again bailed out, even though their greed bought the world economy to the brink of world wide depression.
    Why would any sane voter in the US vote for a party that’s sole reason d’entre is to lower the tax for the rich and shaft the poor. President Obama, despite his faults, still offered hope for the working poor and unemployed in the US, something the Republicans never did except for their fellow travellers (remember Mitt’s recorded speech to the big end of town). The Replicans deserved to lose and I too am glad they did.
    I concur with beachcomber, this is a wake up call for those who would suggest Mr Abbott for PM. The ordinary Australian has a greater social conscience that voters in the US, and the Labour party will learn a lot from the US experience.

  • 9
    klewso
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    MJPC - because they’re not all “sane” (running on prejudice, fed as that is, for the political ends of others, and afraid to have that “infallability” - reinforced as it is - challenged), but they are allowed to vote?

    Murdoch’s politicsised edited view of reality, here, isn’t in competition, and thus balanced, as much as it is there - their Conservatively bent, heavily “edited high-lights” control, from it’s market share of perception-shaping, still dominates our media and our “news”.

  • 10
    CHRISTOPHER DUNNE
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    Romney garnered just 2 million more votes than McCain, which was clearly not enough and completely failed to see the turnout for Obama would be very strong. In other words they constructed a bubble of falsehoods, fashioned out of their near religious conviction in their cause and little else. Here was the ‘word’s greatest CEO’ surrounding himself with yes men, arming himself with discredited ‘trickle down economics’ and an alarming ignorance of who America is today. Today, America is not the America of the 1950’s, and Mitt Romney just spent hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to find that out the hard way.

    Republicans can either choose to join the country or secede. My hunch is they will try the latter first.

  • 11
    klewso
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    I find myself wondering if all this “obscene spending” on promotion, isn’t closely related to the sort of biased publicity the politicised media generates, and the slighted party has to counter (then their opposition has to match). The sort of spending that so benefits those controlling the medium, the “politicised media”?

    To whit :- “The more you bad-mouth a party, the more they have to spend in your viewspapers, with your market-share, to counter the negative PR you’re generating!”?

  • 12
    Dogs breakfast
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    Don’t worry Pav, I’m white, male, not quite old but getting there and hoping to be richer, but rich by many standards, and I’m with you.

    The point is not that all OWWM’s are these selfish gorging neanderthals, but that a section of them that coincides nicely with the obscenely wealthy fit the stereotype.

    And it is more about those obscenely wealthy in the US, and their conservative viewpoints.

    But they don’t represent us, and we don’t fit with them. Not all of us OWWM’s are beyond help.

  • 13
    Malcolm Street
    Posted Friday, 9 November 2012 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    Christopher - “Republicans can either choose to join the country or secede. My hunch is they will try the latter first.”

    I see parallels between the current polarisation in the US and the similar polarisation (combined with increasingly outrageous behaviour by the South) leading up to the Civil War. I can’t see any way the Tea Party will accommodate itself to reality. I don’t expect another Civil War, but I expect the logical extension of the process for the states that are Tea Party strongholds to look at secession.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...