The word that changed the 2008 election

Posted on by

A month ago on January 4th, the morning after Mike Huckabee won the Iowa caucus (the first one), I sent the following email off to a group of friends that I discuss politics with:

One word: Macaca. Imagine how differently this election would have been if George Allen hadn’t uttered that word. The fact that he’d be running right now is certain. He was the only potential Republican candidate that appealed to fiscal conservatives, national security conservatives, and religious conservatives. None of the current crop of Republican candidates can boast that wide appeal, which is why the Dems are sitting pretty. And it is all because of “Macaca.”

We have only to look at the Super Tuesday results map to show what happens when the base of the Republican party gets split in three. Huckabee took the religious South, McCain carried the national security conservatives and Romney the economic conservatives. This morning the Washington Post also started thinking about former Senator George Allen and how everything might have been different for the Republicans if it wasn’t for our boy S.R. Sidharth:

As Virginia voters prepare to go to the polls Tuesday to help choose the Republican nominee for president, state and national party leaders are left wondering: What if former senator George Allen had never uttered the word “macaca”?

After years of preparing for a 2008 presidential run, including trips to Iowa and New Hampshire and formation of a national network of donors, Allen’s use of the word on Aug. 11, 2006, changed the landscape of the GOP nominating contest… “A lot of us saw him as the 1,000-pound gorilla. He would have had so much clout and credibility within the party around the country,” said Chuck Smith, chairman of the Virginia Beach Republican Party.

Other Republicans say Allen would have been far from a shoo-in for the nomination despite his potential advantages. As the race heated up last summer, President Bush’s approval ratings were plunging to record lows among GOP voters frustrated over his immigration policies and his management of the war in Iraq.

With his signature cowboy boys and “aw shucks” personality, Allen could have been defined as the candidate most like Bush, some Republican strategists say.[Link]

The next time you think that one person can’t make a difference in politics, thing again 🙂

Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte (R-Va) said: “One of the problems with each of the Republican presidential candidates this year is each of them doesn’t connect with all segments of the party. Allen would have been able to do that…” Republican strategist Alex Vogel said that, were it not for the “macaca” remark, Allen would have had a major advantage on the campaign trail. “The fact is, George Allen comes across as a regular guy, and he had an amazing ability to connect with the people,” Vogel said. [Link]

But also remember that most politicians get a second chance. Allen could be back one day after he’s done laying low in the “Real World of Virgina.”

15 thoughts on “The word that changed the 2008 election”

  1. Actually, it might have worked out for the best for the Republican party. I think George Allen would have been crushed by either Clinton or Obama. As it stands, it looks like they’ll wind up nominating their most electable candidate more or less by default.

  3. Abhi, you’re prescient 🙂

    I really think Allen would have had a hard time in the general election. The appeal of Romney, McCain, and Huckabee, is that they pull voters who are typically non-aligned (i.e., their primary political identity is not rooted in party support, but in other issues that sometimes align with the Repubs) or independents. I really think Allen wouldn’t have been able to draw those bases out in the same way. But what do I know — my sense of reality is skewed. 🙂

  4. As Virginia voters prepare to go to the polls Tuesday to help choose the Republican nominee for president, state and national party leaders are left wondering: What if former senator George Allen had never uttered the word “macaca”

    Yes, it is sorely needed for the Republican party to question itself, “What if we weren’t racist?”

  5. Yes, it is sorely needed for the Republican party to question itself, “What if we weren’t racist?”

    Or if people didnt KNOW that they are. 🙂

    I have an idea .. we should inject a few persistent mullet (or mohawk?) sporting ABD/DBDs with handheld video cameras on the republican campaign trail and see who screams MACACA first. Any volunteers?

    I keed, I keed. Dont get worked up, my republican brothahs. I love republicans. Some of my best friends are republicans.

  6. Romney is not winning among economic conservatives. The exit polls have clearly showed it’s McCain who is counterintuitively winning among that group. Romney is winning heavily among the anti-McCain republicans or as I like to collectively call them the motherfucking immigrant-hating global warming -denying bigot base of the GOP.

  7. Today from LaShawn Barber (regarding racists in the Republican Party):

    Digging Up Democratic Skeletons

    Democrats, seen as the civil rights party, supported slavery, opposed civil rights legislation, instituted the “Black Codes,” and created the Jim Crow system. The Republican Party, in contrast, was founded in opposition to slavery, and supported post-Civil War and Civil Rights Movement-era legislation. “All of the racism that we associate with [the southern] region of the country originated with and was enforced by elected Democrats,” writes Bruce Bartlett, a former domestic policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan and a Treasury official under President George H.W. Bush. In Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past, Bartlett goes deep into the history of the Democratic Party and attempts to set the record straight.

  8. 7 · effendi said

    Today from LaShawn Barber (regarding racists in the Republican Party): Digging Up Democratic Skeletons
    Democrats, seen as the civil rights party, supported slavery, opposed civil rights legislation, instituted the “Black Codes,” and created the Jim Crow system. The Republican Party, in contrast, was founded in opposition to slavery, and supported post-Civil War and Civil Rights Movement-era legislation. “All of the racism that we associate with [the southern] region of the country originated with and was enforced by elected Democrats,” writes Bruce Bartlett, a former domestic policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan and a Treasury official under President George H.W. Bush. In Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past, Bartlett goes deep into the history of the Democratic Party and attempts to set the record straight.

    This is so silly. Parties undergo re-alignment all the time. The Democratic Party, especially in the South, was historically the conservative party. The actual party label is immaterial. The gains of the civil rights movement are credited to, among many, many others, progressive-minded people in both the Democratic and Republican Party. Oh, and many of those southern Democrats are now Republicans. 😉

  9. effendi, that sort of tendentious article completely ignores the realignment of the parties that took place in the 60s. Many of those Democrats who supported segregation and Jim Crow laws switched to the Republican party (Strom Thurmond being the prime example). What’s more realistic: that the Democratic party has successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of minorities (especially African-Americans) for 40 years? Or that those minorities accurately perceive where their interests lie?

  10. Democratic party has successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of minorities (especially African-Americans) for 40 years?

    How else can one explain blacks voting for a party which destroyed the black family with its welfare programs?

  11. “All of the racism that we associate with [the southern] region of the country originated with and was enforced by elected Democrats,” writes Bruce Bartlett, a former domestic policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan and a Treasury official under President George H.W. Bush. In Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past, Bartlett goes deep into the history of the Democratic Party and attempts to set the record straight.

    “Sure, we might be racists now, but look at them, they were racists a 100 years ago even if they aren’t today.”

  12. How else can one explain blacks voting for a party which destroyed the black family with its welfare programs?

    Pay attention everyone. Contrary to popular belief, this is what is known as “begging the question.” Next time someone asks you what that phrase means, feel free to point to mark‘s quotation.

  13. Allen says “macaca” and Republicans reject him. Hillary says of Gandhi “He ran a gas station down in St. Louis.” She gets a pass and all Republicans get smeared as racists.

    The link

  14. 13 · effendi said

    Allen says “macaca” and Republicans reject him. Hillary says of Gandhi “He ran a gas station down in St. Louis.” She gets a pass and all Republicans get smeared as racists. The link

    They didn’t reject him. Republicans campaigned hard for him in ’06, and he introduced McCain at the CPAC conference today. Do you get tired of raising strawmen?

  15. The same word – monkey – nearly caused a diplomatic incident between India and australia . Time to retire Monkey and all its variants.