Republican Counterattack

In too many races the outcome will turn on ads not issues.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


While most of the political pros have already awarded control of the House to the Democrats, with several thinking the Senate also will go that way, too, they are busily reassessing the race as the final countdown begins.

In general, the pros believe the Republican “firewall” — that is, Virginia, Tennessee, and Missouri — is holding. In Tennessee, where Bill Frist’s Senate seat is up for grabs, Bob Corker, the Republican candidate, is thought to have turned his lackluster campaign around. He is now in position to beat Rep. Harold Ford Jr., the darling of the Democratic Party, who, the media is fond of pointing out, would be the first black Senator to represent a southern state since Reconstruction.

As ludicrous as it may seem, the Republicans are gaining ground by sliming Ford as a scandalous playboy, publicizing the fact that he attended a Playboy Super Bowl party in 2005. (Ford’s reasoned response: “I like football, and I like girls.”) In a new attack ad, funded by the Republican National Committee, a fetching white actress talks about partying, saying at the end, “Harold, call me.’’ She then winks. The ad was pulled yesterday. One would think using the old black-man-with-white-woman ploy had outlived its usefulness, but apparently not. Remember how J. Edgar Hoover put out stories about Martin Luther King Jr.’s behavior with Scandinavian beauties? And you couldn’t go anywhere near Jesse Jackson in his presidential campaign in 1988 without hearing gossip about his latest supposed white girlfriend.

In Virginia, though George Allen’s “macaca” moment opened the door for a slew of allegations about his racist behavior toward blacks in the past, this probably hasn’t hurt him much with many of Virginia’s white voters — that is, those outside the northern Virginia suburbs, near Washington. As it stands, Allen is still is up 4 or 5 points over his democratic opponent Jim Webb, Ronald Reagan’s former Secretary of the Navy who went on to become a journalist and author.

In Missouri, where stem cell research is a high stakes issue, Republican Jim Talent is holding a slim lead over Claire McCaskill. (She’s for stem cell research, he’s against it.) There, the Democrats recently ran an ad featuring Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease, that set off a national controversy earlier this week (see below). Stem cell opponents unveiled their own celebrity-laden ad during World Series last night, which features, among other sports stars, St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Jeff Suppan.

Currently, the pollsters think both Missouri and Tennessee will stay Republican, with Virginia quite probably doing the same. Bob Novak, who liberals love to hate but who is among the more adroit political journalists in Washington, thinks the Republicans will hold on to the Senate, but lose the House by a slim margin of four or five votes.

When it comes to issues, the one with the most traction is neither the war or Bush’s record — the two that have been most widely publicized in the press — but stem cell research. Rush Limbaugh’s crude remarks about Michael J. Fox drew a broad hostile reaction. (On his radio program Limbaugh told his 10 million listeners that Fox “was either off his medication or acting. He is an actor after all.” He later apologized.)

Ads featuring people with life threatening diseases that might be cured by research using stem cells have turned this issue into a much wider discussion of medical practices, embracing all sorts of situations relating to life and death, health and privacy.

Abortion doesn’t seem to be much of an issue this year, unlike previous election cycles. And the Foley scandal isn’t having a tremendous impact in most races. As for Iraq, politicians across the board don’t like the war but don’t want to go on the record saying what to do, save for some brave souls who express vague notions about an exit strategy. People don’t like Bush, but seem scared of taking him on directly. In too many places, the outcome of the election will hinge on perceptions not issues, on who can devise the most effective slimeball ads.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate