Readers advise GOP: Change now -- July 18, 2013 column

By MARSHA MERCER

Last month, I asked readers how the GOP could freshen its appeal to young voters and avoid another presidential election drubbing. Today we’ll hear their advice.

  

“Change. Develop and implement policies that benefit young voters. Reduce student loan costs and or the need for student loans,” wrote David Browning of North Chesterfield, Va., in a letter to the editor of the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Browning had other good ideas but let’s stop at student loans. Congress has been stymied trying to roll back interest rate hikes on new Stafford student loans, which doubled this month to 6.8 percent. This week, there were signs of progress. Senators of both parties agreed Wednesday on a deal to lower rates temporarily, and the White House indicated President Obama would go along. Look for action before the August recess.

   

A reader named Robert who described himself as an “old time, left out Republican” emailed me to say that Republicans have “forgotten their roots: Lincoln. Roosevelt. Eisenhower, and the good side of Nixon…the Republicans need to be born again.”

He advised:  “Tune out the radio talking heads and turn off Fox TV. Young voters are interested in jobs, education and the environment. They believe in science. They have gone to school with other races and with immigrants. They know gays and lesbians…Young people cannot relate to the racist, homophobic, anti-immigrant attitude of many of the GOP leaders.”

There’s a lot to think about in that one paragraph, but immigration tops the list for a successful Republican future.

The Republican National Committee’s “Growth and Opportunity Project” report released earlier this year said Republicans must “embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform” if they’re to have any hope of attracting minority voters. Young voters also overwhelmingly favor changes in immigration policy.

Among 18- to 29-year-old voters, 68 percent say illegal immigrants should be given a chance for legal status and only 28 percent favor deportation, the Pew Research Center reported after analyzing exit polls from the 2012 election.

Voters under 30 are the most ethnically and racially diverse of any age group, says Pew. The share of  young voters who are white has declined 16 percent since 2000. Back then, 74 percent of voters between the ages of 18 and 29 identified themselves as white. By 2012, whites were 58 percent of the voters under 30. 

Eighteen percent of voters under 30 said they were Hispanic, 17 percent African American and 7 percent mixed race.

   

So, while some analysts say the GOP hasn’t tapped out on white voters and could still win elections by attracting more whites, a single-race strategy is more than a bad idea. It’s also likely a short-term one.   

Ethnic diversity is as American as tacos, but House Republicans have stalled efforts to pass immigration reform -- comprehensive or piecemeal. Supporters of reform are talking about a major push to sway House members during the August recess, Aug. 5 to Sept. 9. If they’re successful, watch for votes in September.    

What besides a change in policy might Republicans do to attract young voters? A reader named Mary proposed a marketing campaign to rebrand the party: train candidates in the art of public speaking and language, divide the “market” into special interest groups and appeal to each group with buzz words, and build relationships with public figures.

That sounds promising, except that the rising young stars in the GOP – Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, 43; Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida, both 42, and Rand Paul, 50 – appeal to right-wing believers, not to a new target audience.   

Freshman Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., 36, has wowed conservatives by condemning a path to citizenship and any compromise on immigration. Cotton has “the poise of Bill Clinton but the politics of Rush Limbaugh,” Robert Costa wrote in National Review Online.

Democrats like to say the new breed of Republicans has young faces and old ideas. The GOP may need to be born again politically but change will be a tough sell to the Republican base, especially if change smells like retreat. Here’s one more reader’s advice:  

Republicans should simply “cite facts, logic and history” to young voters, the man wrote, adding, “And for God’s sake don’t apologize – for ANYTHING!”

© 2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

Not like us --why distrust of D.C. causes bipartisan pain -- July 11, 2013

By MARSHA MERCER

What’s the difference between Washington and everywhere else? Here’s a quick take from a corporate executive who knows from experience.   

“Growing up in New Hampshire and being a CEO, I always felt like what I thought, what I said and what I did had to be the same thing,” says David M. Cote, chairman and chief executive of Honeywell International. 

“In government, that’s three separate decisions.”

In Washington, “what they say isn’t necessarily what they think, and what they do isn’t necessarily what they say or think,” says Cote, who noted that Washington operates at a level of “complexity” beyond any he has dealt with in the business world. He sat for an interview last month at a Wall Street Journal breakfast.

I would argue that not doing what one says is duplicity, not complexity, but let’s not quibble. Cote hit on a truth so obvious it made me want to slap my forehead. He learned as a member of the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles fiscal responsibility commission how to translate Washington-speak and understand how politicians triangulate their thoughts, words and deeds.

Cote, the lifelong Republican, said he once walked out of a meeting with a pol who had said, “I’m with you, Dave.” Cote turned to his staff guy and said, “What a great meeting!”  

“He’s not with us,” his guy replied and explained why what the pol said wasn’t really what he meant. Cote had a lot to learn.

Some corporate suits named to presidential commissions just make one appearance or so – they’re busy, after all, with their day jobs. But Cote arranged his schedule so he could show up every time the commission met, an accomplishment that only he, Simpson and Bowles managed. He learned not to take what pols say at face value – certainly not until there’s a deal they can start talking about. Why, he says, would a savvy pol go out on a limb and upset constituents prematurely?

When the Simpson-Bowles commission considered raising the age of eligibility for Social Security by one year 75 years in the future, left-leaning groups rose in mighty opposition, ludicrously claiming that the commission was robbing the old. Eventually, Congress must deal with the long-term future of boomer-burdened Social Security and Medicare. The longer we wait, the more likely we hurt current beneficiaries.   

Even though Congress should deal with the future of Medicare and Medicaid now, the more likely scenario is that Congress will lurch forward, crisis to crisis, Cote says.

There are “some really smart, well-meaning people” in Washington, Cote says, and, yes, there are also dolts. “I’ve had times when I’ve looked at someone and said, ‘You can’t possibly believe what you just said.’”Haven’t we all?

Cote’s trenchant remarks help explain why it’s so hard for voters to trust anyone in Washington. President Barack Obama shocked many on his side when he delayed parts of the Affordable Care Act, and that was merely the latest in a series of disappointments for liberal supporters.

House Majority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., promises that the House will take up a package of bills before the end of the month aimed at addressing the trust deficit in Washington. Among these is a bizarre  measure allowing people to record their conversations with some federal officials – although not with members of Congress.

If the House and Senate can’t agree on substantive legislation, like the Farm Bill and how to avoid doubling the interest rates on new student loans, political grandstanding hardly will shore up the people’s trust.

If Dave Cote is right, the problem for the next presidential candidate -- Republican and Democratic –is deeper than something a jazzy PR campaign can fix. Voters need to believe we can rely on what politicians say as a guide to what they’ll do. That’s not too much to ask. Anything less adds to the already significant distrust of Washington and that will keep voters home on Election Day.

 © 2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

Summer's almost over -- think local -- July 3, 2013 column

By MARSHA MERCER

I have it on good authority that the economy is improving. Auto sales are the best they’ve been in five years. House sales over the last year have jumped by double digits. And the entire American population is on vacation.

OK, I made up that last one, but, seriously, doesn’t it feel like August in France?

My neighbors are staying cool on the Maine coast, meeting Mickey at Disney World and nibbling croissants in Paris. Facebook friends post endless pictures of their road trips out west, mountain vistas,  celebrity-sightings in London and bridges in Rome.

   

I’m home, and I’m OK with that. Really.

   

I’m glad my friends are having fun, and their absence makes driving on the Beltway if not fonder, at least more bearable.

   

I too made summer plans: I’d garden and lose myself in “War and Peace,” finally. I researched translations in May but haven’t actually gotten the book. To whet my whistle, I ordered the 1956 movie starring Audrey Hepburn and Henry Fonda. Get this: It’s 3 ½ hours long. People’s attention spans must have been longer back then. I’ll just return it and reorder when the nights are long.

Gardening has been more pain than pleasure because a low pressure system has held the East Coast in its grasp for weeks, breeding heat, humidity, monsoon rains, ginormous mushrooms and a bumper crop of weeds. The weather is demoralizing, and don’t get me started on Congress, the president and the Supreme Court.

To escape the full monty of Washington malaise, a friend and I dodged raindrops Sunday and got in the car with a map of Virginia’s scenic byways. We drove into the summer afternoon, destination unknown.

Less than 40 minutes from the nation’s dysfunctional capital, the skies lightened and we found winding roads, green rolling hills, stone walls, rail fences, canopies of trees, horses, black angus cattle and more historic markers than you could want.

    

While others fought the crowds at the 150^th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg, we drove the nearly deserted Snickersville Turnpike, State Route 734, a road that hasn’t changed much since George Washington traveled it as a lad. We stopped atop a quiet hill at a monument to the 1st Massachusetts Cavalry that suffered grievous losses on June 17, 1863, in the Battle of Aldie, a fight on the armies’ march to Gettysburg.

Visitors today see a drowsy field and barn and a stone wall. But behind that wall, Confederate sharpshooters knelt and fired on an approaching Union cavalry column. Massachusetts lost 198 of 294 men, and the names of the fallen are inscribed on the granite marker, erected in 1891 by the First Massachusetts Cavalry Association.

It’s easy to overlook the history in your own backyard, but close to home you can change your perspective without worrying about the exchange rate. A road taken can lead to learning new things.

I looked up the Battle of Aldie later and found this sad description of the battle’s toll. Confederate Col. Thomas Munford wrote, “I do not hesitate to say that I have never seen as many Yankees killed at the same space of ground in any fight I have ever seen, or on any battlefield in Virginia that I have been over.”

Back on the road, we stopped in the city of Winchester, with its magnificent library. We wandered the newly renovated Old Town pedestrian mall, where kids cooled off in a splash pad, a young man played guitar and sang Beatles tunes, his guitar case open for contributions, and in true American fashion diners enjoyed sushi, Thai and Mexican food.  

We followed our noses to a barbecue joint – the aroma from the two BBQ smokers out front was irresistible -- and washed down smoked pork with sweet tea at a communal table.   

At the city’s visitor center, I mentioned our delicious lunch to one of the friendly women behind the counter.

“Did you have dessert?” she asked.  We had not. She shook her head.

“The chocolate cake,” she said with a sigh, “is the best I’ve ever had out.”  

Summer may be running away, but it’s not gone yet. We can go back. That’s the virtue of staying close to home.

© 2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

Act II for voting rights -- June 27, 2013 column

By MARSHA MERCER

“Voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. declared in his Supreme Court opinion that nevertheless shredded part of the federal voting rights safety net.

By a 5-4 vote, Roberts and the four other justices nominated by Republican presidents effectively ended nearly 50 years of federal oversight on voting practices in mostly Southern states that had a history of discrimination.

The court said that times have changed and racial progress has made outdated the decades-old formula Congress used to decide which states had to submit their election law changes in advance.  Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined Roberts in the majority opinion.

You won’t be surprised that the four justices appointed by Democratic presidents saw the case, Shelby County v. Holder, much differently.

“Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in a stinging dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Now what? Until Tuesday, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 required the states of Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia and Alaska to submit changes in their election laws to the federal government. Parts of California, Florida, Michigan, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota were also required to do so.

Today, those states and localities no longer have to “beseech” – Roberts’ word -- the government for approval. Several states said they’d move quickly to put in place strict new voter ID laws.

Attorney General Eric Holder says the Justice Department will continue to monitor all states and to file lawsuits when questionable steps are taken. Lawsuits take years. Preclearance is a fairly quick process that puts the burden on jurisdictions to prove at the outset that their new election laws do not discriminate.  

The court challenged Congress to rewrite the law’s Section 4, which contains the formula identifying states needing preclearance. The smart money is on Congress to fail, once again, to do anything.  

If members of Congress can’t pass a farm bill or immigration legislation, and might well fight over whether the evening meal is called dinner or supper, how can they possibly agree on politically explosive standards for which states must get federal scrutiny of their election decisions?  

Yes, but…how can Congress NOT act – if the people demand it? It has happened before.

In August 1963, the March on Washington drew more than 200,000 in peaceful demonstration to the Lincoln Memorial. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his “I Have a Dream” speech.

After the march, King and other leaders went to the White House and talked with President John Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon Johnson about the need for bipartisan civil rights legislation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 eventually resulted.  

On the 50^th anniversary of the march and Dream speech, the civil rights community is planning five days of events in August in Washington Leaders say this won’t be a nostalgia trip but a call to restart the civil rights movement and to urge Congress to act on voting rights for the 21^st century.   

For the record, not everyone who has dealt with the preclearance rules has found them burdensome.

“I have generally found the process straightforward, and given the importance of voting, not onerous,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who served as Richmond’s mayor as well as lieutenant governor and governor in a state that had its share of civil rights issues.

Kaine suggested that until Congress acts, jurisdictions previously covered should continue to submit their election changes for preclearance to the Justice Department “as a sign to their own constituents that they are committed to ensuring equal voting rights.” Nice try.

But then Kaine was once a missionary.

The country is becoming more diverse, but members of Congress actually risk little politically if they fail to respond to racial diversity. The average House Republican district is 75 percent white while the average Democratic district is 51 percent white, according to the Cook Political Report. 

So here we are: Everybody agrees voting discrimination is still with us. Democrats and Republicans always say voting isn't a partisan issue. Prove it. Work together on new rules for preclearance and ensure that everybody eligible to vote can do so.

© 2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

30

 

  

Yes, 2016 is closer than you think -- June 20, 2013 column

By MARSHA MERCER

In his first summer as a lame duck president, Barack Obama has something in common with George W. Bush.

Obama’s job approval rating is only slightly higher than Bush’s 46 percent at this point in his presidency, June 2005. Obama’s popularity has been shaken by reports of the National Security Agency’s phone call tracking, which began in Bush’s term, and of IRS’s targeting tea party groups for special scrutiny, a scandal the Obama administration owns.   

Iowa’s presidential caucuses are still 30 months away, but potential candidates and party operatives are already moving to the next presidential contest. Eight years ago, Democrats were aching to regain the White House; now it’s the Republicans’ turn.

Among possible GOP candidates, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., Mitt Romney’s running mate last year, rates highest among Republican voters, while Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., and Sen. Mark Rubio, R-Fla., get higher marks from the general public, Gallup reports. Christie has had weight-loss surgery – for his physical, not his political, health, he insists.  

Democrats are talking enthusiastically about Hillary Clinton as the first woman president, just as they did eight years ago. Therein lies a cautionary tale.

Back in Summer 2005, Clinton was seen as formidable, if not yet inevitable. When Hillary Clinton appeared with Gov. Mark Warner of Virginia, Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, and Gov. Tom Vilsack of Iowa at a meeting of the Democratic Leadership Council, she stole the show. The DLC was a centrist group that had boosted Bill Clinton’s prospects for the White House, and Hillary Clinton was trying to squeeze her liberal foot into a moderate shoe.

Obama, a freshman senator from Illinois, had spoken eloquently at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, but Clinton and her fans thought him too inexperienced to win just four years later. Voters had other opinions.   

The country is even more polarized these days. Tea partiers push Republicans to the right, and Democrats drift left. The DLC closed its doors in 2011.

This time around, Vice President Joe Biden has Senate as well as one-heartbeat-away experience to be president. Clinton and her fans should recognize his potential vote-getting power.  

At the same time, the historical significance of the first woman president is huge. Clinton has distinguished herself as a loyal member of the Obama team and as the nation’s top diplomat. Republicans treat her like a frontrunner by attempting to tarnish her sterling reputation with questions about her role in the attack on the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which cost four American lives.

Clinton is 65 but she’s hardly ready to retire. Her next memoir is due out next June, and like her husband, she’s on the talk circuit.

When she spoke to the Economic Club of Grand Rapids, Mich., last Monday night, about 50 supporters outside waved “I’m Ready for Hillary” signs and chanted “Hill-a-ry, 20-16. Hill-a-ry, 20-16.” 

The Grand Rapids Press also reported that Clinton offered five rules for life in her speech, including:  “You can’t win if you don’t show up.” She was referring to the need to demonstrate to countries large and small that the United States values their friendship. But of course her remark added to the buzz about whether she will show up in 2016. Clinton hasn’t announced her plans, but almost everyone assumes she’s in.

The Ready for Hillary super PAC is hard at work building a grassroots draft movement. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., became the first member of Congress to jump on the Hillary bandwagon. McCaskill supported Obama early on for 2008. No fan of Bill Clinton, she said in 2006 she wouldn’t want him near her daughter. That was then.

Hillary Clinton could follow her husband’s lead and make money. Bill Clinton brought home $17 million in speaking fees from mid-January 2012 to mid-January 2013. He made 73 speeches at an average rate of $195,000 per speech, a CNN analysis of financial reports found. The former president has made a whopping $106 million in speaking fees since he left the White House.

Hillary Clinton has a new Twitter account. Her profile: “wife, mom, lawyer, women & kids advocate, FLOAR, FLOTUS, US Senator, SecState, author, dog owner, hair icon, pantsuit aficionado, glass ceiling cracker, TBD…” Humor is good.

Practically overnight, she attracted more than half a million followers, with more every minute.  

But Iowa is a long way off. Sometimes you don’t see trouble coming.     

© 2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

30

RX for states: Expand Medicaid -- June 13, 2013 column

By MARSHA MERCER 

“Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing – after they have exhausted all other possibilities,” Winston Churchill supposedly said.

Whether the remark reflected Churchill’s or someone else’s wit, we again are seeing Americans struggle over the right thing. This time the right thing is for every state to expand Medicaid, the joint federal-state health insurance program for the poor.  

Medicaid currently provides health care to about 59 million low-income people – mostly young children and their parents and pregnant women. It pays for long-term care for seniors in nursing homes and people with disabilities. Some states, like Massachusetts, expanded Medicaid coverage on their own.

In March 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act – a.k.a. Obamacare – which aims to bring affordable health care to most Americans no matter where they live.

The law is making significant changes. Next year, insurance companies can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing health conditions, and almost every American will have to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty. The law also required every state to expand Medicaid to cover people with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, about $26,000 for a family of three in 2013. The Congressional Budget Office said the Medicaid expansion would provide 16 million Americans with reliable health care.   

Republican state officials challenged the law in the courts. Last June, the Supreme Court upheld the law but said expanding Medicaid was a state option. Today 22 states and the District of Columbia are moving forward with the Medicaid expansion, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. These include California, Minnesota, New Jersey and New York.

About 20 states have rejected the expansion – at least for now. Among them are Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia. Eight other states around the country are still fighting it out.

In five Deep South states that have opted out – Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana and South Carolina – 62 percent of residents support the Medicaid expansion, a poll in March and April by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies found. The center is a public policy research group that focuses on African Americans.

Virginians were almost evenly split in March with 45 percent favoring expansion and 43 percent opposed, a Quinnipiac University poll reported.    

States that have rejected the expansion have some of the nation’s worst health records. America’s Health Rankings, an annual report by United Health Foundation, ranked Mississippi and Louisiana 49^{th,  --} the least healthy states. Alabama is 45^th and Virginia 21^st.

The states are forgoing “free” money. The federal government will foot 100 percent of Medicaid expansion costs from 2014 to 2016. Repayment will drop  to 90 percent in 2020 and level off after that. That’s a much better match than states currently have for Medicaid. The federal share ranges from 50 percent to 83 percent, with poorer states getting higher amounts per capita.   

Critics of expansion say they worry about unspecified costs down the road, and yet people without health insurance get health care every day in more costly hospital emergency rooms.    

A new Rand study of the first 14 states whose governors declared they would not expand Medicaid, including Alabama, found those states together would spend $1 billion more on uncompensated health care in 2016 than if they expanded Medicaid. The 14 states would give up $8.4 billion annually in federal payments, Rand said.

An analysis of state health data by the Los Angeles Times indicates that the states could use the help. Colon cancer deaths in states that oppose the Medicaid expansion are, on average, 16 percent higher than in states that support expansion, and deaths from breast cancer are 8 percent higher on average in states that oppose the expansion.

“Medicaid by itself may not close those gaps, which also reflect income and education disparities,” the paper reported, noting that conservatives argue that poor people would be helped more by alternative strategies that encourage people to take responsibility for their own health care.

States that don’t expand Medicaid still face other higher costs. Nationwide, only about two-thirds of people eligible have signed up for Medicaid, and the new health law includes a major outreach effort.

The fight over Medicaid is far from over. There’s no deadline for expansion, and supporters say they’ll be back in statehouses for the next legislative session. As they say in baseball, there’s always next year.

For now, though, it appears many states are determined to ignore the proverb and be “penny wise and pound foolish.”   

©2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

How can GOP win young voters? June 6, 2013 column

By MARSHA MERCER

After back-to-back presidential defeats, the Republican Party is obsessed with reinventing itself. Or, more accurately, it’s obsessed with talking about reinventing itself.

This is like someone who, having gained 25 pounds, debates the virtues of various diets while lying on the couch, eating junk food. It’s a first step, but a tiny one.

   

Poor Bob Dole had the temerity to say that this isn’t his Republican party. Nearly 90, the former senator and Republican presidential nominee said last month that he doubted whether he, Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan could even be nominated for president by the current party.

“I think they ought to put a sign on the (Republican National) Committee doors that says ‘Closed for Repairs,’” and spend the next six months coming up with a positive agenda, Dole said on Fox News Sunday.

Conservatives pounced, calling Dole old, irrelevant and worse. Eventually, though, status-quo Republicans may be forced to hear the wake-up calls. Yes, plural.

  

 In March, a Republican task force commissioned by Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus warned in its “Growth and Opportunity Project” report that the party has marginalized itself and risks future presidential losses unless it makes changes.  Among the problems is age. 

“Young people are increasingly rolling their eyes at what the party represents…When someone rolls their eyes at us, they are not likely to open their ears to us,” the report said.

Reagan may be a beloved GOP icon, but no one under the age of 51 was old enough to vote for him when he first ran for president, the report noted, adding, “Our party knows how to appeal to older voters, but we have lost our way with younger ones.” 

It’s even worse than that.

When voters under 30 were asked what words they associate with “Republican Party,” they responded: closed-minded, racist, rigid, old-fashioned.

And the Democratic Party? Soft, said some, but most picked tolerant, diverse and open-minded.

These are findings from a new report by the College Republican National Committee. The committee analyzed voter polls and conducted its own focus groups and survey of voters under 30 for “Grand Old Party for a Brand New Generation.” The report calls on Republicans to turn the GOP brand around, update their tech presence and rethink their policies.

Young people have been voting Democratic for president since 1992, so long that it may seem the natural order. President Barack Obama won 5 million more votes of people under 30 than Mitt Romney did last year, and that was enough to ensure Obama’s victory, despite Romney’s winning 2 million more votes of people over 30.

 

It wasn’t always this way. In 1972, the first presidential election when 18-year-olds could vote, 52 percent of voters under 30 cast ballots for Richard Nixon. Ronald Reagan won 59 percent of young voters in 1984, and George W. Bush lost young voters by just 2 points in 2000 – while losing seniors 65 and more than 4 points.

Democrats should not enjoy the Republicans’ dilemma too much.  It’s not that young people love Democrats, the college Republicans report. It’s that young people hate Republicans more.

At the start of their survey, the College Republicans’ researchers asked young voters to complete two non-political sentences: “I hope people see me as…” And “I hope people never see me as…” They were given a long list of attributes.This was before any mention of politics, and the idea was to get a sense of what the young people valued. 

Interestingly, the most common answer to “I hope people see me as…” was intelligent, followed by caring and hardworking. Way down the list were creative, unique, adventurous and cool.

And “I hope people never see me as…” stupid. Lazy and incompetent were close behind.  Farther down were closed-minded, negative and unhelpful.  

“For the GOP, being thought of as closed-minded is hardly a good thing. But if the GOP is thought of as the “stupid party,” it may as well be the kiss of death,” the report said.

Cue the comments last year by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who was right on target when he said Republicans have to stop being “the stupid party.”

But how? What can Republicans do to win back the youth vote in presidential elections? I’d love to hear your ideas.

© 2013 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.