The Obama / Limbaugh continues to intrigue commentators, and some wonder who is getting the best of it. One of the arguments being made is that Limbaugh is being played by the White House. Obama deliberately provoked Limbaugh with the expectation that he would not only respond disproportionately, but would use his base of listeners to rally against Republicans who seemed warm to Obama's proposals. Frank Rich argues that this seems in fact to have occurred:
While most Americans are fearing fear itself, G.O.P. politicians are tripping over themselves in morbid terror of Rush.
These pratfalls commenced after Obama casually told some Republican congressmen (correctly) that they won’t “get things done” if they take their orders from Limbaugh. That’s all the stimulus the big man needed to go on a new bender of self-aggrandizement. He boasted that Obama is “more frightened” of him than he is of the Republican leaders in the House or Senate. He said of the new president, “I hope he fails.”
Obama no doubt finds Limbaugh’s grandiosity more amusing than frightening, but G.O.P. politicians are shaking like Jell-O. When asked by Andrea Mitchell of NBC News on Wednesday if he shared Limbaugh’s hope that Obama fails, Eric Cantor spun like a top before running off, as it happened, to appear on Limbaugh’s radio show. Mike Pence of Indiana, No. 3 in the Republican House leadership, similarly squirmed when asked if he agreed with Limbaugh. Though the Republicans’ official, poll-driven line is that they want Obama to succeed, they’d rather abandon that disingenuous nicety than cross Rush.
Most pathetic of all was Phil Gingrey, a right-wing Republican congressman from Georgia, who mildly criticized both Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to Politico because they “stand back and throw bricks” while lawmakers labor in the trenches. So many called Gingrey’s office to complain that the poor congressman begged Limbaugh to bring him on air to publicly recant on Wednesday. As Gingrey abjectly apologized to talk radio’s commandant for his “stupid comments” and “foot-in-mouth disease,” he sounded like the inmate in a B-prison-movie cowering before the warden after a failed jailbreak.
Why is this important? Ben Smith, writing in Politico.com, has a hunch. One of the advantages that the Republicans now enjoy is not being saddled under an unpopular president. They can distance themselves from W. Bush, and no longer be identified by him. So what Democrats need, is a person almost as unpopular as Bush to associate with the Republicans, and guess who that might be?
A poll from past November showed that 59% of likely voters were "cold" towards President Bush, the worst showing for a Republican. Coming in second, at 51%, was Rush Limbaugh. If he becomes regarded as the leader of the party, that marginalizes the party already, but it gets worse. Limbaugh fans are very passionate about him and seemingly will do his business, like call Republican members of Congress to criticize them for not towing Rush's line. 23% of the public feels "warm" towards Limbaugh, so that suggests tells us that a minority in the general population is pulling the Republican Party further to the right, and away from the moderate voters who tend to select winners in elections.
The caveat is that the next election is a congressional election in 2010, and turnout among moderates tends to be low during these elections. 23% may be enough to cause sufficient damage.
