So, does anyone believe that the red beanie boys lost their case against no-cost contraceptives in the health insurance plan because Barack Obama has a deep commitment to women’s reproductive freedom or equality?
Or does he have a problem with women and he needs to throw them *just* enough of a bone to win their votes but not enough to piss off the religious too much?
While the percentage of Democrats who describe themselves as liberal has also increased since 2000, rising ten points, the Democratic Party remains much more ideologically diverse than the G.O.P. Roughly forty per cent of Democrats call themselves “liberal,” forty per cent call themselves “moderate,” and twenty per cent call themselves “conservative.”
“Such numbers explain why liberals seem destined to perpetual disappointment in Democratic presidents, who cannot lean too far left without alienating the party’s moderate-to-conservative majority,” Will Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute argues in a recent report.
So, if moderates are still crucial to Obama’s election, what do they look like? Over at Third Way, Michelle Diggles and Lanae Erickson take a deep dive into the data to show that the real swing vote for Obama is a group they call Obama Independents—voters who “liked and voted for [Obama] just 3 years ago… were the most ideologically moderate segment of the electorate,” and “are true swing voters, with one-quarter voting Republican in 2010 and one-quarter voting for President Bush in 2004.” This group, which we are likely to hear a lot about in the coming months, is disproportionately young, female, and secular, and it was hit hard by the recession. One quarter of its members are non-white.
If Obama goes, so does the free Lo-Ovral.
This is the problem with politicians who do not have a coherent worldview, and Obama never has had one. He has not made any effort to craft policy that will advance women’s equality in the workplace or the doctor’s office. It’s not one of his goals. Failure to plan on your part does not constitute an emergency on his. The problem with Democrats is not that their factions are all over the place. The problem is that they try to cater to these factions without providing a coherent vision for the future. There is nothing that sticks Democrats together under one united idea of how the country and world should work. So, Obama careens from one interest group to another trying to thread the needle between pissing off the religious nutcases, who do have a particular worldview, whether we like it or not, and the rest of us. Plan B is a contraceptive too far. Women should get a majority vote from their family and pastors before an abortion. But contraceptives are probably ok, according to the data mining algorithm.
He’s done the same on the banker/financial sector fiasco. Instead of developing policy and solutions based on an understanding of what is wrong with the economy and having a vision of how it should work, he has taken an ad hoc approach and tries to cut deals with each player individually. That is more of the Teddy Roosevelt model but it leaves us open to more misbehavior by the banks because there still aren’t any rules to keep them from gambling our money away and then expecting the government to bail them out. He should have started with the premise that it is wrong to compensate gamblers for their losses and then figure out how to prevent that from happening again.
Well, you know the rest. Obama is pandering here to his swing voters, who happen to be moderate, secular women of childbearing age, in order to get votes. He’s going to save them a bunch of money between now and November. But that won’t get them better jobs or jobs at all. It won’t prevent Walmart from subtle sexism that prevents women from getting ahead. It won’t make measurements of workplace parameters to prevent “he said/she said” accusations about discrimination that no one will take seriously. He’s not interested in equality. He’s interested in getting re-elected.
No, Obama’s decision to cover contraceptives is a one time only deal. There’s no systemic change to the culture. He is not an agent of change. He is an agent of Obama and women are the worse for it.