Will Craig Sex Scandal "Affect GOP Branding?"

By: Lowell
Published On: 8/28/2007 1:54:04 PM

Today's Hotline asks some important questions and has some interesting observations on the Larry Craig sex scandal.  For those of you who might have missed the story, Craig (R-ID) "was arrested 6/11 at the Minneapolis airport 'by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints' in a men's restroom."  As is so often the situation, Craig is a big opponent of gay rights and a big supporter of the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act."  As Dr. Freud might say, Craig has "issues."  With that, here's the Hotline analysis:

craigslist.gop

Well, so much for turning the page.

-- On the same day GOPers hoped to get one scandal-plagued official off the stage, a new one emerges. Sex scandals are often left to the gossip pages. But in this case, could the Larry Craig saga, coming on the heels of Vitter/Foley, actually affect GOP branding?


-- These scandals only help reconnect the "out of touch" label to a party struggling to shed the status quo label. The Foley problems were made worse by GOP leaders' failure to take responsibility. Craig's "what do you think about that?" suggests he didn't get the message from the '06 elections (which, understandably, may have been the last thing on his mind, at the time).

-- Perhaps more importantly, how does this affect the GOP's ability to define cultural and social issues? In the July WSJ/NBC poll, GOPers had a 5-pt edge on the issue of "promoting strong moral values" -- down 17 pts since '01. Should GOP candidates stay as far away from scandal-tainted colleagues or turn up the heat on them?

-- Whether Craig runs again or not, his impact could be felt in '08. In ID and beyond.

Comments



There is more. (Bubby - 8/28/2007 5:46:48 PM)
From today'sIdaho Statesman.

In an interview on May 14, Craig told the Idaho Statesman he'd never engaged in sex with a man or solicited sex with a man. The Craig interview was the culmination of a Statesman investigation that began after a blogger accused Craig of homosexual sex in October. Over five months, the Statesman examined rumors about Craig dating to his college days and his 1982 pre-emptive denial that he had sex with underage congressional pages.

The most serious finding by the Statesman was the report by a professional man with close ties to Republican officials. The 40-year-old man reported having oral sex with Craig at Washington's Union Station, probably in 2004. The Statesman also spoke with a man who said Craig made a sexual advance toward him at the University of Idaho in 1967 and a man who said Craig "cruised" him for sex in 1994 at the REI store in Boise. The Statesman also explored dozens of allegations that proved untrue, unclear or unverifiable.



He starts out the press conference with... (ericy - 8/28/2007 7:07:57 PM)

"I would like to thank you all for COMING OUT".


Republicans should purge him (tx2vadem - 8/28/2007 7:08:53 PM)
To live up to their standard of moral purity, they should purge him from the party.  They should make him as well as Senator Vitter resign.  Their message that a person's private life dictates their fitness for office should guide them in this matter.  Anything less would just prove their lack of conviction to their principles, which was part of many conservatives lament about the former Republican majority.


So what's with these Republicans wives (spotter - 8/28/2007 7:43:39 PM)
that makes them stand beside their husbands at these "I'm not gay" press conferences?  I just don't get it.  What's in it for them?


83% say Craig should resign (Lowell - 8/28/2007 8:50:04 PM)


turnabout (pvogel - 8/28/2007 8:57:19 PM)
gore suffered in 2000 from Clintons scandals?????

If you swallow that, yhen the republicans will be destoyed in 2008. It could be a historic  change.  too bad the supreme court is tainted for the next 30 years



Turnabout Doubts that Gore's Candidacy Was Affected by Bill C (soccerdem - 8/28/2007 11:58:13 PM)
God, memory is short.  All I remember hearing when Gore ran was how the tone in the White House would be changed.  The air waves, the TV, the newspaper columnists constantly used this message.  It was not the sole issue and Gore was not the greatest campaigner, true, but he got the popular vote and in such a close election everything counted.

Rush had 20 million listeners, Hannity about 12, as a guess.  Don't you think that meant anything?  What is amazing is that the phone-ins from listeners to C-Span, Rush and Sean were so often from irate people of all ages and both parties who were going to get rid of "them," equating the lily-white Gore with the big Kahuna.

So they went and got rid of all vestiges of that "immoral" administration and elected something better:  a man who had been a drunk half his adult life.  Yeah, call me bitter!