Q: What happens when you're a major party nominee for governor and your graduate thesis from 20 years ago is uncovered, revealing some rather impolitic views about the role of women in the workplace society? A: The other party, which happens to be led by the current governor of the state where you're running, announces it will dump a huge sum of money into the contest to defeat you.
That's the news late today from Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse: The DNC is going to gamble $5 million on the Creigh Deeds campaign against Bob McDonnell, who has been scrambling all week to explain and defend a master's thesis he wrote 20 years ago as a 34-year-old graduate student at Regent University. The DNC is trying to capitalize on the thesis controversy, as Woodhouse's statements make all too clear. "Governor [Tim] Kaine is very, very enthusiastic about this race," Woodhouse said. "He obviously knows Bob McDonnell and Creigh Deeds. He has a good sense that Creigh Deeds is who you see, and Bob McDonnell is who we learned about through his thesis."
DNC investments aside, how damaging are the revelations related to the thesis--which can be read in full here--to McDonnell's candidacy? Put another way, is this his "macaca" moment?
My initial reflex is that this story is very damaging. The Washington Post is giving the story significant coverage, leading its Metro section with a page B1 story today about the McDonnell campaign's damage control efforts:McDonnell has now turned to his prominent female backers to help rebuild his relationship with the key voting bloc, damaged in recent days by the publication of his 1989 master's thesis. He wrote in the thesis that working women and feminists had been "detrimental" to the traditional family and criticized federal tax credits for child care because they made it easier for women to be employed outside the home.
His efforts came as leaders of national organizations focused on the Virginia race, convinced that McDonnell's thesis shows that his election would erase gains for women.
The Post also pubbed a page B2 companion story today reporting that four of McDonnell's former Republican colleagues in the state legislature--all Deeds supporters, and brought forward by the Deeds campaign--confirm that McDonnell's political views as a state legislator were consistent with views he published in that thesis.
The McDonnell thesis scandal unfolding in Virginia already bears a certain resemblance to the state's other recent election-year controversy--George Allen's "macaca" episode. Both involve the backfire resulting caused by the wide circulation of embarrassing words attributed to a Republican statewide candidate and, because they were either videotaped or set down in print, are impossible to retract.
I do not, however, think the damage McDonnell will suffer is as great as that suffered by Allen. Though Allen was an incumbent, with all those advantages, his comments were offensive in a general way, whereas some people, sadly, may be completely untroubled by the notion that women ought to take a subservient role in the family or American society. Allen's remarks were also videotaped--thus heightening their viral impact because television could run video and audio almost ceaselessly--whereas McDonnell's are "merely" in print. Finally, Allen's nasty remark was wholly unrelated to the topic or goal of his picnic speech that day, and thus came across as not only racist but the byproduct of a mean, intemperate person, whereas McDonnell's can at least attempt (however successfully) to explain his comments as one part of a larger policy argument or inquiry.
As the Pollster composite poll figure above shows, McDonnell enters September with a 10-point lead. We'll see how his numbers respond as this story develops and that $5 million takes effect.
9.02.2009
Is McDonnell's Thesis His "Macaca" Moment?
by Tom Schaller @ 7:17 PM...see also bob mcdonnell, creigh deeds
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

41 comments
True, some people might even be MORE inclined to vote for McDonnell than they were before.
These 2 candidates will split the Virginia electorate right down the middle. Rural men to McDonnell, urban women to Deeds; religious women to McDonnell, moderate women to Deeds; "Fake" Virginia to Deeds with a small base bonus for McDonnell, "Real" Virginia to McDonnell, southern base bonus for Deeds; anti-Obama sentiment for McDonnell, Warner coattails for Deeds....
This controversy will not give the race to Deeds, but he has got his chance now. Without this controversy McDonnell was the clear favorite, because he had the highe profile (as Attorney General), and he had a coalition of conservative and moderate voters and Deads had the headwind of an off-year election.
Ten point swing is a lot of ground to cover. Are there enough undecideds left for Deeds to cover that spread? If he manages to tap into Obama's 2008 campaign machine he might get some help on the ground but wouldn't he still need to be pulling enough undecideds out far enough out of the "meh" category to show up and vote?
"Are there enough undecideds left for Deeds to cover that spread?"
Absolutely. Deeds's problem since the beginning has been the enthusiasm gap. This is exactly the sort of thing that could fire up Virginia Dems. Consider the latest PPP poll. Deeds went from a 14-point deficit three weeks ago to a 7-point deficit just a few days ago. Some of that is the natural revving up of the campaign, but also:
"The big question in the race right now of course is the impact that the revelations from McDonnell's thesis at Regent University will or will not have. Unfortunately we completed 86% of the interviews for this poll on Friday and Saturday so the numbers don't fully reflect any fall out from that story. However it is worth noting that while McDonnell led 50-41 in the two days of polling before the article, Deeds actually led 50-42 in the 83 interviews conducted on Sunday and Monday. That should be taken with a grain of salt since the margin of error on that small a sample is +/-10.8% but it is somewhat unusual for numbers to shift that strongly over the course of a field period and it will be interesting to see the next rounds of polling conducted completely once the story has set in. It's the kind of thing that could get sleepy Democratic voters more engaged to head out to the polls in November."
The VA gov race just got competitive, in other words.
I'd say a bigger difference between McDonnell and Allen is that McDonnell's sexism is a lot more reminiscent of Jim Webb's view of women in the military. McDonnell's sexism is harsher than Webb's, but I doubt it will make the difference in this case.
As a Northern Virginia voter who lives in one of the more truly independent parts of Fairfax County (McLean - went for Bush in 04, but went to Webb by 16 points in 06), I see my neighbors as genuinely disgusted by this thesis.
If they're voting for Bob McDonnell, they sure ain't gonna admit it. Obviously jobs and the economy are more important in the end - so really it's up to Deeds. If he plays this right he'll keep McDonnell distracted an on the defense on social issues while simultaneously rolling out his own education, transportation, and jobs plans. That'll be how Deeds wins. If he doesn't do that, it's Governor McDonnell.
As a Virginian the revelation about McDonneell is certainly not surprising. He has always been a zealot. Frankly, I am surprised his thesis was not called, The Holocaust: The Greatest Myth Since Gravity.
Let me say that I have voted for republicans in the past. I voted for our former Virginian Senator, John Warner, for decades. However, I am boycotting the republican party. In articles and letters in the Richmond Times Dispatch, republicans have said they are more superior to us moderates and don't want us in their party. Indeed they have thrown us moderates out of their party. Any swingvoter, moderate, independent is a FOOL to even consider voting republican. The one thing I am certain of is McDonnell is NO moderate, the republican party wouldn't allow a moderate to run in Virginia.
Any swingvoter, moderate, independent is a FOOL to even consider voting republican.
Yes because those Democrats are treating their Blue Dogs so well in the healthcare debate, aren't they?
This race is ALL about the NOVA soccer moms, and they've always liked Bob McDonnell. Deeds knows that; it's why he lost AG 4 years ago, and his ads during the primary were aimed straight at them. With this, McDonnell just lost that demographic--not to mention much of the rest of NOVA. A week ago I would have said McDonnell had it in the bag, between the enthusiasm gap and coordinated's unusually lackluster and disorganized ground game. Now, I'm feeling a bit better about it all . . .
Wow, that thesis is a real work of far-right ideology. Not only does he claim feminists (and working women in general) are leading to the destruction of the family, but he claims homosexuals should be punished, criticizes the court ruling allowing married couples to use contraception, and claims there to be an 'overriding necessity for inculcation of values to produce good citizens.' He further calls for the end of the 'folklore' of the separation of church and state, claims that Judeo-Christian morals are at the root of all of America's successes, and even goes so far as to label a graduated income tax as 'socialist.' Wow.
And all that's worth mentioning is that he's against women in the workplace?
Let me remind Mule Rider that Virginia is not the same state that participated in "massive resistance" to stop integration. I am sure you must miss those days. It must kill your cracker soul that Virginia voted for Obama. That traitorous bastard Robert E. Let must be spinning in his grave.
The next time you are in your antebellum clown suit celebrating the south (thankfully) losing the Civil War, just keep in mind that history has passed you by.
Your initial reflex appears to be inaccurate...
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Virginia voters finds McDonnell leading Deeds 51% to 42%. That’s little changed from a month ago when McDonnell held the advantage 49% to 41%. All of those figures include “leaners.” ...
The survey was conducted shortly after news stories broke about a thesis paper written by McDonnell in 1989.
The Macaca moment was significant because it was in real time, with audio and video evidence. It reflected Senator Allen's opinions in 2006. The thesis controversy has no pictures or sound, and supposedly reflects McDonnell's opinions as of 1989.
McDonnell will be the next governor of Virginia. Move along. Nothing to see here.
This would be a possible game-changer if the race was a lot closer. Rasmussen polled on 9/1, so it's possible that the poll picked up McDonnell's "walkback."
A couple of observations. Even with the "Macaca" moment Allen only lost by about 9000 votes, and continued to lead in the polls for some time after the fateful video.
Webb was (and isn't now) not a great candidate.
Deeds' problem is that he doesn't have enough of the base right now, and that he's run a really lackluster campaign. The Democrats couldn't come up with a better candidate.
So it's the quality of the candidates as much as anything else.
The "thesis" itself is very thin for a policy degree.
Basically it's just a lit review and an agenda for the GOP. They give advanced academic degrees for that?
Reminds me of Virginia's Lt Governor race in 1993 when Mike Farris (R) lost to Don Beyer (D) due in large part because he represented parents who sought to have The Wizard of Oz and other books removed from public schools. If I recall correctly, he had also writings similar to those of McDonnel regarding women in the workplace.
That Farris lost on the basis of this history is particularly notable because in that election, because George Allen (R) trounced Mary Sue Terry (D) for Governor.
Look, the picture nationally and, presumably, in Virginia is that the Democratic victories of 2008 have been tarnished by a lot of questions about where they're going to take the country. Without getting involved in the particulars of that particular argument, it's why Obama's numbers are dropping and, most likely, why Deeds has been swimming against the tide.
McDonnell's thesis reminds the electorate of WHY they took a chance of the Democrats last year: the Republicans are simply hopeless. They can critique the Democrats all they want to, but what they offer is a turned-back clock to a time that the country can no longer return to. The America which McDonnell praises doesn't exist and almost nobody really wants it to exist anymore. Hell, in a significant number of households these days, if the woman isn't working, NOBODY IS. And you can't blame THAT on the Democrats.
People may feel queasy about where the Democrats are going, but this thesis has reminded them that at least it's FORWARD, not back to an impossible past. The oldest adage in politics is that you can't beat somebody with nobody, and McDonnell just turned into nobody. And there is more than enough time until Election Day for that point to be driven home.
perhaps this is more analogous to the 'macacawitz' incident in the '06 Allen campaign
who knows for sure, but the late reveal that Allen had jewish heritage could have easily cost him 10K votes from his base
that was a non-video event from his past which showed he was not who he claimed to be
the 'macaca' incident just furthered his 'conservative bonafides with his 'real' racist VA base [even though George was from CA]
I'm torn. I don't think anyone's graduate thesis should be held too heavily against them 20 years later in an election. The man was going to Regent - the electorate he was playing to to garner his degree wouldn't have accepted a paper that said separation of church & state is alright, much less equal rights for women & homosexuals. He's playing to a different audience now.
On the other hand, he went to Regent. Voluntarily, by all appearances. Maybe that ought to be a disqualifier right there.
Wow. The bits of the thesis that have made the papers really don't convey just how radically reactionary it is. This guy doesn't just want government in your bedroom, he wants them to go ahead and build a church while they're in there.
I was also amused by his confusion over whether it's collectivism/statism or hyperindividualism that is ruining everything.
I wonder what difference this will make. Its interesting, most intelligent college going types (the sort more likely to vote Democrat) would probably think, well when I was at college I wrote some pretty daft stuff too. The interesting thing is that it might give Deeds a route into Southern Virginia a bit, with less educated but enlightened types, and women. The nest round of Virginia polls will be interesting.
Markymark, while it may be true that many college going types, as you call them, will realize they wrote 'some pretty daft stuff' while in college, I doubt many of them will be thinking of their advanced-degree thesis paper when they realize this. As opposed to a paper written for a course, a thesis is something that compells the author to put a lot of time, energy, and focus into writing. Considering further that McDonnell was 34 at the time of writing his thesis here, the only fair way to explain away what he wrote is to claim he's changed in the past 20 years.
First of all, I'm not familiar with Political Science/Public Policy theses, but I'm a little surprised that merely ranting about Judeo-Christian values and the role of women counts as academically rigourous enough to help gain him a graduate degree. Might be true, might not be (I happen to think it's not), but it's not exactly the standard I expected.
Nevertheless, I'm always slightly bothered when student theses are used against people in an election campaign. They tried it on Clinton(Hillary) in '92, they tried it on Hillary again in '08, they tried it on Obama in the same campaign, and now it's being used by the Democrats. Often they completely miss the point ('OMG! Hillary is a secret, family-hating Marxist because of these two articles on Saul Alinsky and family law!'). Moreover, it seems an infringement on the wacky, everything-goes-as-long-as-it's-justifiable-referenced-and-unplagiarised academic freedom that I value. And, of course, people's politics change drastically over the years. The 1980s really was a different time, and McDonnell may well have changed his mind since then.
Deeds seems to be very far behind, and worryingly unable to make ground on McDonnell. We'll see what happens, but politics teaches us that sometimes seemingly destructive scandals (Rev. Wright, Bush's drink driving, Clinton's philandering) amount to diddly squat in the end.
Tyler, I don't disagree, but remember this is about perception, not reality. What I think is interesting is that McDonnell may have to either defend his old opinions or explain why his views have changed.
Overall I suspect this might have little difference over the election, but I still think Deeds can win.
Surely one lesson of the 2008 presidential campaign is that old theses don't matter.
How typical and yet disgusting of the right. Although I too am slightly reluctant to criticize academic papers, I think a thesis written at age 34 is a little different. At this point, this isn't a 19 year old in his sophomore year of college.
I think at the very least he should be asked when and where his views changed. When did he stop thinking it was ok for the government to regulate the use of contraception? When did he stop thinking gays were destroying the country (I bet he didn't). When did he stop thinking these things, and why?
Not to mention going to that school should probably disqualify you immediately. I mean, if you went to a university founded by Trotsky for your graduate degree, do you think that would be off-limits?
Yes because those Democrats are treating their Blue Dogs so well in the healthcare debate, aren't they?
Relatively speaking, yeah. *shrug* There isn't anything out there even close to approximating Club For Growth. Arlen Specter is being primaried but frankly, given circumstances (his health and age, unknows about how the electorate will take to his party changing) that's pretty much an insurance policy.
AtSwimTwoBirds said...
Surely one lesson of the 2008 presidential campaign is that old theses don't matter.
They do when your colleages who are members of your own party piping up that it's a good reflection of your views and goals in much more recent times. *shrug*
You can throw out all previous polls. When we get some new polling in abut a week we will know if this is having an impact.
The Washington Post is hammering McDonell on this every day and assuming they endorse Deeds I wouldn't count him out.
McDonell is a right wing radical who has tried to play moderate. Even if he gets elected he will have to moderate since he claims he has changed his views and he probably has his eyes on a future run for the senate or white house.
Are the people who shrug off McDonnell's thesis the same who would slam Mahmoud Abbas's doctoral thesis, which was one big piece of Holocaust denial? I know I slam both, but would anyone else do the same?
I'd argue this could be more damaging to McDonnell than Allen's moment, at least in parts of the voting population. The main reason is that a thesis is a thought out intellectual argument advocating a viewpoint. It isn't an off-the-cuff remark that was an attempt at "humor". So where Allen's gaffe reflects on his personality, McDonnell's thesis reflects on his ideology and philosophy. It's an extremely rare student that will take a thesis position that they don't actually believe in.
Overall, I have to agree that McDonnell probably won't suffer as badly as Allen. More voters would be hit by the video clip of Allen than by the text of McDonnell, but it's easier to excuse an off the cuff remark than a reasoned document.
I'm a Democrat in Northern Virginia and I don't think this is a "macaca" moment. Don't get me wrong, the thesis in really objectionable and I don't think 34-year-olds can claim youthful indiscretion (being one myself). But reasons why it won't hurt him too much:
1. His Democratic opponent Deeds has run a very lackluster campaign with seemingly no message other than McDonnell is an extremist. He hasn't resonated with the Democratic base in vote-rich Northern Virginia and I think his rural roots hurt his ability to connect with voters here. Democratic primary voters in NoVa chose him over two others with ties to NoVa, persumably betting that he would run better in the state over all, but perhaps they were too clever by half.
2. McDonnell is able to talk about how his views have changed in 20 years, and this actually gives him an opportunity to stress anything he as done legislatively to help women over the past two decades. It gives him the chance to construct a very positive message, which Deeds has not been able to do at all. Recall that Jim Webb was able to distance himself from his writing by saying that it was a long time ago and he was completely comfortable with women in the military now.
3. The Republican base in energized, and the Democratic base is not. There is reaction to Obama's health care push in many parts of the state, and that is also part of the larger context.
4. George Allen's macaca moment was followed by a series of other stumbles which convinced just enough voters that he was a bully and/or a racist. His ham-handed handling of the discovery during the race of his Jewish heritage plus allegations that he used the N word in college added to a narrative that the macaca footage started. As long as McDonnell avoids doing this and can positively emphasize what he as done for women since his thesis, this is definitely survivable.
Similarities:
Allen's 'Macacca moment' was in mid-August, about two weeks earlier than the 'McDonnell thesis' came to light, but it didn't start to get traction for a few days.
Most people were absolutely unknowing of what 'Macacca' meant, and this partially caused the slow traction. As a result of the above two points, the timing of the disclosures in the races to election day is very similar.
2006 was an off-year election, just as the 2009 election is off-year.
Dis-similarities:
Allen was the well-known incumbent, Webb the not at all well-known challenger, therefore Allen had a large, built-in advantage.
Allen had a 15 to 20 point poll lead over Webb in the latter half of August, and that lead didn't start to dwindle until 2-3 weeks after the 'Macacca moment'. There seems to be anecdotal evidence that McDonnell's lead has already been affected in just a couple of days.
Also, there were very few undecideds in 2006 (in the range of 5% or less) at that point of the election race. In this election, the McConnell lead is about 9-10 points, with about 8% undecided.
Many voters might not be offended with the remarks about women working outside the home, but they might be offended by the remarks about contraception, or about separation of church and state, or about gays. I'm sure that those numbers far exceed the ones who were offended by the disclosure that Allen had Jewish heritage.
Allen didn't try to hide his opinions about most subjects over the years - he was from the 'straight-talking' philosophy, and he demonstrated that his views had not changed much, if at all. McDonnell has made it a point to obfuscate and muddy the waters on what his real views are or have been, and whether or not they have changed over the years. Allen had an advantage in that - he didn't have to explain the how, why and when his views changed, because they hadn't changed. McDonnell has tried to show he's a moderate, but now he's got to explain the how, why and when his views changed, and that will be no easy task, especially if those views have not changed.
Webb didn't get much financial backing from the National Dems in 2006 - the DNC is going in with a considerable sum for Deeds.
IMO the race is still McDonnell's to lose, but it's still 61 days until the election. McDonnell has a very small hole in the needle he needs to thread in order to win. Doable, but it's much more difficult now than it was a week ago.
Mike in Maryland
Who is surprised at the low standards for ideologues in training at Regent (or Oral Roberts or Liberty)?
McConnell since then has a well-established record are a hardcore Christianist. Note the typical hypocricy of the Christianist sex police silent about sex abuser husband and wife team (now ex-)dean at Regent, Stephen and Melissa McPherson (see http://hamptonroads.com.nyud.net/2009/09/former-regent-assistant-dean-wife-guilty-child-sex-abuse).
MiM: what you say about McDonnell's views suggests a parallel between him and Tim Kaine: both have some unpopular religious views (McDonnell on abortion, Kaine on capital punishment), which their opponents tried to exploit in lieu of running a positive campaign. Kilgore's death penalty-themed attack ads didn't prevent Kaine from winning; why should Deeds' Dominionism-themed attacks work?
When I read comments by McDonnell dismissing the thesis as being decades-old and how he has changed since then, I looked up his bio. But my calculations, he had been married for around ten years and had a five year old daughter when he wrote it. It's definitely possible that he's changed since then, but to play it like he was some young, immature dude in college seems quite disingenuous.
Tom says, "[Allen's] comments were offensive in a general way". Hmm. Let's keep in mind that Virginia's electorate is about 50% female but less than 1% macaca.
Let's also keep in mind that his daughter served in the army and is now helping her Dad "working." Because I have not seen any recent evidence that mcdonnell is sexist I don't believe he is, the paper was a requirement and an academic exercise. Most people would change their views about civil rights between 1960 and 1980 is that not true?
Trevor said...
Most people would change their views about civil rights between 1960 and 1980 is that not true?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually no, the majority of Americans imo were already for human rights in 1960, so the minority who were against ie the South, depending on their intelligence and the fear factor would probably not change over time. Maybe, hopefully their next generation w/better education would take the giant leap into the civilized world, but as been discussed ad nauseam, many are still fighting the Civil War down south.
And re: politicians, (2) words: political expediency.
"Tom says, "[Allen's] comments were offensive in a general way". Hmm. Let's keep in mind that Virginia's electorate is about 50% female but less than 1% macaca."
And that is exactly why this has the potential to be more destructive. It isn't a failed attempt at being humorous using a word that is offensive to a tiny portion of the population, it's a well-formed argument that offends anyone not living in the 19th century.
It's certainly going to cost him some voters, put him on the defense, and paint him as a lying, flip-flopping right-wing nutjob, and that, combined with a newly energized democratic campaign, could be enough to make him lose the race.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
электронная почта без регистрации
Post a Comment