I don't know that the Republicans see ACORN as a threat. If you think they do, why do you think they do,Bob?
Because I put up a thread about the subject a few months back, and watched the misrepresentations that my friends from the Radical Right brought to the table. There were a lot of them, and they were directed against ACORN. Part of that was because President Obama was involved with ACORN, and an attack on ACORN was in some ways an attack on President Obama via what’s called the halo effect. In other ways, it was because ACORN was bringing in additional voters, and the Republicans traditionally don’t like that because new voters are traditionally young voters, or ethnic voters or voters of color, and Republicans are not strong in any of these Demographics. This is why, the other day, for example, Rush Limbaugh accused President Obama of being a racist for not including older white males in the groups of people that the President felt the government should reach out to.
The Republicans also voted what amounts to be a bill of attainder against ACORN, specifically targeting their funding, on the basis of a poorly done propaganda piece. Now that it has come out exactly how large a propaganda piece this has been, no apology is forthcoming, nor any attempt to make things whole has been attempted.
Those things would seem to be a pretty good start. Should you wish more reasons, you might reread the thread.
but have been along the lines of getting more ideologically extreme voters activated by appealing to more ideologically extreme issues?
I don't know what you mean by this. Can you give me an example?
I can try.
I’ve been reading a book by Liza Pickard about Elizabethan London. One of the things that you could do to get Londoners seriously upset is by talking about those French protestants who’d come over and who were taking away good English Jobs. They passed laws against this sort of thing, saying that there was a limit on the number of foreigners that a Master could take on as apprentices, for example, even if the Master was foreign.
Being upset at the notion of foreigners taking domestic jobs has been a hot button issue for hundreds of years, and not simply in the United States. In times of economic chaos, it is much more of an issue. People react violently, and sometimes they over-react. The Republicans have exploited this issue to get their base activated; and those people who are the most upset about those who are different are the folks who are the most upset.
The Democrats tend to be interested in these same people as potential new voters.
The Republicans want to keep them off the voter rolls as much as possible, and so go after ACORN and other voter registration groups. They also try to charge folks with voter fraud, and challenge voters at the polls.
This is an example of an ideologically extreme issue.
Getting ideologically extreme voters attracted to these sorts of issues has to do with the sorts of language that’s used in the discussion. “Tiller the Baby Killer,” for example, suggests that Dr. Tiller was doing something illegal, which he was not; or something that was immoral, about which I suspect we disagree strongly. It encourages people who are not thoughtful to do violent things, which they did. It also draws people with views similar to the assassin’s to join the Republican party and to become active in Republican politics. These folks may not believe in killing, but their views may not be entirely rational, either. They may be more ideologically extreme than the traditional Republican voter. Over the past 30 years or so, it appears to me, the Republican party has been following this path steadily to the right.
There is your example and explanation. The Republican of today is much further to the right than was his father.