'The Republicans are worried about the flag, gay marriage and the terrible burden of the estate tax on the rich. The rest of us are obviously unnecessarily worried about war, peace, the economy, the environment and civilization. Another reason to vote Republican—they have a shorter list.'
Molly Ivins: Flag Burning and Other Dubious Epidemics

Are Republican initiatives to get their core vote out likely to work? Have they identified the correct issues?

A little emotional fertilizer to get the voters stirred up. They will be watered next. Smart politics, actually, in an election year.

"Smart politics, actually, in an election year."

You're right, and it's a shame, regardless of which party does the pandering.

How long can it continue to be "smart politics" when it assumes that the voters are uneducable morons???? Fool us once - shame on us; fool us twice, three times,----

...fifty million times! The results speak for themselves! Maybe I'm a tad pessimistic today, but the voters are ineducable morons. And I'm ignoring the even bigger contingent of morons who don't bother to vote, even once every four years. We are nation of adult-age children who are easily distracted by bright, shiny objects (such as tax cuts, and hot-button social issues of little overall consequence). "Smart politics" doesn't have to be very smart to work.

How long can gay marriage, in particular, be used? A commentator, claiming to be repeating what a (senior?) Republican strategist told him, said that that particular issue was only going to work for a few more election cycles, because it doesn't resonate with voters under (I think) 40. For now, though, it does seem to be, as 'Fuse said, "smart politics." It's crappy ethics, though.

I'm still waiting for anyone to make a coherent, much less convincing, argument that same-sex marriage hurts the larger institution.

When the going gets tough, the masses get.... stupid. It's much easier to focus on gay marriage or flag burning: by God, thems the things that matter. Especially when the things that really matter are so complex and so threatening to the idea that everything will be all right if you just trust in god and george. So, yeah: it's good strategy. Given that the bulk of the electorate is so polarized -- national elections don't swing by many votes -- getting only a few "values" voters (look up "oxymoron" -- values voters will surely be there) to vote on such issues is all it takes. I'm not optimistic.

Methos: me, too. And when FMA advocates are interviewed and talk in terms of "protecting marriage," no one demands an argument that connects preventing gay marriage with "saving the institution." It doesn't, clearly. It's about a religious view of homosexuality, pure and simple.

I have to wonder how many of those trying to "protect marriage" have been divorced.

Here's one take on the subject. Worth a chuckle or two - for some of us, at least. With one or two exceptions ?

Yeah, but I bet Ann Coulter sells more books that Garrison Keeler. Much as I like this here answerpool, I think talking to people of (mostly) like mind gives a false sense of hope. When shove comes to shove, I think November will be a disappointment. Flags, gays, and death tax. Works every time.