People tend to think the parties each have their (roughly) 40% of voters, and the contest is really for the 20% in the middle.  Well, that’s only partially right.  The parties also have to excite their base for votes, money, and volunteers.  Because of this, the parties are actually aiming at voters somewhere between their base and the middle, and this voter is different for each party.

What’s my point with this?  Because the target voter is different, so too must the strategies for winning that voter be different.  Too often, people have  a knee-jerk reaction to some tactic of the other party, and they think “We must fight fire with fire!”  For example, Pres Obama has nominated an arguably racist and sexist SCOTUS nominee in Judge Sotomayor (based on her comment that a latina, based on being a latina, will come to better conclusions than a white male).  Had Republicans nominated someone who said, based on his being a white male, he would come to better conclusions than a latina, or a black woman, or any other minority, Democrats would rightly call that person out as a racist, and we’d likely never hear the end of it.

The fact of the matter is that this divisive, racist witch-hunting of whites is something that appeals to a Democrat target voter, but that same divisive, racist witch-hunting of minorities doesn’t appeal to a Republican target voter.  Attacking this nominee on the basis of her racism/sexism is a sure loser, regardless of whether it’s true or not.  Actually, pretty much any attack on this nominee is doomed to failure (elections have consequences, folks), but this line of attack will hurt long-term election prospects.

What’s the course of action, then?  Should we roll over, say “Oh, well, can’t do anything about it, so let’s not do anything?”  No, because this is an opportunity to do something to appeal to the Republican target voter.  The GOP should scour her record and go after any collectivist rulings, where she egregiously ruled against the law for the sake of benefitting “the little man.”  Her political philosophy should be thoroughly vetted, where she believes she’s a legislator, not a judge.  Going after her racist tendencies, with only a squishy comment in support, is not the way to go.