Advertisement

GOP Struggles to Campaign on Medicare

By John Sides, Monkey Cage - August 14, 2012

by John Sides on August 14, 2012 · 2 comments

in Campaigns and elections

Romney advisor Ed Gillespie:

This will be an uphill battle for the GOP, for two reasons.

First, Democrats are more trusted to handle the issue of Medicare.  That is, they “own” the issue.  See, for example, my piece on campaign agendas (especially Figure 1).  To cite some more recent data, a February GW Battleground Poll found that 52% of respondents trusted Democrats to handle “Social Security and Medicare,” while 43% trusted Republicans.  A June 2011 poll found that 47% of respondents had “more confidence” in the Democrats’ ability to handle Medicare, while 40% had more confidence in Republicans.

Second, although perceptions of which party owns an issue can change, they usually will not change during the short window of a campaign.  Take 1988 for example.  In this election, Michael Dukakis tried to emphasize national defense.  George H.W. Bush emphasized jobs and declared that he would be the “education president.” Both were attempting to “trespass” on the other party’s territory.  How’d that work out for them?  Political scientists Bruce Buchanan and Helmut Norpoth studied those strategies and found: Our findings raise serious doubts that “issue trespassing” pays electoral dividends. Voters tend to rely too much on party stereotypes to notice such attempts. Voters tended to attribute Bush’s slogans and promises about education and jobs to Dukakis, and attribute Dukakis’s promises about national defense to Bush.  They relied on stereotypes of issue ownership—“if someone wants to improve education, he must be a Democrat”—rather than pay attention to the specific promises of Bush and Dukakis.

In my work, I find that parties often trespass by finding dimensions of issues that play to the party’s ideology.  So a Republican might talk about education by emphasizing vouchers.  Democrats might talk about crime by talking about prevention rather than punishment (see, e.g., David Holian’s study of Bill Clinton).

With regard to Romney-Ryan and Medicare, you could imagine how the GOP might try to do this.  For example, they could talk about “reforming Medicare” as a means to reducing the budget deficit, since that is what Ryan has proposed anyway and since the deficit is an issue more associated with the GOP.  Sure, Obama will counter-attack—calling the “reform” dismantlement, etc.—but at least the battle will be partly fought on the GOP’s turf.

But to go toe-to-toe on “who wants to cut Medicare more”?  That strikes me as a much harder sell for the Republican ticket.

2 comments

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Nadia Hassan August 14, 2012 at 12:19 pm

Professor Sides, do you think the same is true as far as advertising the conservative reform anti-government budget as something that will help the middle class? Democrats tend to have the advantage in this area, and Obama tends to have the advantage over Romney.

Some commentators (e.g. Guy Molneux, Jim Tankersley) have raised the possibility that middle class voters will respond affirmatively to cutting the deficit by cutting services for the undeserving poor, but that’s a tougher sell with the tax cuts for the wealthy and numbers stuff with the middle class.

Reply

PBR August 14, 2012 at 2:02 pm

Or, how about Democrats’ attempts to sell themselves as credible deficit cutters?

Reply

Cancel reply

Leave a Comment

Name *

E-mail *

Website

Previous post: Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 2 of 3)

Next post: 1.5 million people were told that extreme conservatives are happier than political moderates. Approximately .0001 million Americans learned that the opposite is true.

Search

About The mission of this blog is described in our inaugural post. And, technically, an orangutan is an ape, not a monkey. Named 2010 Blog of the Year by Subscribe

Subscribe in a Reader

 Subscribe by Email

Follow @monkeycageblog Authors John Sides (GW) Erik Voeten (Georgetown) Andrew Gelman (Columbia) Joshua Tucker (NYU) Henry Farrell (GW) We are professors of political science. We remember Lee Sigelman. For more, see here. Questions? // //]]> Occasional Contributors Larry Bartels (Vanderbilt) Sarah Binder (GW) Erica Chenoweth (Denver) James Fearon (Stanford) Daniel Hopkins (Georgetown) David Karol (Maryland) Gregory Koger (Miami) Jason Lyall (Yale) Nolan McCarty (Princeton) Hans Noel (Georgetown) Andrew Rudalevige (Bowdoin) Recent CommentsPBR on Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 2 of 3)PBR on Why It’s Hard for Republicans to Campaign on MedicareJoe Bruns on 1.5 million people were told that extreme conservatives are happier than political moderates. Approximately .0001 million Americans learned that the opposite is true.Nadia Hassan on Why It’s Hard for Republicans to Campaign on MedicareUnlearner on 1.5 million people were told that extreme conservatives are happier than political moderates. Approximately .0001 million Americans learned that the opposite is true. Recent Posts 1.5 million people were told that extreme conservatives are happier than political moderates. Approximately .0001 million Americans learned that the opposite is true. Why It’s Hard for Republicans to Campaign on Medicare Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 2 of 3) Our Man in London: Scenes from the Olympic Park Will the Long Peace Persist? Categories Academia Baby Blogs Bureaucracy Campaigns and elections Comparative Politics Data Education Election Reports Electoral Fraud Environmental Politics Experimental Analysis Foreign Policy
Read Full Article »

Latest On Twitter

Follow Real Clear Politics

Real Clear Politics Video

More RCP Video Highlights »