TNR BLOGS

July 04, 2009 | 11:32 AM
July 04, 2009 | 8:16 AM
July 03, 2009 | 7:55 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM
June 29, 2009 | 9:09 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
28.10.2008
Is Bobby Jindal Really "the Republican Obama"?

With the Republicans’ presidential hopes for 2008 now all but dashed, a few upstarts in the party are—surprise—positioning themselves for future runs. Last week, Chris Cillizza flagged the appearance of Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal in a television spot for John Kennedy, the Republican challenger to Senator Mary Landrieu. Amid a backdrop of stately white columns, the young Indian-American governor projects a cool image of steadiness and calm. Sound like anyone you know? Jindal--who has already been dubbed "the Republican Obama" by numerous pundits and bloggers--seems to drive the point home by describing his party’s candidate as bringing "the change we need":

Jindal, in fact, offered early praise for Obama during primary season. "He just has an enthusiasm and genuineness about him that makes you want to like the guy," Jindal told a Times-Picayune columnist. The writer goes on to argue that Jindal not only admired Obama, but also sought to "emulate Obama’s ability to reach across ideological lines." In his own post, Cillizza goes so far to describe Jindal’s career as "marked almost entirely by a desire to avoid the appearance of partisanship," concluding that he was taking a definite risk in endorsing Kennedy.

It’s true that Jindal has tried to come across as an above-the-fray reformer, launching high-profile battles against corruption from the beginning of his career. But Jindal has hardly been an outsider to the GOP or the ideological principles at the heart of its base--his close ties to both the top Republican leadership and the party’s socially conservative wing have been critical to his success. He has never made a secret of his unwavering social conservatism, which helped win critical rural votes that propelled him into the governorship. In the TV spot for Kennedy, Jindal tries to portray him as a reformer like himself, but he doesn't hesitate to play up their ideological affinity. His first word of praise for the candidate? "He's a conservative."

Next month, Jindal will make an appearance at a fundraising dinner for the right-wing Iowa Family Policy Center--a visit to a state that seems to be a clear indication of his presidential aspirations. Among the Jindal cheerleaders quoted on the flyer for the Christian group’s event are Grover Norquist, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, and Newt Gingrich. It's the first of many small moves that Jindal will have to make to placate the party's base. The question is whether he'll be able to maintain his image as an independent, post-partisan reformer along the way. McCain certainly failed to pull it off this year. But Jindal is an expert gamesman and might find a savvier way to reignite his party’s loyalists--without scaring of moderates--by, let's say, 2012.

--Suzy Khimm

 RELATED: For Chris Orr's take on Jindal's 2012 prospect, click here.

Posted: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 11:07 AM with 27 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

Crock1701 said:

Jindal's 37.  He should wait eight years.  He was elected just last year in 2007, he can win reelection in 2011, not run in 2015  and leave office in January 2016, right in time for Primaries.  Besides, given the sheer length these days in Running for President, he either would have to pull a Mitt and only go for one term, or  have the trouble of running a reelection campaign in 2011 simultaneously with the runup to the primaries, and risk getting sent packing in 2011 by Louisiana voters who'd rather have the governor spend his time there than in Iowa.  Wait to 2016, and assuming two relatively successful Obama terms, Jindal can run a la Bush in 2000 as a Republican Obama.  (Remember Bush's Compassionate Conservatism positioned itself as an heir to the "Third Way," articulated by another good old boy Southern governor.)  Jindal in 2012 would be too soon.  Moreover, it would be hard to run as the Republican Obama against Obama himself.  Contrast, and all that.

October 28, 2008 11:46 AM

drdannyu said:

But... but... if there are two people of color running against each other in 2012, who will the seething racists vote for?

October 28, 2008 11:47 AM

Rhubarbs said:

Well, imagine if instead of spending a decade in elected government, Obama had instead spent a decade as a midlevel bureaucrat, and the comparison would actually be pretty fair. Jindal kind of is a Republican version of Obama, except with less experience. And if Obama wins the presidency, by 2012 Jindal will have about as much experience being a governor as Obama would have being president.

But Jindal's soft record of actual reform is roughly comparable to Obama's. Yes, Obama has delivered on more actual reforms than his critics credit him with, but his record is still necessarily slim. This means that his ability to be seen by various parts of the Democratic coalition as being "one of us" is based largely on assertion and affinity. Just like Jindal.

And you can't discount the race thing. I know that this is an expression of some degree of latent bias -- I'd call it "racialism" rather than "racism" in that there really is no such thing as race in any empirical or biological sense -- but I'm much more willing to trust a brown-skinned Republican to be a competent, good-government officeholder than any of the current generation of white Republicans now in Washington or most state capitals. I've seen a lot of people who look and talk like George W. Bush and Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott screw up, fail, and generally trash the republic and betray their sacred oaths to America. I have not yet seen a Republican who sounds or looks like Jindal wreck my country, and at some level I find that that seems to count for something in his favor. Plus, an Obama-Jindal race would have one salutary effect: Watching the bigots on the right figure out how to vote for a brown-skinned guy with a foreign name who they'll assume is a Hindu but is really a Catholic.

October 28, 2008 11:53 AM

FWright said:

"But... but... if there are two people of color running against each other in 2012, who will the seething racists vote for?"

Finally, the opening Ralph Nader has been waiting for.

October 28, 2008 12:05 PM

dylanposer said:

danny,

To be sure, they will have to split camps.  We will likely see some move in the direction of who benefits white supremecy the most, but then others tack toward who has the most white lineage.  The others might just go to third party candidates; Bob Barr would do well to start his exploratory committee now.

October 28, 2008 12:06 PM

CharlesFosterKane said:

It's entirely possible that by 2020 we will not have seen a white male in a presidential race for a dozen years.

Think: Obama v. Jindal 2012, Palin v. Hillary 2016? And then, I don't know, Chelsea Clinton v. Megan McCain 2020?

October 28, 2008 12:08 PM

The Plank said:

To follow up on Suzy's item , I wanted to note that, while there are plenty of 2012 GOP presidential

October 28, 2008 12:08 PM

Idefix said:

Rhubarbs I would tend to agree with  you, however I have one  word -- well, two: Clarence Thomas.

October 28, 2008 12:18 PM

kagoss718 said:

Only I'm pretty sure that Obama never participated in an exorcism.  Wait, hey...Palin/Jindal 2012!  Keeping America safe from witches and demons!

October 28, 2008 12:21 PM

stgla said:

I agree 100% on Jindal being the Republican Obama and I've been saying this for a long time (I went to college with Jindal).  The main difference is that Obama is a mainstream Democrat but Jindal is pretty far out there conservative.  If Jindal can move center for a general election and there are some issues that work in his favor (i.e. Iraq and the economy not being GOP albatrosses), he will have a good shot at the White House.  Jindal and Huckabee are the only Republicans with a future in national politics.  Romney, McCain, Giuliani, and Palin will be lucky if they get the kind of ad work that Bob Dole enjoys.  

October 28, 2008 12:25 PM

boneill said:

*************************

Last call!  Anyone one interested in a TNR Talkback Meetup Funapalooza tomorrow drop me a line at cairobrian@gmail.com.  

***************************

October 28, 2008 12:28 PM

dylanposer said:

Let me use the anti-gay marriage lsine of thinking:

If we start allowing non-white males the right to run for president, what's next?  Animals?

Lassie/Nemo '16

October 28, 2008 12:31 PM

drdannyu said:

What?  Talkback Funapalooza?  Did I not make the invite A-list?

*sobs*

October 28, 2008 12:57 PM

boneill said:

I mentioned it last week, Doc.  If you want to come to Chi-town you are more than welcome.  Hopefully it will be met with more success than the aborted Maine meetup.

October 28, 2008 1:13 PM

icarusr said:

Columns?  White columns?  How fucking presumptuous!!!!!  Where's Hannity to take umbrage, Colmes to take offence, McCain to denounce, O'Reilly to belittle, Steyn to Mock?

What?  Jindal is a Republican?  Oh yeah, I guess Repugs are allowed white columns; only Democrats, and especially uppity niggers, are not.  Sorry.

Right.  Because what the world needs is more exorcism.  In the White House.

Next?

October 28, 2008 1:19 PM

Wandreycer1 said:

I think its in Chicago Dr D, I wanted to go too....

Right now, I am so sick of Republicans - ten years of worsening disgust and rage really - the idea of contemplating their hatchlings waiting in the wings for even a second induces vomit.  Right now, these people deserve nothing but the contempt of this country.

That said -  if Jindal exhibits concrete expertise and knowledge in policy, if he is interested in governing from the center, if he accepts that climate change is man made and commits to working towards GREEN energy independence, if he treats opponents in a decent, mature manner and if he refuses to exhibit bigotry towards gay people and also fights against it in his party -  I probably won't for him, but I'd be happy to keep an open mind about him and wish him well.

I won't hold my breath.  I have zero faith or trust in this party and I have every right to feel this way.

October 28, 2008 1:30 PM

Wandreycer1 said:

Oops, just read that he doesn't believe in evolution so strike that.  Can't support anyone that marinated in religio-nonsense.

October 28, 2008 1:50 PM

drdannyu said:

I still think you worked some kind of weather/air travel hoodoo to avoid having to meet me in person, bone.  Considering how dashingly handsome and devastatingly urbane I am, I understand your need to shield your ego.  *pauses to admire self reflected in lunch-time yogurt spoon*

I am sorry I don't live close enough to the Windy City to join you.  I'll try to soldier bravely on, regardless.

October 28, 2008 1:55 PM

boyski said:

Jindal's real problem is that he's too short and skinny. In other words race is less a problem than the "he-man" thing (taller candidate wins, etc). On top of that he bears (to my mind) a significant resemblance to Michael Dukakis. And I was actually a big fan of Dukakis, but his story demonstrates that short, nebbishy guys don't get elected President regardless of skin tone.

October 28, 2008 2:15 PM

The Plank said:

On The Trail And Off Their Rockers: What Does Covering A Two-Year Campaign Do To The Soul Of A Journalist

October 29, 2008 7:33 AM

boatsrwood said:

I hate this guy. Here are the Internet fun Facts on Bobby J:

100% pro-life voting record according to the National Right to Life Committee. He opposes abortion without exception. He opposes embryonic stem cell research.

Jindal voted yes on making the PATRIOT Act permanent, voted in favor of the 2006 Military Commissions Act, supported a constitutional amendment banning flag burning and has an A rating from Gun Owners of America.

In 2006, Jindal sponsored the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act (H.R. 4761), a bill to eliminate the moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling over the U.S. outer continental shelf, which prompted

the watchdog group Republicans for Environmental Protection to issue him "an environmental harm demerit". Jindal's 2006 rating from that organization was -4, among the lowest in Congress.

In 2007, Jindal led the Louisiana delegation in Congressional earmark funding. According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, in 2007, Jindal's earmark funding was 14th among all Congressmen (hopefully it was all Katrina related, that wouldn't be so bad in my book)

Jindal supports the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. (He's insane too)

On June 25, 2008, Jindal signed the "Sex Offender ChemicalCastration Bill", authorizing the chemical castration of those convicted of certain sex offenses. Aaah, the long tradition of the southern grotesque, where's Lady Flannery when you need her? Faulkner would love this guys story too.

October 29, 2008 10:27 AM

Historian1956 said:

On the most superficial level, Jindal could be someone I could see making a serious run in 2016.  He has the calm demeanor of Obama and at least an outward willingness to be seen as bipartisan.  After either a failed Obama presidency or a wildly successful one, it is doubtful that the Democrats will be able to retain the presidency in 2016, just by watching history, minus the FDR/HST abberation.  Also it is doubtful Hillary will maintain her supremacy as the "Lady in Waiting" position comes 2016 and there doestn't appear to be a future rising star on the horizon in the party as of now.  Although that last part could change in the coming 6 years, giving 2 years for the actual primary/general election cycle beginning in 2014.

Frankly, I think the Republican Party is going to have to have a "Come to Jesus" moment over the next four years.  Do they want to be totally overrun by the Christian Right or go back to their roots of the monied paterfamilias of the past.  I wouldn't be surprised if a civil war erupts within the party and either a major compromise between the two factions occurs or even a split into two parites happens.  The Republican Party is at a crossroads right now with neither faction trusting or desiring to pander to the the other side.  

Whatever the outcome it will be an interesting ride and will make for great entertainment if you are watching from the sidelines.

October 29, 2008 10:40 AM

Historian1956 said:

boatsrwood ,

Everything on your list minus the last item is repugnant to me; however, that said, if Jindal is serious about a 2016 run, look to a serious pull-back from some of those exremist views to begin occuring if Obama wins on Tuesday.

As far as, the Sex Offender Chemical Castration Bill, since we know that pedophiles are untreatable and will re-offend, I'm all for changing the law for serial pedophiles to life in prison, without possibility of parole, after given a course of Depo Provera or whatever they use and some serious attempt at brain rewiring.  First offense after that, life in prison and throw away the key.

There are also some sexual predatory sadists who might also need the same punishment.  Forget mandatory sex offender registration and notification for such heineous and serious crimes, change the laws such that these kind of top of the food chain offenders never get out and remove the stigma for the lower types of sexual offenses, such as statutory rape between young people i.e. 18 to 20 y.o. male and 15 to 17 y.o females and vice versa type of crimes and solicitation of a prostitute type of offenses which have no element of violence or "brainwashing of victims".  If the offender cannot be cured or treated successfully yet makes a good faith effort to change and fails (i.e. chemical castration), then on the next offense it should be prison until the offender dies.  There is no reason for these types of sexual criminals, male or female to be out walking the streets after just a few years in prison.

October 29, 2008 10:58 AM

boatsrwood said:

I really expected the Republicans to tell the hardcore Christian right to kiss their ass this time around. It was getting close to that until they were given the V.P. gift of Palin.

Historian1956 makes a good point about a Republican split, I often wonder myself if that's in the cards (fingers croseed, McCain loses, more so if he loses big) but maybe its further down the road. Liberals had their Nader moment (with much blame, but still). Conservatives have their Ron Paul and then there's Bloomberg, who many speculate as making a move to national politics. Will Huckabee lead the Jesus freaks? Will we ever see a third party revolution? Eventually I think it's inevitable, especially if our world power status continues to drop and we become a more isolated country. We're still pretty new at this being a country thing.

But I'm getting way ahead of myself.

October 29, 2008 12:50 PM

The Plank said:

My colleague Chris remains skeptical that Jindal—as yet another “dark-skinned man with [a] foreign-sounding

October 29, 2008 1:28 PM

butchie b said:

boatsrwood, one might also wonder whether the Dems might split, as the higher Dem numbers in Congress reflect members whose views are, ahem, well to the right of their leadership.

Our world power status is dropping?  Really?  And how are you measuring that?  Euro elites don't like us?  Never have, never will.  The Middle East doesn't like it that we support Israel? Now there's a scoop.  Well, nobody else has one aircraft carrier battle group.  We've got 11, I think.  And the world watches whose movies, plays whose video games?

Yeah, you're getting ahead of yourself.

October 29, 2008 3:44 PM

The Plank said:

It's a little tense here with the election so close, and there've been a few in-house debates

November 1, 2008 1:42 PM