-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
What the GOP's next steps should be after Herschel Walker's loss
NPR's Steve Inskeep speaks with GOP fundraiser Steven Law about Herschel Walker's loss in the Georgia Senate runoff and how he believes the party should recalculate to move forward.
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
When Herschel Walker ran for U.S. Senate in Georgia, he faced criticism for many things he said. But when he lost this week, he gave a gracious concession2 speech.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
HERSCHEL WALKER: I don't want any of you to stop dreaming. I don't want any of you to stop believing in America.
UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Herschel.
WALKER: I want you to believe in America and continue to believe in the Constitution and believe in our elected officials most of all.
INSKEEP: Unlike some, Walker did not claim his defeat was unfair. The loss concluded a disappointing midterm for Republicans, who failed to recapture the Senate. So we called a Republican who knows a lot about Senate elections. Steven Law runs a political action committee that spent tens of millions of dollars on Republican candidates.
What went wrong with Herschel Walker's campaign?
STEVEN LAW: I think there were several things. First of all, Herschel Walker obviously was a tremendously famous sports figure in the state, beloved - 100% name ID - but he also had a lot of problems in his past life, many of which he was quite straightforward4 about. But when that - when those kinds of things end up in the political environment, it did him some harm.
And then, in addition to that, Raphael Warnock is an unusually strong candidate. It's not any surprise the Democrats6 are already looking at him as a potential future presidential candidate. He raised over $100 million, and he used that very effectively to negatively define Walker. Now, Walker raised a lot of money himself. He raised more money than any other Republican challenger in the country, but it just proved to be a bridge too far.
INSKEEP: When you talk about Warnock's image, some analysts7 have pointed8 out that Warnock worked very hard over the past couple of years to appear bipartisan. You might agree or disagree as to whether he really was, but he worked with Ted3 Cruz on things that were important to his state. He had a particular stance on immigration that was different than the rest of his party. He was taking his own stances on things.
LAW: Yeah, I think that's exactly right. I mean, one can argue whether it was more artifice9 than reality, but he was certainly smart enough to invest in efforts to appear bipartisan. And it was a huge part of his messaging, which indicates, you know, something that's going on in the electorate10 - that voters want to see more cooperation in Washington. They want to see people working together. They're tired of the hardcore partisanship11 and the crisis, the scandal, the grievance12 politics. They want to see people solving problems. And Warnock clearly marketed himself that way. And we - whether or not it was accurate or not, it seemed to stick with voters.
INSKEEP: Did the Georgia result symbolize13 the whole problem for the Republican Party in the midterm elections?
LAW: I think Georgia had a lot of unique complicating14 factors. I mean, it was the one race where we had a true celebrity15 on the ballot16, and we were also running against a Democrat5 who was popular. But the cycle didn't go well for Republicans for any number of reasons. Among them, the red wave that a lot of people were expecting - we were not, but a lot of people were - it just never materialized. Democrats were very energized17.
And then the second thing that hurt Republicans was candidate quality overall. We just had a number of candidates - and I'm not just talking at the Senate level - gubernatorial level, House races, up and down the ballot - candidates who were flawed, candidates who simply couldn't communicate to the middle part of the electorate, which ended up having a decisive role in these election outcomes this year.
INSKEEP: I want to ask about another factor that I think you've commented upon in social media. Fox News personalities18 in the last few days have been saying, wow, it was a really bad idea for Republicans to avoid early voting and to pretend there was tons of fraud in the system.
LAW: Well, exactly right. You go back to the days when Karl Rove and Ken19 Mehlman ran the RNC - the Republican Party bested the Democrats on getting out the vote in every single election. Democrats were simply not good at it. And over the last couple of decades, they've really invested in doing well at that while Republicans started to treat early voting is a bad habit that needed to be avoided. And we got the results that you would expect from that. I do think it's important that the party step up on it. I'm glad to hear that people are recognizing that this was a major tactical failure on the Republican Party side.
INSKEEP: Paul Ryan, the former House speaker, said something the other day that I think you said before - kind of a formula. He said, with Trump20, we lose. Without Trump, we win. Is he correct?
LAW: Well, I think Trump himself will have a decision to make about how he wants to come across and what he wants to talk about. At the end of the day, what voters are in the mood for is constructive21, competent leadership. They want leaders to get the job done and to leave us alone. And you look at what's worked. You look at the kinds of politicians who have been succeeding in the last couple of elections. It's been people like Governor Brian Kemp, Governor Glenn Youngkin, Governor Ron DeSantis.
INSKEEP: Now, you began that answer - I asked if Republicans lose with Trump, and you said, well, it depends on how he decides to present himself. Are you saying you think it is still conceivable that this particular former president could rebrand himself as a competent centrist?
LAW: I really don't know. I mean, I'm nowhere near that inner circle or - and I'd be the last person who could predict his thinking or how he'd approach things. But I - the one thing I do know is what we are seeing that voters are now drawn22 to. They're drawn to politicians who are not mired23 in grievance politics. They're not mired in some particular ideological24 bent25. They want to solve problems. They want to make people's lives better. And a leader who comes forward with that kind of approach is more likely to be successful than one who's not.
INSKEEP: Stephen Law, it's always a pleasure talking with you. Thank you so much.
LAW: Thank you. I really appreciate it.
1 transcript | |
n.抄本,誊本,副本,肄业证书 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 concession | |
n.让步,妥协;特许(权) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 ted | |
vt.翻晒,撒,撒开 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 straightforward | |
adj.正直的,坦率的;易懂的,简单的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 democrat | |
n.民主主义者,民主人士;民主党党员 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 democrats | |
n.民主主义者,民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 analysts | |
分析家,化验员( analyst的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 pointed | |
adj.尖的,直截了当的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 artifice | |
n.妙计,高明的手段;狡诈,诡计 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 electorate | |
n.全体选民;选区 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 Partisanship | |
n. 党派性, 党派偏见 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 grievance | |
n.怨愤,气恼,委屈 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 symbolize | |
vt.作为...的象征,用符号代表 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 complicating | |
使复杂化( complicate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 celebrity | |
n.名人,名流;著名,名声,名望 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 ballot | |
n.(不记名)投票,投票总数,投票权;vi.投票 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 energized | |
v.给予…精力,能量( energize的过去式和过去分词 );使通电 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 personalities | |
n. 诽谤,(对某人容貌、性格等所进行的)人身攻击; 人身攻击;人格, 个性, 名人( personality的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 ken | |
n.视野,知识领域 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 trump | |
n.王牌,法宝;v.打出王牌,吹喇叭 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 constructive | |
adj.建设的,建设性的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 drawn | |
v.拖,拉,拔出;adj.憔悴的,紧张的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 mired | |
abbr.microreciprocal degree 迈尔德(色温单位)v.深陷( mire的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 ideological | |
a.意识形态的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 bent | |
n.爱好,癖好;adj.弯的;决心的,一心的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|