New Hampshire reveals a deeper Republican divide

Anti-Mitt Romney documentary sets the tone.

The New Hampshire primary later today is only the second stop for the Republicans in a long campaign for presidency, yet for most of the candidates it will be make or break.

However, instead of concentrating on their policies and reaching out to the undecided populace -- only 44 per cent of voter's polled said they had made up their mind -- the GOP candidates have engaged in a week of smear campaigning, with front-runner Mitt Romney the main target.

The tone of the campaign was well and truly set by the pro-Newt Gingrich Political Action Committee (PAC), Winning Our Future, with the release of a stinging anti-Romney documentary. The 30 minute film -- "When Mitt Romney came to Town" -- has yet to be released in full, but the three minute trailer attacks the former governor of Massachusetts for his actions during his time at the investment firm Bain Capital.


The video has led Romney, who has spent the last day of campaigning in New Hampshire trying to undo his own gaffe, to be portrayed as a modern day Gordon Gekko, the corporate raider immortalised by Michael Douglass in the 1987 film "Wall Street".

Gingrich attempted to solidify this view during last weekend's debates during which he grilled Romney over his lack of dedication to his constituents whilst he was governor.

The release of the documentary's trailer has underscored the the campaign as a tit-for-tat game that has impressed few voters. According to a national CBS poll released yesterday, 58 per cent of registered Republican voters have said they want more presidential choices, with only 37 per cent stating that they were satisfied with the candidates.

According to John Dickerson, writing on, the party is suffering from a "humor crisis", confusing insults for jokes. He writes:

Humor suggests that no matter how dark things are, you have the sensibility to laugh, to see a bit of sun around the corner... A joke well-told gives the audience something they can pass along later to their friends. It magnifies your message easily or at least makes voters feel good enough that they report back favorably about their experience at your rally.

The candidates have concentrated all their energies on attacking the front-runner despite all the indications that regardless of his gaffes and embarrassment, he will still come first in the vote later today. The polls have consistently placed Mitt Romney in first place ahead of Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman who is currently tied in third place with Rick Santorum according to the WMUR/UNH poll.

Romney may take New Hampshire but the real challenge ahead is who the Republican party will choose to rally behind come January 21 in South Carolina. The votes have been too close for any candidate to emerge as a clear winner; with all their skirmishes, the candidates have failed to put themselves forward to their own party and are instead damaging their own bids for the Republican presidency nomination.

Show Hide image

Ankara bombs: Turkey is being torn apart by bad leaders and bad neighbours

This is the worst terror attack in Turkey’s history. In just a few months, hundreds of civilians, Turkish security personnel and PKK members have been killed.

It had already been a deadly summer of political instability in Turkey. And now this. Another massacre – this time at the hand of twin bomb attacks on a peace rally in Ankara, which have killed at least 97 people.

It is the worst terror attack in Turkey’s history. In just a few months, hundreds of civilians, Turkish security personnel and PKK members have been killed. Barely a single day passes in Turkey without some incident of lethal political violence.

Freedom from fear is the very basic principle of human security, which should be protected by any state that wants a true sense of legitimacy over its population and territory. In Turkey, that freedom is under enormous pressure from all sorts of internal and external forces.

Stirred up

There are plenty of competing explanations for the political violence engulfing the country, but none can seriously overlook the impact of Turkey’s bad political leadership.

The terrible, violent summer reflects nothing so much as an elite’s greed for power and willingness to treat civilians as dispensable. This has become particularly apparent since Turkey’s inconclusive June 7 election, and the way various political parties and leaders did all they could to prevent the formation of a viable coalition government.

Ultimately, the power game is simple enough. At the elections hastily called for November, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s AKP party needs to garner only a few per cent more than it did in June to win the majority it needs for Erdogan to bolster his powers and make himself the country’s executive president.

To that end, pro-government media has been in overdrive throughout the summer, deliberately fuelling an environment of division, paranoia and mistrust in hopes of winning votes out of pure fear.

All the while, southeast Turkey has endured dreadful violence. Some towns – Cizre, for instance, which was under seige for days – have suddenly found themselves on the front line of renewed fighting between the security forces and the PKK.

The demise of the peace process is not just a failure of diplomacy – it signals that the armed conflict is still hugely politically and financially lucrative to Turkey’s political and military leaders. And the violence they’re profiting from is rapidly corroding social life and human security across the country.

The war next door

But the political instability caused by Turkey’s leaders has been greatly exacerbated by its neighbours, especially the continuing civil war in Syria and its deadly ramifications – an influx of jihadist fighters, a massive refugee crisis, and spiralling military interventions.

Since the end of the Cold War, global security has never been so seriously threatened as it is by today’s situation in Syria, which is now host to a head-to-head clash between the interests of Russia, the Assad regime and Iran on the one hand and the US, the EU, their Arab allies, and NATO on the other.

All sides claim to be fighting against the Islamic State and other Islamist extremists, but it’s clear that what’s really at stake is a lot more than just the fate of the jihadists or the political future of Syria. Already there’s an ominous spat underway over Russian planes' incursion into Turkish airspace; NATO has already raised the prospect of sending troops to Turkey as a defensive gesture.

And while it was always inevitable that the Syrian disaster would affect its northern neighbour to some degree, Turkey’s continuing internal political instability is proving something of an Achilles heel. By deliberately forcing their country into a period of chaotic and violent turmoil, Turkey’s leaders have made it more susceptible than ever to the Syrian conflict and the mighty geopolitical currents swirling around it.

And yet they press on with their cynical political ploys – seemingly unmoved by the cost to their people, and unaware that they could just be becoming pawns in a much bigger game.

The Conversation

Alpaslan Ozerdem is a Chair in Peace-Building and Co-Director of the Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations at Coventry University.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.