Super Tuesday: 5 things we learned

Here's where the GOP stand after another ten states choose their Republican candidate.

Earlier this week, the former First Lady Barbara Bush called the 2012 Republican race "the worst campaign I've ever seen in my life". Today's New York Times leading article agrees, noting that even with last night's Super Tuesday results counted, the dirty race continues to drag on:

Republican voters will have to go on for some time choosing between a candidate, Mitt Romney, who stands for nothing except country-club capitalism, and a candidate, Rick Santorum, so blinkered by his ideology that it's hard to imagine him considering any alternative ideas or listening to any dissenting voice.

So where does this long drawn-out process for the GOP to nominate a presidential candidate for November stand? Here's five things to take from last night and note in the coming weeks:

1) Mitt continues to struggle in the South

The frontrunner Romney lost South Carolina to Gingrich in January, and yesterday Newt took his home state of Georgia, while Santorum won Tennessee. Romney has a sizeable lead in the delegate count, but has not yet won over southern voters. It's not enough that these conservative Americans backed John McCain in 2008: Romney needs to make gains off his own personality and politics.

2) Evangelical votes could yet boost Rick

Santorum's success with conservative evangelical voters could help him make up some ground over the next week. Three of the four states holding primaries or caucuses in the coming week -- Kansas, Alabama and Mississippi -- hold 130 delegate votes between them and are of this demographic. It's now almost a certainty there won't be a Republican nominee until June.

3) Ron Paul keeps things interesting

Despite having yet to win a contest, Ron Paul continues to receive enough votes to keep things interesting. He finished in second place -- ahead of Romney -- in North Dakota, second in Vermont and in half the contests received more votes than Newt Gingrich. Should Paul leave the race soon, his not-insignificant fan base will be migrating towards another candidate, which could play out in various ways.

4) Was Ohio Mitt's coup?

This swing-state come November was an absolutely critical win for Romney. Had Santorum taken that state, he would have received an enormous momentum boost. Yet Romney's success comes with warnings: exit polls show he continues to struggle with working-class voters, evangelicals and those described as "very conservative". And with the Romney campaign spending four times that of Santorum's, a 15,000 vote margin is only barely good enough.

(As an aside, four years ago Hillary Clinton won the Ohio primary, only to go on to lose the nomination to Barack Obama who took the state in the Presidential election.)

5) GOP flailings are great for the President

Unsurprisingly (see Bush, above), the GOP race is doing little to soften the party around the edges. As I reported yesterday, the reduced turnout of voters in the primaries shows a clear gap of enthusiasm for the Republican party amongst their own people. Now new polling by Pew shows that the dirty battle between candidates is directly helping their rivals: Democrats, turned off by Romney &co. and rallying behind the president. As the New York Times writes:

A new Pew Research poll shows that 3 in 10 voters say their opinion of the Republicans has worsened during the primaries. Among Democrats, 49 percent said watching the primaries have made them more likely to vote for Mr. Obama. That is up from 36 percent in December, which shows that Mr. Obama has risen as the Republicans have fallen.

Still, it's eight months until the big election day, and the NYT leader notes, "the president, who can be frustratingly inert at times, still has a long way to go".

Alice Gribbin is a Teaching-Writing Fellow at the Iowa Writers' Workshop. She was formerly the editorial assistant at the New Statesman.

Pexels
Show Hide image

Relive your worst experiences for $15 an hour: how confessional journalism exploits women writers

The women’s website Bustle asks its writers to fill out a checklist covering every possible personal angle; it puts a low-market value on their most intimate truths.

Let me tell you about the worst thing that ever happened to me, the most terrible thing I’ve ever done. Let me tell you everything there is to know about me, all the buried markers of self that live under my skin. OK not that one, and I’ll keep that one too. I have to have something left over, after all. Even so, I’ve written about being the May Queen at school, and the time I got flashed in an underpass; about having depression as a teenager, and the unplanned pregnancy that became my son.

Actually, I’ve written about that last one twice: my first successful pitch for a comment piece was a response to anti-abortion comments by the then-influential semi-thinker Phillip Blond. It was a kind of pitch I now refer to now as the “what I think about X as a Y”: what I think about abortion as a woman who had and chose to continue an unplanned pregnancy. Experience is capital, and in 2009, I used it to buy my way into writing.

It’s a standard route for women writers, but not usually as formalised as it is at women’s website Bustle, which (as Gawker reported last week) asks its writers to fill out a checklist covering every possible personal angle: “I see a therapist”, “I’ve had group sex (more than three)”, “I used to have a Fitbit but I don’t now”.

Every bit of what you are, granulated and packaged for easy dispersal through a range of stories. It’s an editorial approach that gives rise to a weird, impersonally-personal tone. “Five Reasons I’m Grateful For My Parents’ Divorce”, chirrups a listicle; “that’s why I tried anal sex in the first place”, trills a gif-heavy piece about the benefits of bumming.

That’s just the shallow end of the confessional genre. The ideal online women’s interest story combines a huge, life-changing disclosure with an empowering message. Like this, from xoJane: “I'm Finally Revealing My Name and Face As the Duke Porn Star” (the last line of that one is: “My name is Belle Knox, and I wear my Scarlet Letter with pride”). Or this, from Jezebel: “On Falling In and Out of Love With My Dad” (which concludes like this: “And to the victims of their abuse, I want to say what I have finally been able to understand myself: that my attraction, and what it led to, was not my fault”).

It’s tempting to think of this blend of prurience and uplift as a peculiar product of the internet, but it’s been a staple of women’s publishing forever: the covers of women’s magazines are full of lines like “Raped for 50p and a biscuit!” and “The groom who went ZOOM!” about a jilted bride, exactly as they were when I used to sneak them from my aunt’s magazine rack to read them as a child. The difference is that, in the trashy weeklies, there’s no pretence that trauma is the overture for a career. You get paid for your story, and someone else writes it up. The end.

At Bustle, the rate apparently runs to $90 for a six-hour shift. That feels like a low market value to put on your most intimate truths, especially when the follow-up success you’re investing in might never materialise. The author of the father-daughter incest story for Jezebel told a Slate writer that, despite the huge web traffic her confessional received, her subsequent pitches were ignored. Her journalistic career currently begins and ends with her very grimmest experience.

“Everything is copy” is the Nora Ephron line. But when she said it, she didn’t intend the disclosure economy we live in now. For Ephron, “everything is copy” meant claiming control: “When you slip on the banana peel, people laugh at you. But when you tell people you slipped on the banana peel, it’s your laugh. So you become the hero, rather than the victim of the joke.”

Does the aspiring writer plucked from an editor’s checklist to retail her own Worst Thing Ever get to call the banana skin her own?

The Bustle checklist suggests not. “Don’t put anything on here you don’t want to write about,” it stresses, before adding, “that said, you can always say ‘no’ . . . You might be too busy when an editor approaches you about possibly writing an identity post, or simply not interested, and that’s okay! We won’t be mad!”

Ticking the box basically puts you in a position of assumed consent, but which hopeful young woman would dare to set her boundaries too close when an editor tells her this could be good for her career? (Yes, I know this sounds a bit like a story of sexual harassment. Funny, that.)

So many confessionalist pieces of writing tell stories about women having their limits overridden. Rape and coercion. Abuse and assault. Being talked over and ignored. But the logic of the perpetual confession journalism machine is the same: everything about a woman should be available to use, nothing a woman has to say is valid without a personal claim to authority, repackage their guts as shiny sausages and call it an “identity piece”.

Women writers shouldn’t be waiting for permission to say no. We need to tell our stories on our own terms, and we need to set better terms than $15 an hour and the hope of some exposure. The worst thing that ever happened to me? It’s mine. I’m keeping it.

Sarah Ditum is a journalist who writes regularly for the Guardian, New Statesman and others. Her website is here.