The term “bed-wetting” in politics has roots in psychological analogies.
Much like a child’s fear leading to a loss of control in the night, it is used to denote overreaction, fear, panic, or a loss of control within the political landscape.
Origin of “Bed-Wetting”
David Plouffe, President Barack Obama’s former campaign manager and top political adviser, first coined the term in 2008 when Democrats began openly fretting about their political challenges, ABC News reports.
It may not be a pleasant image, but that’s the phrase used inside Obamaworld when Democrats start worrying about their political fortunes.
Plouffe used the term again before the 2010 midterm elections in a Washington Post op-ed when he urged “no bed-wetting” among Democrats:
This will be a tough election for our party and for many Republican incumbents as well. Instead of fearing what may happen, let’s prove that we have more than just the brains to govern — that we have the guts to govern.
Primarily used by politicians, campaign managers, and political strategists, “bed-wetting” typically aims to chastise or mock a person or group for perceived overreaction or alarm about a particular issue, candidate, or political event.
It’s often used to diminish the concerns or fears of others by likening them to immature or irrational behavior.
During political campaigns and election seasons, the term may be employed to criticize a political party or supporters for reacting prematurely or excessively to polls, political gaffes, or other campaign-related events.
For example, if a party’s supporters are alarmed by a slight dip in polling numbers, they might be accused of “bed-wetting,” suggesting that their fears are exaggerated or unfounded.
Within policy debates, “bed-wetting” may be used to describe unnecessary panic or fear regarding potential consequences of a policy decision.
It’s a way to criticize those who are opposed to a particular policy, arguing that their concerns are based on unfounded or exaggerated fears.
While it can be an effective rhetorical tool to minimize an opponent’s concerns, the use of “bed-wetting” can also backfire.
It may be seen as belittling or dismissive, undermining the user’s credibility, or alienating those who feel that the concerns being dismissed are valid and serious.
More on Bed-Wetting
A person who expresses doubts; a worrywart.
Politics is an exercise in building up confidence among the like-minded. When that isn’t achievable, pejorative terms such as this one pop up. The expression has been around for decades, but has come into vogue in recent years. Both parties use it to call out dissenters within their ranks.
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial section, a reliable bastion of conservatism, sneered in August 2012: “Much as we predicted last week, the Republican Party’s Bedwetter Caucus has emerged on schedule to explain why Mitt Romney can’t possibly win the election with Paul Ryan on the ticket.”
Across the ideological spectrum, Barack Obama’s campaign mastermind David Plouffe became known for often castigating doomsayers with this childhood affliction. In a 2010 Washington Post opinion piece about what his party had to do to recover in time for the midterm elections, Plouffe listed several prescriptions, among them: “No bed-wetting.” (It wasn’t enough for his party, which got shellacked that year.)
From Dog Whistles, Walk-Backs, and Washington Handshakes © 2014 Chuck McCutcheon and David Mark.
Use of “Bed-Wetting” in a sentence
Roll Call (July 27, 2016): “No bed-wetting. Dems will leave Philly after a great convention with mo[mentum] and Clinton will enter August with strong electoral college advantage”
The Hill (July 25, 2019): “This is like the Democratic bed-wetting of past cycles except everyone evidently drank a gallon of chardonnay before they went to bed”
ABC News (February 3, 2014): “The bed-wetting has begun.”