There was the following statement in October 29 New Yorker’s article that came under the title, “Why the G.O.P. Candidates Don’t Do Substance”:
Did any of the candidates detail how they would pay for their huge tax giveaways? Of course not. Relying on the discredited arguments of supply-side economics, a few of them did say that reductions in tax rates would produce a much higher rate of economic growth, which would boost tax revenues. ...
It was left to John Kasich, who is seeking to position himself as the voice of sanity in the asylum, to state the obvious: “You know, these plans would put us trillions and trillions of dollars in debt…. Why don’t we just give a chicken in every pot, while we’re coming up with these fantasy tax schemes.”
What does “Give a chicken in every pot” mean? Why should it be chicken, not egg, bread, pork, or turkey? Is this a common idiom?
Additionally, is the phrase, “Don’t do substance” used in the headline a common expression as well? How different is it from “Don’t have substance,” which I feel like being more comfortable with?