Posted on 11/08/2012 11:43:50 AM PST by radpolis
I have read many of the Freeper and conservative analyses of why we lost this election.
The ironic thing is they are not all wrong even when they contradict each other.
Each element of criticism has an element of truth.
The problem essentially comes down to this:
How do we get more votes than the Democrats?
The fact is that the Republican Party has some inherent contradictions that we have to over-come.
Most Freepers want to be a niche party in a country of 310 million people.
As a capitalist, this goes against the basic principle that you want to maximize your customer base.
Some really believe that you can win elections just by appealing to the White conservative Christian and evangelical base.
We can win elections with this base if the voters show up. But this is a really risky strategy, because evidently this base is fickle.
We can certainly win state elections when this base shows up in Red and Swing states. Evidently, we are good at winning elections even in Blue and Swing states when there isn't a presidential election. (There are reasons for this that always benefits us that I won’t be going into.)
However, during national elections, we have told moderates on the West Coast and the Northeast that if you don’t subscribe to conservative Christian principles of the Deep South and Midwest then you can go take a hike.
As far as I am concerned, this is a stupid strategy. Telling the Rockefeller and Tim Johnson Republicans to take a hike is not helpful.
Freepers need to come to grips with the reality that there are people who are philosophically with us on the West Coast and Northeast but who are more socially libertarian than socially conservative, many are hard core capitalists and/or have misgivings about the Nanny State. For example, they are small businesswomen who get killed on taxes and regulations. But they side with the Democrats, because the hardcore evangelicals turn them off with their rhetoric. Honestly, I think what killed us was the “War on Women.” However unjust you think that attack was, we have to come to terms that some rhetoric on our side is what hung us.
Broadly, we shouldn't be losing any elections in New England, except for maybe Massachusetts and Vermont, which have gone full blown socialist. And, quite frankly, we shouldn't be losing any elections in the Upper Midwest either. These states are mostly lily white and don’t have the black and Latino demographic that swings elections to Democrats.
So basically we need to go back to the way we won elections in the past.
We have to stop isolating the liberal and moderate Republicans on the West Coast, New England and Upper Midwest. Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan embraced them, because they were not stupid. In other words, abide by Reagan's 11th Commandment.
But, at the same time, we need to keep the hardcore conservative base in the Deep South and lower Midwest.
This is the paradox.
In the final analysis, we need the Reagan coalition. People seem to think Reagan was a hard core conservative his entire career. But the fact is he was more like Mitt Romney. Reagan governed California when it was going through the social revolution of the late 60s and early 70s. He didn't govern California like a hard core conservative. What made Reagan look like a hard core conservative to many, however, was his position on Communism and the Soviet Union.
Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan won their elections with blowouts. They had 50 state strategies. They didn't win by going after a handful of votes in the so-called battlegrounds.
The gap we need to bridge is the social conservatism of the lower Midwest and Deep South with the more socially liberal elements in the urban and coastal parts of the country. Many here think we shouldn't go this route and go hard right, socially. I respectfully disagree.
I don't think you can win if you isolate women, the youth, and the male libertarian elements with rhetoric that sounds more like the Taliban than American.
I also think we would have a better message that would even appeal to Democrats is if our attitude towards government be made in the rhetoric of reform instead of elimination--even if we plan on eliminating.
The broader base lies in prosperity for all through free markets and entrepreneurship, a social agenda that is limited to civil society, church and localities, smaller, efficient and reformed government, and a strong defense.
But you step on your own argument and contradict it:
Broadly, we shouldn't be losing any elections in New England, except for maybe Massachusetts and Vermont, which have gone full blown socialist. And, quite frankly, we shouldn't be losing any elections in the Upper Midwest either. These states are mostly lily white and don’t have the black and Latino demographic that swings elections to Democrats.
Rhode Island is more heavily Democrat in presidential elections than Massachusetts, but both states have elected Republican governors more often than not in the past two decades. The broader point is that you talk about not throwing out the Rockefeller Republicans (another passage that's likely to irritate your readers), and go on to throw out whole states. If your approach is right, you ought to entertain the possibility of electing Republicans in states like Massachusetts, or at least not publicly single one or two states out as unwinnable under any circumstances.
Also, you talk about not confining the party to the "White conservative Christian and evangelical base," but go on to say that we should be winning in the Upper Midwest because of race. That seems to be a serious contradiction, unless your argument is for a very White party that includes people of different political philosophies, rather than for a conservative party that includes people of different races.
If you're talking about Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan, I'm not sure you're right about Blacks and Latinos not being a factor. If you're talking about the Northern plains, you ought to consider that Scandinavian social ideas may have been more of an influence than skin color (though Republicans shouldn't write those states off any more than the Northeast). But in any case, Republicans ought to strive against being identified as the party of one race against the others.
On the whole, though, there is some sense in what you say.
There is no “conservative paradox”. Both Reagan and GW Bush won running as fiscal and social conservatives. Conservatism isn’t the problem, it’s the solution. The challenge is getting the right candidate to sell it. That person has to believe down in his/her gut in that conservative message and be willing to implement it once elected.
Abortion is not a woman’s issue. No one SERIOUSLY believes that killing babies is okay.
“This is the paradox.”
We should come to accept what we find odious, learn to flatter and cozen like Democrats and their tin god? How long will you wrestle with your indecision?
One man standing alone with the truth is a majority. 1 Kings 18:21
No one here will bend the knee to Obama or his followers. There are other forces at work in this world than evil. Stand true and your paradox will work itself out.
Mike Huckabee posted these on his facebook page. Comments?
Mike Huckabee
There is a lot to be disappointed by in the election results this evening and I am disappointed, but not despondent.
Tonight’s results only remind me that our country has slipped into a deeper state of dependence on government than I wanted to believe. Where the Goliath of government has grown so too has our dependency.
It’s also increasingly apparent to me that our real problems are not politic
al, but spiritual. Both parties have failed to acknowledge that. Democrats have not wanted to even acknowledge the need for God in our public institutions, but sadly, many of the Republican leadership will acknowledge God, but not because they believe we should be humble before Him, but to use God in our speeches and platforms. We wear our love of Israel like a badge of courage but on the issues of life and marriage too many of our leaders are more like lambs than Lions of Judah.
Well now maybe our Republican Party will look at itself in the mirror. I feel that we shouldn’t pack up and quit, but gear up and get ready for the next battle. That’s what we do as people of faith and a party of principle. We don’t stop believing what we believe. We do a better job of doing what we’re supposed to do. That’s how you attract voters and win elections. And that is how you save America from herself.
Mike Huckabee
The Good Fight Continues
Like you, I am disappointed in the results of Tuesday’s election. But we fought hard for the issues we believe so strongly in. That fight is one that will continue. I intend to be an active participant in fighting for the values that conservatives value - the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, the Second Amendment, limited government, reduced spending, and all of
our core principles.
Huck PAC and I will continue to fight the good fight. We will be a voice for conservative values. Don’t let anyone tell you that conservative social values don’t matter anymore. They do matter. They continue to be the bed rock of our society. And they are worth fighting for.
Stay involved, keep the faith, and continue to fight the good fight!
Wrong again, Longbow. It’s the Republicans who are a pathetic joke.
The CP (or maybe another third party) may be small french fries now, but that’s all going to change. The reason nobody knows about them is they never got any play in the media, including FOX and talk radio.
But when the time comes they get some honest exposure nationally, red-blooded Americans of all races and walks of life will be drawn to them like bees to honey. Why? Because most people want to be free and to rise up as far as their talents and wits allow them to. There’s no dignity in handouts.
Republicans had more than 20 years to wise up and follow in Reagan’s footsteps. They blew it. It’s doubtful they had any intention of returning the U.S. to its former glory anyway. Either they don’t care of they do care but are afraid to fight for what’s good for the country.
The GOP’s day has come and gone. Did you know that millions of registered Republicans stayed home on Tuesday in what was probably the most critical election of our lifetime? What does that tell you?
RINO File.
Here’s the Conservative Paradox...First we need to WIN to change things...Why aren’t we winning...because we are proposing social engineering in our National platform when that is not what we should be about. We need to be more inclusive and appear less imperious.
We need to be more Libertarian, not Liberal, to be more inclusive. Most people ARE generally conservative by nature. We all know that Conservative principles are sound, founded upon tradition and universality.
The single issue that, IMHO, hurts us the most is our appearance of being monolithic (at least that’s the perception) in preaching about birth control and abortion . Yes...I know...51% of the population believes abortion is wrong but in every election that issue is used to beat us over the head. Murdock lost in Indiana because of his rape comment;same with Akin in Missouri. That would have been two more Senate seats. It has to be worth 5 points nationally.
Why do we lose among young single women? Married women? Hispanic women? Why should there be a gap? Exit polls say that their “Perception” of the Republican position IS monolithic. We give our enemies an issue when there doesn’t have to be one. We are the party of freedom; we believe in the Bill of Rights. So if we refuse denial of our right to keep and bear arms, for instance, how can we say that it is OK to deny the freedom one has over there body. We have to be consistent...AND TAKE THE ISSUE AWAY FROM THE OTHER SIDE.
New Republican plank on Abortion and Birth Control:
The Republican Party believes that Abortion and Birth Control are within the realm of one’s freedom and right to make decisions about their own body and that this is consistent with the support and belief in the Bill of Rights and all other indivdual freedoms as well as responsibilities. We also respect the religious choices of indivduals in regard to this freedom. We believe , therefore, that Federal government has absolutely no role in financing, determining, supporting, opposing or legislating for or against birth control or abortion one way or another. We further believe that the states should be responsible for providing the usual guidelines protecting the health of individuals.
The rest of our issues DO resonate with the electorate. This isn’t abandoning principle...it is a restatement of principle....Individual Freedom...which is exactly what the founders wanted.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Yeah, right. LOL. You keep dreaming there pal.
3rd party's don't work in our winner take all system that does not allow for coalition government. Never really has, never will. A major party went down once and was quickly replaced be another - which immediately became the 2nd leg of our 2 party system. Geeze, even Ron Paul figured this out. Heck, even the LaRouchies knew it which was why they ran as Democrats.
Every election people cry, whine, flail and wail about creating or joining a 3rd party and it never amounts to squat.
I don’t much like Ron Paul, but I do like the concept of a “Liberty” movement. I like your idea of branding us as the party of freedom and attacking abortion from a fiscal angle. If we can get the government to stop paying for it as a domestic economic matter, it would be a heck of a lot more progress than we’ve had fighting about it as a moral issue.
Thanks...but I am definitely not a Ronbot. Yes...we probably would be more successful addressing matters in a more practical framework with the MTV genereation.
But don’t miss the political point...we still address it as a political issue in the context of Individual Freedom as opposed to Social Justice and Collectivity.
It still is genuine but more translatable. To me it is THE ONE issue that prevents us from being formidable.
Gotcha, no I didn’t think you were a paultard. Was just mentioning that I like how they are using the term “Liberty Movement”.
And yes, I think you are on to something. We can still be for the same legislative goals, just push for them from a different angle that is more inclusive and alienates fewer people. This is the kind of thing I suspect folks on the right are going to do in the future. So yeah, you are definitely on to something here.
I think radpolis has it very nearly right but there is more to it.
Biggest problem is that "the party" keeps shoving unelectable good old boys [next in line] up our nose then adding a more conservative VP to appeal to the conservative base.
Fact that Biden is again our VP and Sara Palin is not pretty well shows us that a strong VP isn't enough to pull off a win or cause a loss.
Lesson; the GOP leadership has got to be changed, which would probably require civil war within the party & deeply sadden the Bush family. So, how do we do that?
Next problem is probably the in-party circular firing squad mindset many of us have.
I am not here to point fingers but social conservatives in particular need to understand that alliances are stronger than a bunch of independent operators.
Lesson; Alliances are formed on shared goals and not shared ideology. So, work together on the immediate goals and do whatever does not endanger that work in order to convince allies to work for or accommodate your views.
Finally: A third party (remember the “ Wobblies”, "Bull Moose, ", "know nothing", "Free Earth"...?) will only crash, burn, and assure more dem domination.
Deal with it.
Lesson; we've got to actually change the damn GOP and not try to replace it in one election cycle because one cycle is all we've got!
Only time will tell so I guess we’ll see.
But what we do know for sure, is that the Republican party bosses blew not only the most critical election of our time, but what should have easily been a landslide victory. Heck, even Joe the Plumber coould have sailed through to victory.
Also, I agree that after every major election people do ‘whine and cry’ and talk third party but it has yet amounted to anything significant.
But this time is different. The clock is running out and our options are few.
So while the GOP know-nothings are wasting time ‘figuring out’ what went wrong and who to pander to next time, us real Americans will be formulating a strategy to get our country back.
We can no longer allow a boy to do a man’s job.
I disagree with you on 3rd party’s. I am not a big fan of the Republican party, but there will always be an “establishment” that understands how the system works. Did you notice how fast the various Tea Party factions became mainstream in their own way. There is no way to stop that.
That aside, I re-read my last post to you and saw that it was pretty obnoxious. I apologize for that. Sometimes I get carried away.
I appreciate that, but no worries.
Things are bound to get heated given all that’s been going on. We’re all human.
Besides - I’m quite sure we both want the same thing anyway.
The whole war on women could have been turned against the dems. Point out the hypocrisy of the murderer Ted Kennedy and the rapist Bill Clinton. Than mention half of the aborted babies are future women. The dems want women to be sluts. They want women to get AIDS and cervical cancer and other STDs. If The dems would get tough on criminals women wouldn't have to be afraid of becoming victims of violent crime including rape. If the dems would stop taxing businesses there would be more jobs for women. Then talk about men the women love. They too don't want to be crime victims or be unemployed. Republicans never challenge the dems. That's the problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.