Posted on 11/11/2014 6:15:10 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Over at the Washington Examiner, Philip Klein makes the interesting case that the GOP can only win the presidency by nominating a real conservative.
Regarding the failed presidential candidacy of Mitt Romney, Klein notes,
“His clumsy statements, such as declaring that he was ‘severely conservative’ and that his preferred immigration policy would lead to ‘self deportation,’ were rooted in the fact that he was just regurgitating what he thought conservatives wanted to hear rather than explaining views with which he was comfortable. This was also at the heart of his butchering the conservative critique of the culture of dependency with his ’47 percent’ comments.”
Klein continues,
“It would be overly simplistic to state that candidates such as Romney, Bob Dole, and Sen. John McCain lose because their candidacies discourage conservatives.
“The deeper issue is that when the Republican nominee is somebody who conservatives are suspicious of, the nominee has to spend the whole primary trying to convince conservatives that he or she agrees with them, and then the general election constantly reassuring them that he or she isn’t going to abandon the right just because the nomination has been sewn up. This leads to incoherent campaign messaging.”
I think this is pretty spot on. But I wanted to drill down on two points that, I think, Klein only implicitly acknowledges. First, he doesn’t note it here, but among the many implications associated with having to keep the base happy is picking a running mate to placate them. As Klein hints, it is ironic that a moderate candidate has to continue to act conservative while a genuine conservative candidate can “move to the center” after winning the nomination. And the selection of a running mate is no exception.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
If history is any gauge, yes (...W was conservative compared to the field and opposition)
I’ll be brief: Yes.
Conservatism. Works every time it’s tried! Love My Gov!
YES!
W does not count. Nor does his father.
THey are part of a huge deal. HW had to be Reagan’s VP. WHy? They didn’t like each other...
W is in no way conservative.
Last time republicans won was in 1984. And it was every state but Minnesota.
Times have changed so much?
No.
I’m not sure that this is even the right question. The GOP might win if they nominated Hillary Clinton as their standard bearer, but what would be the point?
Cruz/Palin vs Romney/Hillary in 2014
.... sounds about right vs. socialistic left.
It didn’t work in 1964, did it?
W ran as a conservative, and triangulated on a few issues..following the Clinton strategy of the 90s. Run on the core pillars of conservatives, and offer a policy to seniors, latinos, and women to gain more of their votes (the Medicare reform, immigration reform, and education reform). It was a blueprint that largely worked. At the same time, he was airtight on social conservatism, rebuilding the military and offering supply side tax reform that reduced everyone’s taxes.
In practice, he was terrible on spending, sold out too much to government growth in a lot of areas (some necessary due to 9/11, and some unnecessary - education). He was not lock step small government conservative by any stretch, but he was good on some of the issues to get elected.
We can do better than W, but we also can’t ignore the electoral success of two term election wins.
I think he means “Can the GOP Win Only With a Conservative?” With the “only” placed before “win,” the pquestion asks whether the GOP could not lose or tie with a conservative, which may be unlikely but is not impossible. With the correct word order, the question asks whether a GOP moderate or liberal could also possibly win, which is the issue addressed in the article.
So it has worked 50% of the time in recent history. Your statement refutes Diana’s argument that nominating a conservative “works every time.”
Indeed it did. I was only 19 yrs. old in 1964 and too young to vote, young and dumb I still knew that Johnson would be a disaster for this country and still to this day, some times engage in a little day dreaming about how much better off we would be, had Goldwater won that election.
The good Lord raised this mighty Republic to be a home for the brave and to flourish as the land of the free-not to stagnate in the swampland of collectivism, not to cringe before the bully of communism.
Barry Goldwater 1964.
Compare to another Barry 2014.
Something the stupid party refuses to learn because some people have been in Washington too long, living in the dem controlled echo chamber. When the party heads no longer reflect their base, then both sides have contempt for each other and it shows in votes cast.
“W” actually lost the popular vote the first time he was elected.
The last time we ran an authentic conservative..............
.....we only won forty-nine of the fifty-seven states.
They can only win with a conservative, yes - but sometimes the Democrats go hard left and allow a semi conservative to win - as in 2000 and 2004, where a somewhat conservative Bush beat hard core radicals.
The key is not only conservatism, but how big the chasm is between the parties. When it’s big, the GOP always wins. When it’s small, the Dems always win. Thus the magic of Clinton, who was able to obfuscate any ideological differences running against moderates HWBush and Dole.
Now on HW Bush, he won in a landslide, but that was on the assumption, or hope, that it would be another 4 years of Reagan. When that was demonstrated NOT to be the case, HW Bush got only 38% of the vote in 1992.
Maybe. It's considered conventional wisdom, but hundreds of thousands, if not millions, or Republicans left long voting lines in the three non eastern time zones after NBC fraudulently called the election for Gore (by way of Florida) at 7 pm EASTERN.
Of course, Bush was "barely" conservative to begin with.
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.