Posted on 11/05/2008 8:07:19 AM PST by Brookhaven
The Return of the Big Tent Republicans
Listening to the talking heads discuss what the future held for the Republican party, there seemed to be one consensus: if the Republicans wanted to win in the future, they need to broaden their appeal by going back to the idea of a big Republican tent. A tent with room for conservatives, moderates, and (dare I even say it) even liberals on various issues, who are all brought together by the common goal of defeating Democrats. My initial reaction:
Bullshit.
This election was not a defeat of Republican conservatism. Save for Palin’s presence on the ticket, conservatism was missing from the Republican ticket. It was impossible to listen to a McCain speech without also remembering his past history of working with Democrats and blunting conservative goals. John McCain is the quintessential “Big Tent Republican”. He ran a “Big Tent Republican” campaign. He lost.
In the end, McCain’s campaign was reduced to a “we’re not the other guy” strategy. Rather than proudly laying out his plans and giving voters a reason to vote FOR John McCain, he ran a negative campaign against Obama (portraying him as too extreme) hoping to garner anti-Obama votes. This is the logical end of any “Big Tent Republican” campaign. People don’t vote for moderates (of either party.) They may vote against someone on the extremes, but they will never vote for a moderate.
The high water marks for the Republican party were the 1984 Reagan election, and the 1994 “Contract with America”. No one can argue that. They were also the two times the right wing dominated the party. Reagan and Gingrich were not only right wing conservatives, but proud of it. They not only believed in conservative principals, they proudly proclaimed, advocated, and defended them. Reagan and Gingrich were both portrayed in their day (by the press, Democrats, and even some Republicans) as not just out of the mainstream, but so far out on the edge that they were actually dangerous.
Yet, 1984 and 1994 were the Republican party’s high water marks.
Bush I - Ran conservative/governed big tent. Dole - Ran big tent. Bush II - Ran conservative/governed big tent. McCain - Ran big tent.
Where has it gotten us? Bush I failed to get reelected, neither Dole nor McCain could get elected, and lets be honest about Bush II. His bright spot was his conduct of the War on Terror (for which I give him a lot of credit), but had it not been for the war I have serious doubts he would have been reelected in 2004 (and by 2008 the country, and even most Republicans, were ready to wash their hands of him.)
I’m sure we will hear many pundits and party insiders in the near future proclaim that the way to get the Republican party back on the road to success is to re-establish the Republican big tent. The big tent is not now (nor has it ever been) a winning strategy for the Republicans. Every time they have employed it, they have lost. That is the plain and simple truth.
The winning strategy for Republicans was laid down in 1984 and 1994. It is also the hard strategy. Hard to stand for something and hard to be hated and reviled. But Republicans should have learned their lesson by now. If they don’t hate you, you aren’t winning.
Of course, continue to try to bring in those who hate and despise us by way of compromise. McCain has always believed this as has Bush. Yeah, that will surely work “THE NEXT TIME”. Just because you lie down and take a submissive pose in front of the bear does not mean the bear will change his mind about eating you. Fools all.
One issue not so curiously missing from this election was smaller less intrusive government. Obama is against it. McCain was a leader in the Republican Congress that expanded the size and scope of government beyond a Democrat’s wildest dreams.
Palin couldn’t make that a campaign issue because then she really *would* have been undermining the top of her ticket.
Republicans haven’t learned a thing. They will blame Palin, mark my words. As a political party founded on the belief that less govenment is better government, the Republican Party is finished.
Like it or not, the American people chose an authentic liberal over a faux conservative. At least we all know what we’re getting.
- Sarah Palin (Maybe)
- Ban Abortion (Not a federal issue; Constitutional amendment needed to protect state self determination on the issue and to nullify Roe v. Wade and its progeny)
- Ban gay marriage (Not a federal issue; Constitutional amendment needed to protect state self determination on the issue)
- Enforce immigration laws (Yes)
- Shrink government (Yes)
- FairTax (Yes)
- Stop corruption/earmarks in DC (Yes)
- Abolish McCain/Feingold (Yes)
We should have seen this coming years ago. People who will stay home because they can’t vote for someone based on the abortion issue, based on immigration stance, based on some moral issues like sexual orientation, they cost us in 06, and they cost us in 08. Äs long as we get lukewarm support from the so-called Christian Right, we are doomed to lose. Democrats hate Christians, and those of us who are secular conservatives hang with them, but they won’t hang with us. They all stayed frikkin home yesterday, because they couldn’t vote for McCain, over the amnesty bill or whatever issue.
I’m looking forward to the day when we can have a fiscally conservative party without some religious test to every issue. The turn the other cheek approach is not winning. America loves a fighter, just look at the box office for action movies. They love a scrapper. They love a winner. Bush was not a scrapper, he thought he would turn the other cheek, and the democrats did not respect him. Neither do most Americans. I shudder when I see Thanksgiving greeting cards that say thanks that Bush can’t run again. If he had told them where to put it on January 25, 2001, we would still be in control of Congress.
Pull too far to the right and the result is ultimately an Obama - an equal (or worse) opposite reaction.
If we want to gain friends from the broad center, perhaps we try not insulting them with terms like “Democrat Party,” which only serves to alienate those among the middle ground - and unwittingly creating conservative isolation.
“The only people that should be allowed in the republican tent are Reagan republicans, that’s the price of admission. Don’t like it ? Go someplace else.”
Well, looks like they did. Yay for us.
Sorry. I disagree. Conservatives, whether the Bush variety or REAL Conservatives, were attacked and reviled by the left and the MSM. The left and Obama did not care about big tent.
To be successful, one must stay true to values - for us those are conservative values.
Obama is the most liberal Senator and he won. Lead and the center will follow.
Two party system is done in the USA.
Our country will never be the same.
hello USSA
Interesting. Lot of food for thought here.
I don't think that bears out. We had a moderate this election, and we lost.
Besides, notwithstanding the good support we had from PUMA folks this time around, the marriage was ultimately unworkable. I can tolerate some measure of economic liberalism in the government. I don't like it, but I can suck it up.
The values issues, however, are life and death to me. And that's where I draw my line in the sand. There can never be any compromise on my part re: abortion. It's murder, period. I will never ever support gay "marriage", which is an abomination.
That's where I am PUMAPOWER. That's where a lot of conservatives are. That's never gonna change.
Maybe Conservatives and Republicans don't belong in the same tent.
Our Grand old party has become the Grand old spending party. News flash the Federal Government is broke and GWB raised non-defense spending more than than Clinton did.
>>>I like the Big Tent idea, but with a twist. Before economic issues were #1 and there were social liberals in the tent. I have no interest in that. Now we need to make social issues #1 and allow economic liberals into the tent. I’d be happy to have pro-life, pro-traditional marriage blacks, latinos, and working class whites in the party even if they do favor a bigger government. <<<
We should invite economic liberals in as voters, but not as candidates.
What we really need to do is win these black and Latino voters over on economic issues.
For example, we need to explain that Socialism and spreading the wealth is not fair. A sample:
“If a Latina women works two jobs to put herself through college to make a good income, and accumulates some wealth for her and her children, would it be fair for the government to seize a big chunk of that wealth to give it to some guy who doesn’t work as hard (or at all)”?
Or
“If a black man who has been working hard all his life, comes up with a great idea for an invention or a business, saves and slaves for years, and puts his hard earned money at risk, to make it work, and ends up making a million dollars a year and creating 400 jobs, is it fair to seize half his income to give to some guy who puts in his 40 hours a week, but wasn’t willing to put the hard work or take the risks, or who simply didn’t have the vision and genius?”
We also need to explain that Socialism stifles ingenuity, risk taking and hard work, which kills the economy, resulting in far less wealth for almost everyone.
I agree. I think that people will also begin to change their views once they switch parties also. If someone who is black or hispanic becomes a Republican because of social issues it will probably lead to being more open-minded on economic issues. I also think that most people are receptive to the message of personal responsibility - that you deserve to keep what you make. However, it will be easier to make the case coming from a more diverse party rather than a rich country club Republican.
When the fiscal conservative, limited government, protect our borders people finally figure out YOU CANNOT LEGISLATE morality and figure out morality is taught in the home and the places of worship...then the Republican party could make a comeback. I am anti-abortion, if someone who does not want a child is stupid enough to get pregnant in this day and time then they should have the child and give it to someone who wants one. It is not the place of government to say what citizens can do with their mind or their body. That single issue could have kept O out of the White House. A pro-choice conservative would gut the dems of huge numbers of women who will not under any circumstances vote for a proclaimed right to life candidate. If the time money and effort spent to change the LAW was spent on teaching people moral values in the right way I think the outcome would be more babies born. What have the pro-life people accomplished?... They have helped put someone in the White House who will load the supreme court with socialist liberals for an entire generation. How many lives will that cost?
Big Tent Republican Party??? hmmmmm
After what happened last night in the election, I am not even sure what country I am living in...much less whether I belong in the Republican Party.
I am a conservative period....and if the Republican Party doesn’t return to my political philosophy, there is no reason to remain in it. I think it is pretty obvious what happens when RINOs, Centrists and Liberals find a home within the Republican Party. WE LOST...BIG TIME...POOF..
With that said...I hope McCain hasn’t destroyed Sarah Palin’s political career. God Bless Sarah and all true Conservatives.
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.