Posted on 02/01/2008 7:31:58 PM PST by Richard Kimball
Please understand that this is not about what should be. It's my observation about what is happening.
Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and James Dobson have all come out not so much for Mitt Romney, but against John McCain. They’re placing a huge bet, and it will affect the Republican Party and conservatism for the next generation. I believe this is a watershed moment in party history, at least as important as the emergence of Ronald Reagan.
Ronald Reagan realigned the political parties. He managed to create a coalition of the existing left/moderate Republican hierarchy (the country club Republicans) while forming a new coalition of voters who had previously been unaligned or registered as Democrats. This coalition was comprised of religious and social conservatives, economic conservatives and small government libertarians. As much as anything else, his brilliance was about the fact that he was able to keep this coalition together. In the twenty years since Reagan left office, the coalition has cracked sometimes, but now it is rent asunder.
John McCain is not the choice of the party’s conservative wing. However, he has continued to win primaries. Some of these victories are because of crossover votes from independents and Democrats. One line of thought is that these people are simply crossing over to give McCain primary victories while planning to vote for Hillary or Obama in the general election. I do not believe this is true. In a tightly contested Democratic primary, why would committed Democrats cross over? It would make sense if the Democratic primary were settled, but not in this situation. There is little difference in the candidate platforms between Obama and Hillary. Both are socialists. The Democratic race has become about identity politics and personalities. Many weak Democrats and independents are, I believe, uncomfortable with this situation, and are really considering changing parties.
Karl Rove once said about disgruntled conservatives, “Where are they going to go?” In 2006 they went nowhere. They stayed home and the Republicans got creamed. 2008 presents a much bigger risk to conservatives, and that’s why I think the four conservatives who have bet against McCain are betting not only their influence, but the influence of their constituencies in the future of the Republican party. In 1992, Pat Buchanan shattered the Reagan coalition. He had a lot of help from the first President Bush, and Ross Perot finished the job, but Buchanan was the initial architect. It wasn’t so much that Buchanan ran against a sitting president as the way he did it. Ronald Reagan ran against Gerald Ford in 1976 without damaging the party as a whole. Buchanan took discontent with Bush’s moderation and fanned it into an ugly party war. He attracted supporters, but alienated far more people than he attracted. When Buchanan left the party, most Republicans breathed a sigh of relief. As a whole, the party decided that it was better to have Buchanan outside the house throwing rocks, than inside. Buchanan went to Ross Perot’s old Reform Party, which immediately collapsed, because he did the same thing there that he did in the Republican Party. He alienated more people than he attracted. He lost all political influence, and became totally irrelevant. His supporters had no place to go. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats believed that Pat and his supporters were worth the problems.
Today, the situation may be similar, but with a larger part of the Republican base. There is one difference, and that is that in 1992, Buchanan was the leader. This time, there is no leader. Limbaugh, Coulter, Dobson and Hannity are pundits and persuaders, not politicians. This time it is a more broad based discontent that is expressing itself without a prominent political figure to lead the charge or give voice to it. This base has essentially placed two bets. The first is a bad bet. They’re betting that their influence can knock McCain out in the primaries. I believe Florida turned the momentum to McCain, and that Romney is on the ropes. The other candidates are now only window dressing. The second bet is that McCain cannot win the general election without conservative support. This bet is for all the marbles, and conservatives are hoping McCain loses. If McCain loses and the Republicans lose seats in the House and Senate, the party will have to mend fences with conservatives. This means making concessions and more conservative candidates.
McCain is making a pitch to the conservatives by talking about military strength, constructionist Supreme Court Judges, limiting spending and reducing the size of government. If conservatives come back, even grudgingly, the showdown will be avoided. If these voters continue to reject McCain and sit home or write in third party candidates and McCain still wins, the disaffected voters are in big trouble.
Most of the party hierarchy is moderate to liberal. They have tolerated the conservatives because they need them to win. If McCain proves that the Republicans can win by turning independents into Republicans and getting disaffected Democrats, the Republicans may decide the conservatives aren’t worth it.
I think what will happen is that we will spend some time, perhaps a decade in the wilderness, and this will be our punishment for buying into the argument about nominating “electable” candidates rather than sticking to principles. The great conservative House of 1994 started acting like nothing more than hawkish pork barrel democrats with a share of scandals thrown in. We never won the senate and we allowed the Arlen Spectors of the world to defeat the likes of Pat Toomey. Politicians like McCain have not had any compunctions about claiming to be conservatives while governing as liberals. Mainstream America is now very confused about what a conservative is, and it’s our fault. (President Bush and his deals with Ted Kennedy didn’t help any.) Supporting McCain merely precludes us from being able to run an effective opposition against the socialists from within a major party.
So what should we do? Stick to first principles, educate the next generation, and throw rocks from outside and inside if we need to while making the case for the same policies successfully advanced by Reagan. Americans will ultimately recognize sincerity and a clear vision. So far in the last decade we have given them insincerity and inconsistency.
And remember, any time someone from inside to GOP uses the “electable” argument, whether at the local, state or national level, that is the first clue that they are 1) not conservatives and 2) liars to boot! Always remember that Reagan was “unelectable”.
I’ll be at CPAC next week, and both McCain and Romney, as well as President Bush (his first time) and VP Cheney (his third or fourth time) will be there. It will be very interesting to see what the pulse is.
Will you be posting a report from CPAC? If you are, please ping me to it.
Vice versa.
How true. And the reason is not just that the bill was a bad bill but even more so the way he handled it. And continues to handle it.
When Romney says he is against abortion, I think it’s because he’s changed his mind about it. When McCain says he would not vote for McCain-Kennedy now, it’s because the politician in him senses it’s not good for his career.
There’s a huge difference in being against something because you feel it’s fundamentally wrong and in being against it because it turned out to be unpopular.
Truth is McCain would pass McCain-Kennedy in an instant if he thought he could. He has not changed his beliefs in the matter, just his vote for now.
Remember Rush’s “Big Theory” from several years back?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1509680/posts
Also, would McCain propose any nominee who was a Constitutionalist or rather nominate someone with a judicial philosophy that the Constitution is a living document that must be adapted to the current times and governing needs?
Limbaugh supported Bob Dole even though he knew, just like we all did, that Dole was a spectaculary weak candidate. I believe candidates are transparent when they have to pretend to be more conservative than they are so as to avoid losing the base they desperately need.
Most of the talk show types like Limbaugh don't have the guts to be out there on their own without a party.
I've never been that much of a fan of Hannity, although I like his politics. I have enjoyed listening to Rush since he became a tsunami, not that my views matter that much. To do what these people did from the beginning takes incredible guts. To do it day after day takes both guts and a serious dose of discipline.
There have been too many instances when they broke with the Party puppeteers (despite well meaning advice to the contrary) to suggest they do one thing or another out of fear of losing "their" Party foundation.
Limabaugh didn't even have the guts to endorse a conservative in this election.
He never has. Ever. Not until a nominee has been picked. I suspect he does realize, though, as does Hannity and Levin and Kimball, that the Republicans didn't lose in 2006. They forfeited. They forfitted when the vast majority of elected Republicans of the DC persuasion went out and groin kicked their base, and did it with extreme prejudice. I didn't know it was over until Tom Delay went ON the Rush's show and actually defended that bunch of DC Republican clowns despite Rush attempting to lob to Delay a few ephus pitches that should still be in orbit.
If the Republican Party nominates a liberal, you may see a House of Representatives with 435 Democrats next January. That many conservatives will stay home in shear disgust.
I believe he may also be a global warmist. If the Republicans nominate McCain, so many conservatives will stay home in disgust that you may see 435 Democrats in the House of Representatives next January.
I’ll post something, but my time is much more scarce now than it used to be. I’m primarily attending CPAC this year to bring my son and give him a deeper foundation in the principles and issues. His sixth grade class is clueless. When asked to do a project on a current leader, the only names that the kids could come up with were GWB and HLC.
Other than supporting groups focused on educating our youth in conservative principles, we’re keeping our political powder dry until some real leadership emerges.
John McCain has been put where he is by moderates, independents and cross overs. He cannot carry a plurality, much less a majority, of primary voters who self identify in exit polls as Republicans, to say nothing of “Conservative Republicans”.
These problems McCain has with the conservative voter - fatal though they are - pale in comparison to his other problems, such as age, ethics, and mental stability, which will be brought into focus by his current buddies in the MSM as soon as he is nominated. Or do you think the NY Slimes endorsed him because they think he has the best chance to win in November?
McCain, Ron Paul and I all have something in common — Zero probability of being elected President.
I am not voting for McCain literally or figuratively. When I vote against the dim it will not be by pulling the lever for McCain.
I am not staying home. I'm just not voting for McCain.
It is very important to have as many true conservatives in Congress as possible, even if they are a severe minority. The new leadership has to emerge from somewhere and we must have someone present to issue a strong voice of dissent.
He was one percentage point shy of carrying the plurality in SC. In a general election, GOP voters who did not support him would have a choice of wasting their vote, essentially electing Hillary, or picking the lesser of evils. I realize some would refuse to vote for him, but a lot are not that stubborn.
He has a lot better chance of being elected than Romney or Huck. Which is a big part of why he is doing so well in the primary. His poll numbers against Hillary are impressive, even in some blue states, where he is currently ahead of her.
Sorry, HLC should have been HRC!
There's that old electability argument again. How could those polls mean anything when the majority of those polled only know anything about those candidates who have received heavy media coverage for years. Whoever the Republican nominee is, he will receive enough media coverage to change any perceptions or non perceptions that are registered by these early polls. Also, see my earlier post on "electability".
Polls measure who people plan to vote for at the time the poll is taken. Whether they know what they are doing or not is beside the point.
Come November large numbers of voters will know rather little about the candidates. A substantial percentage will vote on the basis of how the candidates make them feel. Polls taken before election day will still be meaningful despite this ignorance.
Well, it puts us back to the "frog in the hot water" thing we've been dealing with since 92. At his heart, I think McCain is a moderate hawk with a crazy streak. Obama is a socialist and Hillary is a maniacal control freak. If Hillary or Obama is president, you're getting Marxists on the court. It's not so much that we'd like McCain's judges as we'd detest Hillary's. Also, Dems will try to block a conservative judge. Republicans still believe that a Democrat judicial nominee should be rubber stamped.
Boy, he nails it every time, doesn’t he?
That’s untrue. It’s often not even a question of knowing a lot about a candidate, but rather of simple name recognition. Polls between a “known” and and “unknown” will be very different from polls taken once the “unknown” becomes “known.” People don’t tend to indicate a preference in polls for candidates whose names they don’t recognize. A substantial percentage of those polled knew Rudy, McCain, Obama, Hillary, and possibly Edwards, but that’s about where the list ended for a lot of people.
Unfortunately, your arguments are the same as those of the liberals in the GOP establishment. I don’t mean to imply that you are one of them, but simply to observe that we can all fall into the trap of trusting the wrong talking points.
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.