Is Conservatism Dying?

Townhall.com ^ | 17 March 2007 | Patrick Ruffini

[Aussie Dasher]

Time magazine has chosen a weeping (and Photoshopped) Ronald Reagan for its first redesigned cover in 15 years. The theme: "How the Right Went Wrong."

This is not the first time Time has run an altered photo of Reagan on its cover. The August 16, 1993 issue featured Reagan turned upside down, and the blaring headline: "Overturning the Reagan Era." The implicit message in the wake of the 1992 defeat and the passage of the Clinton tax increase: the Age of Reagan was over. Higher marginal tax rates and HillaryCare were here to stay.

The American people had something else to say about that in November 1994.

Once again, conservatism is being left for dead. The November elections were a body blow. The mood at CPAC was said to be glum (funny, I didn't see anyone roaming the exhibit hall with their heads hung low, but I don't seem to have the same magical divining powers as reporters). And conservatives are said to be disaffected with their choices for President.

As conservatives, we face challenges to be sure. But forgive me if I'm not exactly quaking in my boots at the latest in a string of Time magazine covers or New York Times/CBS News polls portending doom for Republicans.

As I wrote on my blog a little over a month ago, we can expect a concerted effort to depress Republican turnout going into 2008. The Democrats will be portrayed as fresh, vigorous, and exciting. Republicans will be framed as disappointed in their candidates, hungering for someone new.

Lo and behold, that is exactly the message we see from this Time cover, and the New York Times/CBS poll earlier in the week purporting to show that most Republicans want new options in the 2008 race.

What's left unsaid is that leading Republican Rudy Giuliani (who campaign I support and am doing some work for) has a greater favorable-to-unfavorable ratio of any the Democratic candidates amongst his own party. To the extent that the Republican candidates are less favored, it's because they are not as well known. (An average of 33% of Republicans don't know enough about any given member of their Big Three; for Democrats that number is 13%.) And the Republicans are not as well known because none of them has received Obamamania-like coverage.

Despite all this, the leading Republican candidates are leading or competitive in the polls. According to the Real Clear Politics average of all public polling, Giuliani leads Hillary Clinton by 4.8 points, while John McCain is up by 1.6 points. We are told that Democrats lead by 20 points or more in the Presidential generic ballot (traditionally a dubious measure). The fact that they can't keep pace in head-to-head matchups says more about public dissatisfaction with their candidates than it does of Republicans.

Sometimes, it seems like Republican despair (the Times uses this word in their piece) and division is mostly an artifact of press rooms and cocktail parties than it is of grassroots voices in the Republican Party. Indeed, this seems to be their strategy. Democrats can't attack Republican candidates who are broadly popular nationally using the standard playbook, so they'll play up Republican division and "despair."

This isn't to say that the primary season won't see disagreements. That's what primaries are for. But more often than not, these divisions will be greater in places like Washington, D.C. than they will in the heartland.

Another interesting fact Time ignores is this: contrary to the conventional wisdom, this primary race is in many ways more conservative than 2000. In 2000, George W. Bush ran as a "compassionate conservative" largely uninterested in deep cuts in government spending. Today, virtually every Republican carries the banner of spending discipline. With the exception of Chuck Hagel, the primary candidates or prospective candidates haven't really wavered on the prosecution of the war.

So, if conservatism is a "broken" brand, wouldn't candidates be running away from it rather than running on it?

2006 taught us the consequences of running away from the core principles that unify all Republicans, chief among them smaller government. Had we stood unambiguously on these principles, we would have fared much better than we did. The appeal of our ideas is the same or stronger than before; it was our leaders' willingness to carry them through in 2006 that "went wrong," not the conservative movement.

Times like now teach us almost nothing about broad shifts in public opinion. At this point in 1999, George W. Bush was leading by double digits -- at another time when the Republican brand was in the media doghouse after the Clinton impeachment. No one could have predicted the razor-tight 2000 election back then. Until the February 5 GigaTuesday primary, the parties will be focused on duking it out for the nomination. At that point, public opinion will realign based on the parties' nominees, and this will become a contest about the future. With Democrats lacking in bold ideas and a clear direction on the war since taking control of Congress, the Time cover looks like another example wishful thinking and media cocooning for the Democrats.

[philman_36]

I meant it in the context of the current political situation.

Second sentence on...I agree. Somebody's day is gonna get ruined.

[TAdams8591]

Rudy is NOT going to win the nomination. : )

[UltraKonservativen]

...Conservatism is in fact being murdered by the MSM, liberal Dims and RINOs...
They are attempting murder but all we need is someone to take up the call of true conservatism. In Reagan's words ""The great, confident roar of American progress and growth and optimism." and stop this nonsense of appeasing this "Toxic Trio".

[Democratshavenobrains]

Conservatism was killed..........in the Billiard Room.........by Professor Plum........with the Candlestick!

[John David Stutts]

As I wrote on my blog a little over a month ago, we can expect a concerted effort to depress Republican turnout going into 2008.

The MSM succeeded in depressing the GOP turnout in 06. The voters rejected the WOT, GOP taxcuts, abortion bans, the end of the AWB, and conservative SCOTUS judges. Judging from the sizable number of Freepers who will not endorse any GOP candidate who can win...I see no reason to expect the GOP to prevail in 08. Conservatives are easily led by the MSM.

[dfwgator]

The problem is that conservatism is constantly being defined down. The conservatism of the Reagan-era is long dead.

[freedomfiter2]

The problem is that conservatism is constantly being defined down.


Don't blame me.

[jetson]

When you get right down to it MOST people are conservative. The problem is that we are creating allot of undereducated, misinformed dolts who are too busy feeding their fat faces or drinking lattes to ask difficult questions. Stalin would have been tickled pink to be able to mold the useful idiots that this country is producing.

[Ol' Sparky]

Conservatism can do nothing but die if enough conservatives are willing to sell out their principles and vote from someone that isn't significantly different ideologically than the typical Democrat for President.

Turning conservatism into a a water-down form of liberalism would disaster. Eight years of RINO/liberal Republican office will set conservatism back to the years before Reagan took office.

[goldstategop]

Liberals always make the mistake of thinking conservatism is dead. Its more relevant than ever.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[lapdog]

Bush had a majority in both houses, but you never would have known it had they not had a (R) after their names. Reagan had neither house, but got much more support from his party. Granted, Bush is NO Reagan, but if Bush is conceding to much to the Left, I'd put a fair amount of the blame on the gutless Republicans in Congress who left Bush standing alone.

[Sun]

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" ready to settle for RINOs.

Guess we true conservatives need to be extra strong, and work extra hard, and thankfully there's a lot of us on FR.

[Liz]

RINOs are like overbearing, unwanted guests who drop in uninvited.

They never take the hint....they just don't get that its time to leave.

[democratsaremyenemy]

I hate to say this , but he probably IS crying right now,crying for our country and what it has become,crying for the "Republican" party for what it has become......


I am so sick of this Administration...I wish It and the Republican Party would just go away. What happened to the "Grand Ole Party?" It has been completely taken over by a bunch of GUTLESS WIMPS????.



President Bush lets the Democrats just walk all over him...ie the latest manufactured scandal about the U.S. attrorney firings.What does he do? He and Gonzales apologizes....for WHAT? What are you apologizing for? I am so sick of seeing my President who I voted for both times just grovel at the feet of these Democrats......Im so sick of seeing my President who I voted for both times groveling at the feet of Calderone in Mexico.....I just cannot understand this.....I want to cry sometimes....

[Old Landmarks]

Conservatives are still alive and will continue to battle the evil of the left.

What has happened since the nineteen sixties is that fake conservatives who have no true foundation have been moved further and further to the left by the news outlets, godless university professors, leftist public school indoctrination when they were young, leftist indoctrination on television all day ever day and so forth.

Only those who have a true moral base will see clearly and have the courage and convictions to stand against the lies and deception.

We withstood the left during the thirties because they did not yet have centralized control over channels of daily indoctrination. Parent's morality was not attacked daily by their own government through the leftist public schools.

Now a lot of so called conservatives attack the religious conservatives as if they were the ones who just appeared out of nowhere and started this fight.

Religious conservatives, the so-called "religious right" are the ones who reflect this country's history, traditions, morals, virtues and law.

This fight was not started by the "religious right", it was started by the far left and in a more modern since it was the leftists of the sixties who hated the Bible and now they have allies in the Republican party who reject our history just like the Berkeley leftists of the sixties. The secular republicans need to point their guns back toward the fight starters, the usurpers, the liars, the Constitution revisionists and the traitors, all on the left.

[NutCrackerBoy]

We'll be asking if liberalism is dead in two years.

Liberalism is dead already but its damage is done. Liberalism lost nearly all of its battles except nanny state government and liberal activist judges. But these two are slowly eating away self-sufficiency and self-governance.

Conservatism won many battles, but in losing the big government and judicial originalism battles, can only watch in horror and staunch the bleeding by: 1) inserting a bit of accountibility into the vast bureaucracies and 2) slowing down the left-liberal rampaging Culture Warriors.

[CyberAnt]

Conservatism is NOT DYING! It's reforming under the "silent majority" cap.

When we launch on election day .. the dems could very well be in shock for years.

[Texas Federalist]

Conservatism can do nothing but die if enough conservatives are willing to sell out their principles and vote from someone that isn't significantly different ideologically than the typical Democrat for President.

And if conservatism is already dead, George Bush will be known as the man who killed it.

[madprof98]

As I wrote on my blog a little over a month ago, we can expect a concerted effort to depress Republican turnout going into 2008.

The incessant Rudybot posts here have already depressed prospective turnout considerably.

[epow]

No, Conservatism is in fact being murdered by the MSM, liberal Dims and RINOs.

If that doesn't constitute an evil triumvirate I don't know what would.

RINOs are more dangerous to America than liberals who admit that they're liberals. And conservatives who vote for RINOs because they are told that only a RINO can save the US from (pick one) Hillary, Obama, or Gore are gullible suckers.