Posted on 10/02/2007 2:42:38 AM PDT by Soft Bigotry
WASHINGTON -- The Republican Party, known since the late 19th century as the party of business, is losing its lock on that title.
New evidence suggests a potentially historic shift in the Republican Party's identity -- what strategists call its "brand." The votes of many disgruntled fiscal conservatives and other lapsed Republicans are now up for grabs, which could alter U.S. politics in the 2008 elections and beyond.
Some business leaders are drifting away from the party because of the war in Iraq, the growing federal debt and a conservative social agenda they don't share. In manufacturing sectors such as the auto industry, some Republicans want direct government help with soaring health-care costs, which Republicans in Washington have been reluctant to provide. And some business people want more government action on global warming, arguing that a bolder plan is not only inevitable, but could spur new industries.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
It’s also the healthcare issue. Businesses want “socialized medicine.”
Business wants to stop subsidizing health care to compete globally.
Csn’t say I blame them; doesn’t mean they want socialized medicine.
Things are not looking good for the GOP in 08—dems are raking in the bucks, Hillary! and Obama have the star power, history tells us the country wants a change, now this. Ugh.
This writer’s first mention of immigration (by far the most internally destructive issue facing the GOP) was buried about 3/4 into the article, and then on the back end of a paragraph about funding roads and bridges!
This dude is out of touch. The quality of the WSJ’s writing is in the toilet these days.
Well, they want healthy employees for the least amount of money out of their pockets. And many of the corporate types are in regular contact with counterparts in Western Europe who aren’t shelling out for health insurance. The U.S. is pretty much the last industrialized nation not to have some form of gubmint health insurance, which didn’t matter much before the recent dramatic rise in insurance premiums.
They imagine that things will be better if they put the party of socialist hucksters and traitors in power. Boy, what a lack of imagination.
Think forcing tax audits on everybody filing schedule Cs might have something to do with it? Talk about biting the hand which feeds you.....
Or they think it’s good business.
Sounds like a case of some wetting their fingers and trying to predict which way the political wind is blowing.
One thing is for sure. If the democrat party is considered the “lesser of two evils”, we are definitely in trouble.
This is accurate: Already, economic conservatives who favor balanced federal budgets have become a much smaller part of the party's base. That's partly because other groups, especially social conservatives, have grown more dominant. But it's also the result of defections by other fiscal conservatives angered by the growth of government spending during the six years that Republicans controlled both the White House and Congress.
Here are some BS parts:
In manufacturing sectors such as the auto industry, some Republicans want direct government help with soaring health-care costs, which Republicans in Washington have been reluctant to provide. And some business people want more government action on global warming, arguing that a bolder plan is not only inevitable, but could spur new industries.
Richard Clinch, a 69-year-old New York native, illustrates the party's plight. The retired Westinghouse manager and mechanical engineer says he has been "a lifelong Republican."
... Yet next year, for the first time since he began voting in 1960, Mr. Clinch won't support the Republican presidential nominee, he says. He only "very reluctantly" voted for Mr. Bush's re-election in 2004. "Like many Republicans, I am frustrated," he says. "We've lost control of spending," and the administration's execution of the Iraq war has been "incompetent." Mr. Clinch says he is liberal about rights for women and gays, and vexed that "we [Republicans] get sidetracked on these issues like gay marriage."
... Such misgivings do not necessarily translate into long-term gains for Democrats. Mr. Clinch says his two sons -- one a 50-year-old ophthalmologist, the other a 42-year-old economist -- have both jumped from the Republican to the Democratic Party. But Mr. Clinch isn't necessarily voting Democratic. "I think I'm becoming an independent," he says. "If I were 21 years old, I'd be an independent definitely."
Sounds like Mr. Clinch doesn't know what he wants to be when he "grows up". "You see it in the lack of donor support" for Republican presidential candidates, says longtime strategist John Weaver. As former top adviser to presidential candidate and Arizona Sen. John McCain, Mr. Weaver recalls hearing Republican businesspeople grouse about the party's focus on moral issues and Iraq.
First, there is no one to give to (at least, not yet), and many got burned already by wasting their money on McCain or giving to Giuliani (New York / WS and liberal socially, just like they are). Also, many simply don't give to GOP anymore because of stupid domestic "policies" by Bush WH and many RINOs in Congress. The economic conservatives, Mr. Fabrizio found, are split into opposing camps: "free market" conservatives opposed to any new taxes, spending and regulations; and what he calls "government-knows-best" moderates, who sometimes favor regulations and higher taxes for causes such as education, environmental programs or infrastructure.
So, he himself says they are not "economic conservatives", they are "economic moderates" (if that even can be said about "government-knows-best" liberals). Maybe he should call them "liberal conservatives", just to clear things up a little? The once-dominant "deficit hawks," who put balanced budgets ahead of tax cuts (think former Sen. Robert Dole, or Mr. Bush's father), are all but extinct. A quarter-century of infighting between those Republicans and others who seek lower taxes regardless of deficits has been decisively settled in the current Bush administration in favor of the tax cutters.
Really, GHW Bush and Bob Dole "deficit hawks"? Lower tax rates regardless of deficits? Sounds like Bill and Hillary Clinton were dictating the salient points of the article to the author... New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire former Democrat who left the Republican Party three months ago...
Yep, another "lifelong Republican"... and so on, and so on...
lol. Everytime I hear life long Republican, I immediately raise the BS flag. It is funny that people think it adds credibility to their statements. For me, you and many others, it just adds comedy to the statements. Thank you for that very informative post!
Businesses do not want to have to pay for their employees’ health care. That’s the whole issue in a nutshell. And they’ll support anyone who will pass that on to someone else, even if it’s the government, and everyone’s taxes — especially businesses — will skyrocket. We have lost our commercial competitive edge because so many of our businesses today can’t see beyond tomorrow; it’s the phenomenon of instant gratification that began to take root in the 1960s, and which has pretty much stifled much of business today. Businesses can truly thrive only if their vision is toward the future.
“Yep, another “lifelong Republican”... and so on, and so on...”
Yeah, you’re right. The GOP has a lock on the business vote, the fiscal conservative vote, the social conservative vote, the immigration conservative vote.
They are definitely a shoo-in in 2008 by following the big-government, big-spender philosophy. Most Republicans and conservatives are too dense to see the brilliance of this strategy, and that it’s architect, our president, has ensured GOP majorities in congress and ownership of the executive branch far, far into the future.
This article is just a biased piece that doesn’t reflect a shred of the political utopia that has been earned by the GOP through excellent governance over the past 7 years.
All business types like higher taxes.
;-)
If they really think that, somebody should revoke their MBAs. Health insurance is simply a part of overall employees' compensation. "Universal Healthcare" simply means that overall expenditure will be higher and that government will have more or total control over that segment of the economy. If new HillaryCare will result in mandates on business to insure all employees, they will have to pay even more than they do now, to include a premium to cover "other" uninsured. If businesses will not have to pay anything for insurance, the money still have to come from "somewhere", which means burden will be on employees and they will need much higher salaries to pay for their own insurance which will have to include a "premium" to cover "other" uninsured.
There is no free lunch in government-mandated anything, only more expense and less control and less quality and more bureaucracy. The only way to reduce expenses and increase quality is free competition, unburdened by government, with some limited government-based programs and unlimited charity-based initiatives for those who cannot afford the cost of care or insurance.
This is the predictable WSJ article to counter yesterday’s report that the GOP’s social conservatives will bolt if Rudy gets the nomination.
That “business leaders” would vote for Hillary, a socialist, because of social conservatives in the GOP would be the classic case of biting off your nose to spite your face.
More likely is the fear that they’d better start paying protection money to the Clintons so that they get better treatment if Hillary’s elected. That’s the usual lack of character that we have come to expect from “business leaders” in America today.
I stand by what I said. A third-party vote is a vote for Hillary.
Good points or bad points, it doesn’t matter. Corporations and even small businesses want a national healthcare program and they are going to back the candidate that promises one.
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.