Does the Republican Party Need to be a Big-Tent Party Again?

Self | 10/4/08 | Self

[paudio]

I know this view is not popular here, but we need to have an honest discussion after what happened last night. There has been many calls to throw 'RINOs' out of the party. Yesterday's results, however, show that we cannot do that. Like it or not, conservatism is a word with many meanings: social, economic, libertarian, 'patriotic' conservatism, etc. Recently, it's obvious that whatever coalition that Reagan put together has fallen apart. Dubya, ran as a conservative,managed to bring all factions together, but as a president, he gave privilege to one or two factions, and left the others cold.

Sarah Palin may be the darling of social conservatives, but not necessarily of the other conservatives. When we said 'she rallies the base', it seems now that we only meant 'she rallies the social conservatives'. It should be clear now that there are just not enough social conservative voters to win a national election. With her on McCain ticket, we cannot argue that 'the base' stayed home tonight.

The way I see it, in order to rebuild the party, we need to start from one of two assumptions: (1) there exists a conservative idea that encompass all factions of 'conservatism', or (2) Such idea doesn't exist, but we only had good communicator that managed to bring different people together. I used to think it was number one, but recently I started to doubt about it. It seems to me that the second one is much more important. Reagan, Newt, and candidate Bush (not the president) did a good job in their time.

So, in my opinion, in order to be able to compete with the Dims again, we need to find a person that can unite the whole factions back. Perhaps, we also need an issue to do so.

The other problem we have now is the tarnished brand of conservatism and Republican party that was caused by Dubya's inability or unwillingness to counter the media's narratives. At this moment, more than ever, we need to win the independents and moderates. Hoping them to vote for conservative candidates while throwing the 'moderates' in the party is really a misplaced hope.

[NinoFan]

“The blood of those who serve is on the hands of each and every one of those who helped Obama by being......sooooo pure and righteous.”

Bull. The only people responsible are those who voted for Obama. So throw your blood on someone else.

McCain going left on the bail-out cost us some fiscal conservatives, so yes, a more all-around conservative candidate would have earned us more votes. The conservatives that you cry about being “oh so pure” (and by that you probably mean social conservatives) actually did show up and do their part. The ones who didn’t show up were the moderates due to the economy/bailout, guilt, class identification, or some other reason. Where I come from, you reward the people who support you, not the cowards who vote for the most liberal President this country has ever seen. I think you’re going to see far more conservatives willing to talk to those who stuck it out than those RINOs who betrayed everything they claimed to believe in.

[CaribouCrossing]

I respect the base, but only for as long as they are willing to give a little to save our country.

I’m tired, I’m angry, I’m frustrated....and I fear for our troops.

The differences between McCain and Obama were HUGE. So to say that he was far enough to the left that those closest to him saw Obama as a viable option, even preferable, is ridiculous, in my honest opinion.

Many comments I’ve read and received seem to imply that the base of the Republican party is the reason Obama won. If that is true...and we will learn so in the days ahead, then I will have lost all respect for our base. You don’t cave in when men and women are fighting for your rights...even your rights to cave in. damn, just damn...

[freekitty]

That’s not true. Obama did everything he could illegally to win. And that is not 52 percent.

[NinoFan]

Oh, and I apologize for the noob comment. It was said in the heat of the moment. You’re not the only one who is madder than hell tonight.

[nathanbedford]

Here is a portion of a post which I published before the election in response to a politico article calling for Republicans and conservatives to move left to fill the big tent:

As we conservatives drag the remnants of our movement into the wilderness with no idea how we will emerge or whether we will ever emerge as an electoral force in America which is recognizable by my generation, we must inevitably engage ourselves in the most soul- searing inquiry of what went wrong. This will be an agony but equally it will be effective only to the degree that it hurts. It will not succeed without bloodshed. There must be finger-pointing and bloodletting. We must carve to the bone. The process must be Darwinian. Those whose ideas are false must be bayoneted on the trial.

The object is to find our soul - nothing less. In a come to Jesus sense we must get absolutely clear what it means to be a conservative. Only at this point do we look to the tent flaps and open them. Those who cannot subscribe to the hard-won consensus, to a confession of faith as to what is a conservative, should walk out through that flap. Those who are attracted from the outside to the core message of conservatism should be encouraged to walk through the flap and enlarge the tent. What the left wants us to do is to expand the census in the tent prematurely and thus turn a movement into a menagerie. The Soul-searching must be conducted by conservatives without the earnest ministrations from liberals like those of Politico. This article, of course, has nothing whatever to do with explaining why Republicans lost 2008 election across the board, it has everything to do with first efforts by the left to sabotage the rebuilding process on the right which must be done exclusively by the right.

We have not lost the 2008 election because we were excessively partisan while Obama was enlightened and transcendental. We actually lost the election because George Bush and Karl Rove betrayed the soul of conservatism. A party without its soul is like an army which does not believe in itself, it cannot win the next contest. A party which had abandoned its principles and so lost the last two elections and frittered away both its power as the ruling coalition and its status as the majority philosophy of the nation, cannot expect to swell its ranks by recruiting to a lost cause. The party must first know what the cause is and only then can it recruit. To again borrow the military analogy, a party like an army disintegrates without a mission. Armies are assigned missions but a political party finds its mission only through soul-searching.

As this process occurs we will be told by the left that only a big tent party can win and that to become a big tent one must move to co-opt the center. That is not how it works. That is the reverse of the way it works. The center is not peopled by voters with fixed notions about the exercise of power who wait for one of the great political parties to surrender their values and embrace the tempered and resolute opinions of the middle. That happens with splinter parties but not with the mushy middle. When an unaffiliated voter bestirs himself to enter the polling booth he is confronted with one of two options: right or left. He does not consider who has moved the farthest geographically from right to the left or left to right any more than he commits because of his own long held political beliefs. He votes for the fella who best tickles his fancy at the moment. Put more charitably, he votes for the candidate who persuades that he is the best, and has the best to offer.

If we as conservatives do not believe that we have the best to offer we should get out of the business. A candidate, like a party, who is centered on his philosophy has integrity and is persuasive. And that philosophy must first have a vertical spiritual component which finds expression and out working in a horizontal governing philosophy.

Because of his race, Obama was asked only to demonstrate that he could walk and talk like a president. Obama has won the middle, not because he pandered to them, which he did, but because he had the wind at his back.

As John McCain reverts from titular head of the Republican Party to United States Senator, it falls to the rest of us to contrive a governing philosophy which he, unfortunately, did not own and therefore could not bequeath to us. We had such a legacy from Ronald Reagan but we squandered it. We must construct our own. We must do it in the wilderness. We must do it unaided by intermeddling liberals. Their's is the serpent's way, the easy way, a pander to the superficially popular, the accommodation to the middle. The bed of birth has always been a bed of pain. The pain must be embraced if we are to receive a new life.

[def_dave7]

Woops. I said paudio is right. My mistake. I meant to say that paudio’s theory is NOT right.

This once great country needs REAL conservatives, not RINO’s.

[NinoFan]

No, you’re not getting it, the base did turn out. It was the moderates who left for Obama. It’s the moderates who publicly endorsed him despite him being the most evil man ever to be this nation’s President.

[GoodDay]

I’m sorry if that was painful for you to say.

My fear is the following:

I fear that there really has been a leftward drift in the minds of the majority of voters. They WANT handouts and redistribution — even if they’re still afraid to call it socialism. After Hussein’s “spread the wealth” comment, they couldn’t possibly be fooled into thinking that it’s really a “tax cut for the middle class.” Yes, it’s socialism, but they somehow feel guilty calling it by that name, probably because they know that it involves massive theft.

As for Palin, I never saw her as strictly a social conservative. Her commitment to low taxes, energy production, and competition, convinced me that she is conservative/libertarian on fiscal issues. Now, whether she is ideologically consistent enough to apply the ideas of “choice” and “competition” to all other areas - such as education - I don’t know.

I don’t know that much about Jindal yet. I’ve heard a lot of excellent things about him, though.

If there really has been this mental and moral drift to the left by the electorate, then the problem becomes more difficult: you have to educate people to understand freedom and how it can solve their problems. It’s not easy. It can’t be done by 2012 or even 2016. We’re talking at least a generation. The left has been infiltrating, and planning, and plotting a takeover like this for YEARS, and they achieved their goals largely through education: propaganda and indoctrination in the schools. “Community organizing” was effective because there was a sea of people who already tacitly believed in the efficacy of the welfare state; they just needed to be organized. If we want conservatism to be re-emergent, we’ll have to start with education; start with any idea or policy that can crack the monopoly that the state has over what a child is taught.

[hinckley buzzard]

A solid conservative could have done well. The problem is, we didn't have such a candidate available this year. Maybe you don't know what a "solid conservative" would look like. All our "conservatives" had serious and crippling shortcomings, most of which were due to political compromises which sabotaged their credibility.

We also had a dishonest incumbent who bastardized the "conservative" brand so badly that it could not be effectively used this year. That won't be a problem in the future however.

[JrsyJack]

For all the hype, blacks are only 12% of the population and cannot swing an election even at 100% turnout. They always vote at least 90% Democratic so they contributed little incrementally to Obama’s victory. It was women, college students and guilty white libs, the usual suspects. What defeated McCain was losing the Jewish vote in FL and blue collar voters in the rustbelt states of IN, PA and OH along with the DC area overspill into N. VA. Had he carried those states he would have won.

[CaribouCrossing]

NinoFan, I’m sure I’m just as angry and emotional tonight as anyone else. So perhaps we can all learn a lesson here. Folks are blaming McCain, I feel that the “base” (from comments I’ve read) are partially to blame for this disaster. Maybe it is time for people to stop playing politics and get to the business of saving this country? And if that means I can’t have exactly what I want on every issue, fine.

As for the here and now....I’m tired, and I’m going to bed. Have a good evening, NinoFan. I do appreciate your comments. :)

[Redcloak]

The big tent is a big, empty tent. We They need to start acting like Republicans. They need to start inviting people into their smaller tent on the Party's terms. No more "Oh... You're a Marxist Lesbian who entered the country illegally? Well... OK... We'll expand the party to include Illegal Alien, Marxist Lesbians. No problem." Republicans don't want that s**t. Neither do those they imagine they can attract.

[freekitty]

I agree. Either the Pumas was a myth; or Obama cheated. Take your pick.

And I can assure you Hillary was never against Obama. She and Obama work for the same people and it’s not the American people. They want a one world order and they have got the beginning of one.

The question should be is how do the citizen’s of the world fit in? Free or not free?

[PhiKapMom]

In 1994, the Contract with America contained no social issues — zero, zip, nada.

Since those days of limited government, strong military, fiscal responsibility, etc., we have spent as much time on social issues and growing Government under Bush as anything. The touchy feely programs. The Congress under Denny Hastert and Trent Lott/Bill Frist spent money like drunken sailors and giving us more and more federal programs.

They forgot what won us the Congress — true fiscal conservatives who were for limited government.

We had a great election in Oklahoma this year as we took the OK Senate for the first time EVER in the history of the State, kept the OK House, took back one of the Corporation seats and protected the other one, and clobbered Obama 66% - 34%! Went sent Jim Inhofe and 4 out 5 of our Congressional delegation back to DC. Why? Because our candidates ran on less government and less taxes.

[CaribouCrossing]

Time will tell.

[backhoe]

Not much.

Just for your consideration?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/833678/posts?page=9520#9520
“Zimbabwe on the Potomac”

[FastCoyote]

Name a RINO who hasn’t stabbed us in the back!

[OneLoyalAmerican]

Greetings THX 1138:

We need a party of ideas, not a party of men...

Very pithy!

Cheers,
OLA

[Canedawg]

This election is not just an embarrassment, it is a ruthless rejection of fundamental liberty and capitalism, the foundation of our American success story.

For the first time in my life, I am not proud of this country, after seeing the results of this election.

[NinoFan]

Well, the moderates tend to be the ones who are only fiscal conservatives and not social or defense conservatives. The base, of course, is all three.

Have a good evening. Sleep well. Your governor is one of the best women on the planet.