Posted on 11/11/2008 12:26:03 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
With all trends running against them, Republicans' only hope is to reinvent themselves as pragmatists. That, or nominate Sarah Palin and go out in a blaze of glory.
Surveying the wreckage after American voters gave their party the bum's rush, Republican thinkers have pondered what went wrong, searched their souls -- and decided that the way to regain power is to move further to the right.
In postmortem conferences and symposiums, in right-wing journals and Web sites, on Fox News, the overwhelming consensus among Republican analysts is that the only thing wrong with conservatism is that it isn't conservative enough. In a morning-after National Review symposium titled "How the GOP Got Here," L. Brent Bozell wrote, "The liberal wing of the GOP has caused the collapse of the Republican Party." Richard Viguerie said, "Republicans will make a comeback only after they return to their conservative roots." Other contributors echoed these sentiments. If only McCain had attacked Obama on red-meat issues like immigration or abortion or cloning. If only Bush had not betrayed Reagan's legacy by expanding Medicare. If only conservatives had let Sarah Palin be Sarah Palin.
Pat Buchanan argued on the right-wing site Townhall that McCain lost because he was too deferential to Beltway decorum and refused to take the culture-war gloves off. Noting that McCain refused to raise the Rev. Wright issue and didn't hit Obama on Bill Ayers as hard as he could, Buchanan wrote disapprovingly, "Lee Atwater would not have been so ambivalent."
Predictably taking the hardest line were the braying tribunes of the right-wing plebs, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. The McCain-detesting Coulter wrote, "The only good thing about McCain is that he gave us a genuine conservative, Sarah Palin. He's like one of those insects that lives just long enough to reproduce so that the species can survive. That's why a lot of us are referring to Sarah as 'The One' these days. Like Sarah Connor in 'The Terminator,' Sarah Palin is destined to give birth to a new movement."
Limbaugh managed to refrain from comparing McCain to an insect, but he joined Coulter in anointing Palin the future queen of the Republican Party. Noting that a Rasmussen poll showed that 69 percent of GOP voters love Palin, Limbaugh sneered, "So all of you wizards of smart on our side, all of you intellectualoids who think that Palin was a drag, the party loves Sarah Palin. The vast majority of conservative Republicans love Sarah Palin. Twenty percent of Republicans who say she hurt the ticket, you are probably the ones that need to go and walk and join across the aisle with the others that you find so much more palatable because they are able to communicate and they are writers and they are intellectual ... The party loves her."
It's hardly surprising that buffoonish entertainers like Coulter and Limbaugh are sticking to their guns: Their livelihood depends on catering to the rabid GOP base. But you'd think that the right's cooler heads would realize that something has gone terribly wrong with a party and a movement that can seriously consider nominating Sarah Palin for president.
The right's love affair with the feckless Palin indicates it has learned nothing from the Bush and McCain debacles. Bush's presidency was a decisive refutation of the idea that Republicans can win by playing only to true believers. And McCain's fateful decision to embrace the Bush-Rove play-to-the-base strategy cost him any chance he had at winning the election.
Right-wing ideologues are suffering from massive cognitive dissonance (not to mention a healthy helping of denial). They can't grasp why their party imploded because the vast majority of them always supported Bush and his policies and still do. A few conservative critics have blasted him for lacking fiscal discipline, but most right-wing pundits liked Bush's policies just fine -- until the public turned on him and on McCain.
Some conservatives, like the National Review's Rich Lowry and Ramesh Ponnuru, have tepidly argued that the GOP must reach out to the middle class. But they don't explain exactly how it's supposed to do this without abandoning its core ideology. McCain made a classic Republican appeal to the "aspirational" middle class by attacking tax increases on the richest Americans, and he promoted a free-market approach to healthcare. But Americans roundly rejected both ideas. Lowry and Ponnuru blame McCain for being a bad salesman, but the real problem is the product.
The painful truth for conservatives is that the dogs aren't eating their dog food -- and every national trend indicates that they will never eat it again. Which means the GOP faces a wrenching choice: remain true to its increasingly irrelevant and rejected ideology and fade into political insignificance, or remake itself as essentially a more moderate version of the Democratic Party.
How could the Newt Gingrich/Karl Rove/George W. Bush juggernaut have crashed so quickly? In fact, the crash has been a long time coming. The American right has been living on borrowed time for years, and in 2008 its luck finally ran out.
The GOP faces two problems for which it has no answers. The first is that its two main branches are fundamentally incompatible. The right has always been divided between a libertarian, free-market, anti-government, no-tax wing, and a traditional-values, moral-issues wing. These are strange bedfellows. Libertarians abhor any kind of coercive policies, no matter how "moral" their aims, whether they're imposed by government or anyone else. They tend to be tolerant on social issues. Traditionalists, many of them devout Christians, regard their version of morality as the highest value and demand coercive governmental measures -- on abortion and gay marriage, for example -- to instill it.
Two things have always held these two branches together: national security concerns, and a sense that however much each branch might dislike some of the GOP's positions, the Democratic alternative was even worse. Both of these unifying factors have now waned, and they seem unlikely ever to return.
The collapse of the USSR fatally damaged the GOP's "tough on national security" appeal. Sept. 11 and Bush's "war on terror" revived it for a while, but when the American people realized that the Iraq war was a disastrous mistake, the terrorist boogeyman shrunk to its rightful proportions. (Sadly for the GOP, fear is not a state that a healthy organism or society wishes to live in for very long.) By crying wolf, Bush weakened the right's ability to use fear as a political tool. As with the economy, Bush's overreaching ended up hastening the demise of the very "movement conservatism" of which he was so loyal and exemplary a servant. Indeed, Bush's "war on terror" opened a new set of fissures in the already-cracked GOP, this time between neoconservative interventionists and old-fashioned conservatives opposed to gratuitous foreign meddling.
As national security has faded, the last thing holding the right together is its hatred of the Democrats and everything they stand for. This glue still binds the party's ideologically driven base. But for the GOP to win national elections, it has to convince moderates of the same thing. And in this election, moderates decisively rejected the Republicans' arguments.
Moderates rejected the GOP for two reasons: because Bush's presidency was a disaster, and because they didn't like the GOP's harsh, ugly tone. That tone is the result of the fact that the party was taken over long ago by "movement conservatives," true believers who bitterly oppose secular modernism and everything associated with it. Their hard-line Jacobinism, imbued with an inchoate sense of angry resentment, drives the right's culture war and animates the movement's base. It has become synonymous with modern conservatism, which is why McCain's ugly campaign was no accident.
The problem is that moderates are completely turned off both by the GOP's performance and by its extreme, demonizing worldview and rhetoric. And the reason they're turned off is that the country's demographics have fundamentally changed -- and changed in a way that makes it impossible for the GOP in its current form to survive.
In their prescient 2002 book, "The Emerging Democratic Majority," John Judis and Ruy Teixeira argued that America has undergone a fundamental Democratic realignment over the last few decades. The election vindicated their thesis. In a post-election piece in the New Republic, Judis explains that that realignment "reflects the shift that began decades ago toward a post-industrial economy centered in large urban-suburban metropolitan areas devoted primarily to the production of ideas and services rather than material goods." The key change concerns professionals, who in the 1950s were a tiny minority of the population and who tended to vote Republican. Now they comprise 20 percent of the labor force -- and a majority of them vote Democratic.
What this means, as both Judis and the conservative-but-teetering-on-apostasy New York Times columnist David Brooks have pointed out, is that the Republicans are in danger of becoming the party of Joe Six-pack (or his real-life counterpart Sarah Palin) and Joe Six-pack alone. Perhaps the most noteworthy development in the election is that Obama carried college graduates, possibly the first time a Democrat has ever done that. The Republican majority used to be made up of a combination of working-class whites and wealthy, educated businessmen and professionals. Now the college graduates and the professionals (who vastly outnumber the businessmen) are voting Democratic.
This isn't just an ideological shift, it's a cultural and social one. The new class is steeped in the universalist, tolerant ethos promoted not just in America's schools but in its offices. Its members are liberal on social issues and free of the cultural resentment of "elites" that Palin, in particular, used to appeal to the white working class. They are the new face of America, and for them the GOP's culture war is both irrelevant and offensive.
Above all, they're pragmatic. They want results, and they don't see the government as inherently more destructive of freedom than a multinational corporation. Labels like "liberal" and "conservative" don't mean much to them. They're skeptical about governmental programs but open to them, and they strongly favor government regulation. They support progressive taxation, and are willing to vote against their own pocketbooks as long as Washington delivers. After the Wall Street meltdown and the $700 billion government bailout pushed through by a Republican administration, the right's strident anti-governmentalism and shrill accusations of "socialism" seem ludicrous to them.
As if the rise of the professionals wasn't enough, the GOP also has to deal with the triple whammy of women, Hispanics and young people. All supported Obama, and there's no obvious way for Republicans to win them over without altering the nature of their party.
When you add all these things up, there is nowhere for the GOP in its current form to go. Any action it takes to shore up one group will hurt it more with another. If the right continues to make the culture war its main strategy, it will shore up its base with working-class white men in rural areas. But this "Deliverance" strategy, in which the GOP lets the Democrats have every part of the country where large numbers of people live together and targets lone white men surrounded by vast open spaces, is only a ticket to dominance in places like Utah, Arkansas, Idaho and Oklahoma, with their rich treasure trove of 22 electoral votes. The post-election map already shows a weird correlation between unpopulated areas and Republican votes -- not a trend the GOP should be encouraging.
The only thing that might allow the GOP to postpone its day of reckoning would be a failed Obama presidency -- admittedly a real possibility, considering the daunting obstacles he faces. But if Obama succeeds, the only viable path for the GOP if it wants to continue to be a mainstream political force is to reject its extreme economic libertarianism and its extreme social conservatism, lose its harsh, messianic tone, and remake itself as a moderate party that supports effective government but is wary of excessive Democratic social engineering and is slightly more traditional on social issues. It could also appeal to the center by rejecting neoconservative militarism and returning to a quasi-isolationist stance. (If Obama ends up being a liberal interventionist, this would ironically mean that the parties had reverted to their traditional foreign-policy roles.)
In effect, such a remade GOP would be a Rockefeller or Eisenhower party, one virtually indistinguishable from the right wing of the Democratic Party. This strategy would allow it to survive -- but at the cost of its hardcore base, which would become an embittered and perhaps radical rump movement.
In the coming years we will witness a war between conservatism's pragmatists and its true believers. If the pragmatists win, America will have finally arrived at the era of broad political consensus that pundits erroneously forecast after Lyndon Johnson's demolition of Barry Goldwater in 1964. If the true believers win, we may witness a Palin candidacy in 2012 -- and a likely electoral landslide that will bury the GOP so deeply it may never dig out.
What else would you expect from Salon?
Salon is the disinformation, propaganda and dirty tricks department of Comrade Hussein's outfit.
Hussein has learnt very well from Stalin's KGB.
They are past masters at sowing confusion, and chaos amongst the opposition, Nothing new here. Just ignore it, and move on and elect conservatives to represent us.
Nope. We'll just wait here and watch this comedy act called the DNC dismantle our nation and be prepared to pick up the pieces soon afterwards.
we tried this strategy. The candidate was john mccain
Part of the problem is the disconnect betweeen the cities/suburbs and the places where raw natural resources and food are produced. The cultural values are quite different and the urbanites have no idea how dependent they really are on their rural cousins. If those rural cousins should organize and cease to produce ( “strike”) the raw materials upon which the urbanites “just in time” manufacturing and food processing and distribution is based, they might just come to a greater appreciation of the country bumpkins they so love to demonize and hate. Perhaps they might just BACK OFF the regulations they so love to bind us with.
Bring back the old Democrats before the commies took it over and some might consider it.
But, somehow I doubt it. ;-)
At the very least, Gary could have provided a photo of himself, with his article, so we could determine if he looks as stupid as he actually is.
One thing is for sure, and that is that he is going to have a Kool Aid mustache because he has drank a lot of it.
He definitely went overboard on Palin in calling her feckless. That is patently unfair as well as inaccurate. I do think Conservatives need to let go of Palin and stop, literally convincing ourselves she is our new leader well before the time.
That is not Gary’s watch though and he says these things to demean and would love it if all the claptrap he was spewing was true. It is not. I have seen a lot of the Jindal and Palin love-fest going on here at FR and in my opinion it is the wrong thing to do at the wrong time.
That is the problem with the Party. They want to engage in some popularity contest and we want our own rock star I suppose.
What we should be doing now is promoting our ideology and our beliefs, explaining why what we believe is better for America and Americans. Promoting our beliefs and fighting for them is what will win elections. Think about this past election; it was Rudy v Hillary, right? How did that work out for Rudy and Hillary? Seeking out our own Cult of personality three years before the time is not going to be helpful. In fact I find all of this a bit silly. Flame away, but when the time comes for choosing, regardless of whether it is Jindal, Palin, Romney or anyone else; I say to them, “show me”. So far, I do not see it but we have four years and many things can change for better or worse in that time.
It is time for Conservatives to man up and stop indulging in fantasy scenarios and start spreading the reality of our beliefs and ideologies that lie at all our cores. As soon as next Summer, when gas prices have reached $4/gal. once again there will be a nation hungry to hear our beliefs and ideas.
I think this pantload Kamiya may be right, in a sick kind of way. Given that America no longer exists as the proud nation it once was, it doesn’t deserve a rescue attempt by conservatives. It’s gone. Walk away. Every man for himself.
It’s hard to feel like an American any more because America has become little more than a land mass populated by too many people who have no respect whatsoever for our military and who sit around with their hands out waiting for big government to confiscate money from their neighbors and “redistribute” it to them.
That’s the Democrats’ America.
That’s an America not worth defending.
I still don’t think Palin is the right choice for 2012. yes she is very inspirational but we need someone like Sanford or Jindal. Someone who truly understands and can apply conservative principles to topics such as the bailout and medicaid, for example.
you’re right. We have to put forward our principles first and then we’ll see if the candidates (and their records) can match up to them.
LOL!
Your comment reminded me of the following...
God is dead.-Nietzsche
Nietzsche is dead.-God
And then, of course, along came Ronald Reagan.
Let them wallow in their smugness. It's easier to blindside them.
why bother reading this stuff?
They know exactly how dependent they are and that’s why they always seek to subjugate us.
Historically, we’ve already been there and done that.
[1861-1865]
Three words: “Republic Of Texas”. :D
... yes, and everyone is stupid and want OJ Simpson sleeping next door... (sarc off)
There’s going to be a threshold of sheer public insult and molestation bullying going on there that is not going to pass.
So far they dance in a sinful America, but these make for worthlessness, even as slaves taken for granted.
No, truth be told, there still is time for repenting Democrates until it’s too late.
These were the arguments of all evil and intelligence insulting parties before, especially that of Hitler and his Vichy collabos.
LLS
This is molesting condemnation arguments they use, KGB style admition of guilt. They want us to give up thinking and condemn ourselves. But spirits are here and about, no matter what.
Truth is, if this fraud Obama goes on and this folly keeps on, sooner or later the world is going to turn into a giant Gulag of desparate people. Some will survive, hang on and find a flow of spirit, many will perish in disgust.
When I spent voluntarily 18 months in Iraq staring at a T-Wall working the factories for little pay there, I saw a vision of the future. With Russia and China and terrorists and illegals and chaos poised to take over this clownishing government, they will see the idyllic wishful thinking reality vs. these gay calls to “join the band” will be their toilet paper.
God forbid if we ever fell for it or had weak knees, but we’d recover, because we were warned and knew already, as we are saved, but many will not, despite the mercy hands of resource out there.
No riches can make up for or buy out stupidity. Perls to swines, idiot proofing ourselves makes us worse idiots and bound to lose it all.
Ah yes, and there always will be many others to do all that, along with fingering interfering liberals at each other’s throats or rectums (depending on how they land on each other in their big crowded sweaty tent of morons), who have this neuron brain handicap of being compulsive interferers. First will be a Gulag were they will be taught mercy and given mercy, and, after that, the idiot proof Gulag will be spent out with many spirited folkes and a few surviving idiots who will not be tolerated, because power does not make smarter, it gets lost by this selfinduced entropy called stupid and evil. They will be resoundly eliminated or, better yet, will be disgusted themselves of their own self-worship, as disgusted they will be of their idiot worshipers, and they will kill both themselves along with stupidity.
Of course they will make show trials like this proposition of switching side, of us admiting we are “humane” and “liberal” like them, but to naught, because the flesh is no proof and we know better and recover. They know that and that is why they always kill those repenting their ways, because they know they are likely to reswitch and feel remorse.
Moderates might be the first ones they execute.
I were watching a lady giving bread to birds at Wall Mart. She gave plenty of bread on one patch and then on another right next to it. It did not matter, the first birds to get there got harassed and attacked by the following bully ones. They probably were either stupid ones or not hungry because they could have fed freely off of the other patch without harassing the first ones. A sort of domination compulsion took over and became stupid. They were fighting each other for a small patch of food, knowing there were two or three more like it right next to each other.
This is the Democratic party, this is the Globalwarming and Malthusian alarmisms of the days. These folkes are like animals and they belong to this “planet Zoo” indeed.
Yes they did select our candidate, but they forgot about the law of unintended consequences. Does anybody think that any of the other candidates would have selected Sarah Palin for VP? John McCain may have given us a loss, but if we survive the next 4 years, we have Sarah Palin standing in the wings, ready to be our voice. I for one am thankful for that.
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.