Posted on 01/09/2016 12:39:15 PM PST by Mariner
The Republican Party is facing a historic split over its fundamental principles and identity, as its once powerful establishment grapples with an eruption of class tensions, ethnic resentments and mistrust among working-class conservatives who are demanding a presidential nominee who represents their interests.
At family dinners and New Year’s parties, in conference calls and at private lunches, longtime Republicans are expressing a growing fear that the coming election could be shattering for the party, or reshape it in ways that leave it unrecognizable.
While warring party factions usually reconcile after brutal nomination fights, this race feels different, according to interviews with more than 50 Republican leaders, activists, donors and voters, from both elite circles and the grass roots.
Never have so many voters been attracted to Republican candidates like Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who are challenging core party beliefs on the economy and national security and new goals like winning over Hispanics through immigration reform. Rank-and-file conservatives, after decades of deferring to party elites, are trying to stage what is effectively a people’s coup by selecting a standard-bearer who is not the preferred candidate of wealthy donors and elected officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“I’m glad the NY Times is concerned about the Republican Party!”
Ditto. But I was surprised that they did an almost decent job in analyzing the situation, especially since they didn’t resort to their usual ritualistic knee-jerk attacks on conservatives in general.
Actually the republican party has become unrecognizable. Unrecognizable from the democrat party.
And that is the real problem.
The media wants us to believe that the republican party is what it has always been. That is why they put out this propaganda.
“reliable Republicans who shared tea and pastries...”
‘Had it said “beer and bratwurst” I would have taken it seriously. “Tea and pastries”’
Look on the bright side. It could have said tea and crumpets.
‘After what the GOP pulled in MS to get Cochran back into the Senate, there won’t be any reconciliation here’
+1
I like tea, too, but as a Tea Partier, I'm more than happy to toss it in the bay and just drink coffee.
I’d rather not get into this discussion right now. I don’t have time to discuss it in as much detail as it would take to support my disagreement with you.
While I don’t think it’s necessarily a lame argument you make, I still think it is misguided.
Trump makes some good arguments against it too, but I believe he hasn’t taken the full situation into account.
It’s not a deal killer for me, because in some instances his beliefs on this will serve him well.
Best beware of anything the NYT publishes to ‘help conservatives’.
It is already split. Neither McCain nor Rimney won...why? The conservative base stayed home. Why can’t people look at history and learn from it. They were trying to give us our third loss in a row with J Bush, but that’s not happening. And they wonder what is going on.
>>My only fear is that they survive as a party. Lets hope they don’t.
They need to just join the elitist Progressive Democrats so the blue collar Democrats can join with us.
What states flipped from GOP to Dem because conservatives stayed home? What’s the baseline of conservative votes to measure how many stayed home?
I really don’t think those unicorns are real. But If I’m wrong, the last thing I want is ANY democrat that twice voted for Barry influencing anything right of center. No Democrat and damn few Republicans can be trusted. Ever.
We need no more enemies within. Let them rot.
I would describe the Republican coalition as follows:
The old Eastern moderates, like Rockefeller.
The western libertarians, like Goldwater.
The southern religious conservatives, like Jesse Helms.
The strong defense internationalists, like Cheney.
The intellectual fusionists conservatives/libertarians, like William Buckley.
Some movement exists back and forth between the groups and some belong to more than one group.
This doesn’t bother me at all. The votes and voters are still there. Give them a reason to vote for you, and there’s no problem.
The fact that the Republican party is fracturing doesn’t surprise me. But I had expected it to be a split between conservatives and moderates, not between establishment and outsider.
For instance, Trump's positions in this campaign don't suggest a complete "social issues don't matter" philosophy...in spite of his previous inclinations and pronouncements along that line.
Also, you left out the part where it's clear to most (not everyone, of course) that Trump is ultimately an American Nationalist.
That has been missing in American politics for 30 years and it matters.
This split occurred a long time ago with moderates leaving when someone too conservative for their “taste” won the nomination. In Virginia, the stupid John Warner organized a third party nomination to steal just enough votes from Ollie North to throw the senate election to LBJ’s son in law. Last year, the same John Warner actually did a commercial for the Democrat Mark Warner who only beat the Republican by 13,000 votes statewide. I don’t it believe it made that much difference (John Warner was a stupid old man when he was young) but it does make some middling road voters think the Rep is some kind of extremist if his “own party” doesn’t support him.
Couldn’t agree more! Thanks
If the GOPe is obliterated, I, for one, will be delighted.
Screw ‘em.
Those are the “old money” groups. There are some “new money” groups. I would add to the old group Pat Buchanan conservatives.
The further away we get from “the day” of the “old money” groups, the more they mutate into something else. You can trace their history back, but they don’t look much like their forefather.
Combining our groups:
Establishment: Rockefeller, Cheney
Trump: Buchanan, mutated Goldwater, Angry untitled group, Revolutionaries as described below
Constitutional Conservatives: Buckley, Helms, Goldwater
Within those, I would add some “new money” groups.
Within the overall, I would add a faction of spies and revolutionaries out to destroy or at least fundamentally alter the party. They set up phony “Republican” groups with a liberal title (Log Cabin Republicans, etc.).
“Old money” “New money” could be “old mint” “new mint.” Just a borrowed term to convey an idea.
Yep. Succinctly wise.
The idea that immigration and citizenship could be limited never entered his mind.
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.