It’s official. The Republican party is now as ideologically monochromatic as a political party can get. With the defeat of a dozen northeastern and Midwestern moderates, the GOP is now truly a conservative party, the kind envisioned by Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater many years ago.
The problem – and this will become readily apparent in 2008 – is that the party has also shrunk geographically. At the moment, the GOP is now a largely southern party with strong points in the mountain west. And most disturbing is that in the 10 battleground states that determine the winner of every presidential election, the GOP is a ghost of its former self (save Texas and Florida). In New York (3 seats lost) and Pennsylvania (4 seats lost), the party has virtually disappeared. Also worrying is the massacre of the GOP in Indiana (3 seats), North Carolina (2 seats), Arizona (2 seats), New Hampshire (2 seats), and Iowa (2 seats).
It is hard to overstate the threat to the Republican stranglehold on the electoral college these losses represent. In 5 of the last 7 presidential elections, the GOP began the race with a huge tactical advantage. They were virtually guaranteed more than 170 electoral votes before the ballots were cast thanks to their death grip on a solid south, the mountain west, and several Midwestern/border states that had become as reliably red in national elections as is historically possible.
No more. Now the GOP must fight to hold states like Indiana, North Carolina, New Mexico, Arizona, and probably even Colorado if they wish to win in 2008. That’s because of the big state advantage of the Democrats who have won 7 of the 10 largest states that last two presidential elections. Only Ohio and Florida – two states now considered toss ups in any national election – saved the GOP in 2004 and 2008. And given the election results on Tuesday, Ohio especially would appear to be an uphill battle for Republicans.
Another bad omen for Republican chances in 2008 is the fact that the Democrats now hold 29 of the 50 governorships – a significant tactical advantage on the ground in any statewide race. Governors have their own political organizations and connections that can give a Presidential candidate for their party a significant boost on election day.
The most significant result from Tuesday’s election may be the stake driven through the heart of the old Rockefeller wing of the GOP. While this faction had been declining in influence and members since 1964, (and as the definition of “moderate” moved further right in the intervening years), the loss of long time members like Sue Kelly ( NY-6 terms), Nancy Johnson (CT-12 terms), Jim Leach (IA-15 terms), and Charles Bass (NH-6 terms) knocked the chocks out from underneath the moderate wing of the GOP, making the party more conservative than at any time in its history.
Charles Krauthammer sees the same thing:
The result is that both parties have moved to the right. The Republicans have shed the last vestiges of their centrist past, the Rockefeller Republicans. And the Democrats have widened their tent to bring in a new crop of blue-dog conservatives.
Rockefeller Republicans have a long and honorable history in the party. Civil Rights legislation in the 1960’s would have been doomed without them. Many programs having to do with workers’ protections like OSHA and MSHA (mine safety) couldn’t have been passed without their support. In many ways, this group of northeastern and Midwestern Republicans was the social conscience of the Republican party, always applying common sense arguments on social legislation that swayed some of their more conservative brethren while reining in some of the excesses of the liberals across the aisle.
I realize many modern conservatives viewed these “RINO’s” with contempt. But the moderates shared many mainstream Republican values with conservatives like fiscal responsibility, support for a strong national defense, and a love of individual liberty which, in my mind, tended to offset their apostasy on other issues. And celebrating their defeat is akin to cheering as the friend you made a suicide pact with offs himself first. Political parties that cede vast swaths of territory to their opponents tend to disappear rather quickly. Just ask the Whigs.
Does this mean the GOP should field more moderate candidates in 2008? That probably depends on what your definition of a “moderate” might be. Can one be a conservative but be pro-choice? No one has drummed me out of the conservative movement yet despite my stance on abortion. Nor has anyone accused me of being “moderate” about anything.
I think what we are about to see is a definitional change in what being a conservative means. This will come about as a result of the coming schism between GOP social conservatives and its libertarian wing – a subject I address in a post I’ll have out later today.
UPDATE
The Barrister at Maggies Farm has a slightly different take on this issue.
8:12 am
Tears for the Rockefeller wing? Surely, you jest? This crowd was the holdover from the founding members of the 19th century party…the old oil and railroad barons who cared not a whit for social issues so long as they got their paws on the levers of financial power in Washington. These aristocrats were happy to sell white middle class people down the drain with forced busing, affirmative action and illegal immigration because it was in their financial iterests to do so. Naturally, they never have to worry about the consequences for their children because they inherit millions. If the Democrats are the “rainbow coalition”, then the Republican party is now the party of the white middle class. And what we want is autonomy for our people just the same as blacks, American Indians, Asians and any other group desires. We want our own communities where we can raise our children free from the influence of a corrupt multicultural elite, where we call the shots for our kids’ education and where we decide what our taxes will be. We want government cut down to size and we want our elected leaders to realize that we don’t worship at the alter of either big government or big business. If Bush and his aristocrat bretheren in the Ivy League can’t understand this, then perhaps a whiff of revolution will help wrap their addled brains around the concept of “liberty”. That may be asking too much of a snotty plutocrat, but we’re past the point of asking for anything. We’re getting angry.
8:14 am
Xenophone:
Perfect alias. Don’t change it for the world.
8:20 am
And I might add that the Rockefeller Republicans were reformers. In fact, your grasp of history is childish. There were at least 3 GOP reform movements between the robber barons and current moderates.
8:58 am
Moran, put on your surplice and call yourself anything you like. Just don’t call yourself a conservative. More likely your silly universalism is what animates you, not “conservatism”. Using the power of the state to advance a social or economic agenda, no matter how self righteous, is what got us into this situation to begin with. Any solution that doesn’t remove power from Washington and put it back in the hands of the individual states and communities is no solution. It is merely a ploy to keep people from understanding who is really in charge. Most of us who actually read more than the government-controlled school textbooks understand that American history is quite a bit different from what we’re spoon fed. It’s true that the early industrial elite did not engage in criminal activity. You’re riht, there were no robber barons. By changing the laws of this nation to benefit themselves and like minded people, they were able to accumulate more money and power than a medieval king and do so legally. It was all done legally. You see, once you own the store, you can rearrange the shelves to your heart’s content. Well, some of us don’t like the merchandise anymore. We don’t want do-gooder socialism and we don’t like plutocrats. And right now, we don’t see either party as acting in our best interests.
9:08 am
New Hampshire is a special case, and has some lessons which may be of some use.
If you imagine the GOP majority as stretched between two poles – Liberty and “Family Values” – New Hampshire voters are heavily on the side of Liberty. (That’s why the “Massachusetts North” notion is false – the voters in NH are no sheep).
NH may be the most Liberty-oriented state in the Republic. The collapse (and that’s what it is) of the GOP here has come about because the Party leadership has aligned itself with the RNC and no longer warms the hearts of the Liberty voter. This year was foreshadowed in the 2002 Governor’s primary, where the party faithful split 1/3, 1/3 and 1/3 among fiscal conservatives, values types, and technolibertarians.
The values folks MUST MUST MUST understand that they terrify 2/3 of the electorate. They can get much of what they need by signing on to a “shrink the state” agenda – they will then be left alone to raise their families as they see fit.
But if the Dobsonites like the hypertrophic state just the way it is – as long as they are in charge – then we will never be in the majority again.
9:09 am
I’d like to take your comment and bottle it. Well said.
9:18 am
The “moderate” folks must understand that the best way to handle a natural division of human interests and political preferences is a genuine republican form of government with power vested in local communities and states. That way, those people who are of like minds can choose the types of communities they wish to live among. There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all central government. One man’s “liberty” is another man’s “hell.” For God’s sake,do-gooders! What is difficult about this concept? Do all of you want to reform the entire globe? The entire universe? Please, for the sake of the common man, those of you who are wedded to Wilsonian idealism and LBJ Great Society Programs…please form your own colony on a distant planet and leave this one alone.
10:14 am
Xenephon dismisses the Rockefellers for caring only about their own children, and then goes on to advocate hermetically sealing his own extreme-right-white culture. It’s too good for words.
“what we want is autonomy for our people just the same as blacks, American Indians, Asians and any other group desires. We want our own communities where we can raise our children free from the influence of a corrupt multicultural elite, where we call the shots for our kids’ education and where we decide what our taxes will be..”
How much did the U.S. make from slave labour?
10:16 am
I agree with much of what you say but not sure about the present GOP being what Goldwater had in mind. Clearly we have Big Government social conservatives running the GOP and I wonder if that will change. If nothing changes then the GOP is doomed to being a regional party.
I was shocked up here in NH to see both moderate GOP Congressmen sent packing but it is what the GOP deserves. The GOP has changed from being a big tent party as it was 50 years ago to being an ideological European style party and people are starting to realize this. The first thing moderate Republicans do when they get to Congress is vote for a big government social conservative leadership that is all too happy to punish anyone who strays from the plantation. People are starting to understand that voting for a moderate Republican is also voting for the big government social conservatives (and gokart-mozart is right in saying that people in NH don’t take to people calling themselves conservatives and telling you how to live your life).
I am talking here about how moderate Republicans in recent years have found themselves facing conservatives who come out of nowhere in the primaries . There is also the matter of the practice in the House of Representatives of no bills being allowed to the floor unless approved by the GOP caucus. This combined with the threat of an opponent being found for the next primary helped turn the GOP into what it is today.
I have always thought there was something unholy about the Democratic party when for many years after WWII you had Northern ethnics and liberals joined with Southern segregationists. The way the GOP has structured itself may be more honest and a better way to do things in a democracy but so long as the GOP’s base is big government social conservatives, it will find itself more and more isolated. This is especially true if the mountain state conservatives and traditional liberals on each coast manage to live with each other and compromise instead of one group steamrolling everyone else as has happened in the GOP in Washington.
10:17 am
Maybe its because nobody likes being trapped in a rightwing nuthouse that caters to the fundies at the expense of all else!
10:22 am
Questions of party power aside, the new monoculture poses an even greater danger to the country as a whole. We just saw what happens when one party so controls the system that no questions are asked, no compromises made. The country needs two vital political parties to keep an eye on each other and forge a consensus across the political spectrum.
10:43 am
[...] Rick Moran says Tuesday wasn’t a good night for all moderates and centrists; those with an® next to their names got killed. And that’s bad news for all Republicans, he convincingly argues: It’s official. The Republican party is now as ideologically monochromatic as a political party can get. With the defeat of a dozen northeastern and Midwestern moderates, the GOP is now truly a conservative party, the kind envisioned by Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater many years ago. [...]
10:44 am
Center-Left May Be Thriving, But What About Center-Right?
Rick Moran says Tuesday wasn’t a good night for all moderates and centrists; those with an® next to their names got killed. And that’s bad news for all Republicans, he convincingly argues:
It’s official. The Republican party is now …
10:46 am
This no right wing nuthouse. This is Lincolnite fascist plutocratic kow-tow do-gooder big-tent multicultural Hail Mary big business sand box. Keep your moderate Republican masters. The rest of us are going to stand aside and watch you folks go over the falls along with your central government theories. You’re no different than “moderate” Democrats. You don’t think conservative voters see this fraud? Get out more often. Travel a little bit outside the northeast and upper upper midwest. As soon as the Democrats have demostrated once more that they are indeed Democrats, you’ll see conservatives in states like Ohio and North Carolina and other states going back to alternative candidates. It’ll be the same old story. That is, of course, unless the open borders fanatics manage to amnesty enough Hispanic voters to turn the tide permanently in favor of the Democrats and their statist agenda. In which case, all this backbiting among Republicans will have been a moot point. The country will then polarize by region and there will be nothing to stop it. PS: Check your history books. It was the Republican party that first injected regional politics into this nation. Up till then, it had been non-existent. The old Whig and Federalist parties were national, until their demise. And just as thoughful men of the time predicted, the Republicans proved a curse. It seems that any attempt to reform the party of state capitalism will fail. And that leaves us in the hands of the party of state socialism. Wonderful. Just wonderful.
10:50 am
Actually, this author says it better than me…
http://www.lewrockwell.com/manion/manion68.html
10:50 am
Fred:
Your comment was deleted because it was not germane to the post. Might I recommend you leave the same comment here?
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/11/08/surprising-restraint-from-the-left/
11:39 am
[...] Crabby reality? The party of the left simply must realize the country turned to the right when it spurned the party of the right. Spurn, baby, spurn. No need to be too blue when the news is all there in monochromatic black and white. It’s official. The Republican party is now as ideologically monochromatic as a political party can get. With the defeat of a dozen northeastern and Midwestern moderates, the GOP is now truly a conservative party, the kind envisioned by Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater many years ago. [...]
11:50 am
congrats you can now consider yourself the inheritors of the klan mantle…you must be very proud!
11:57 am
Moran,
Talk about off the mark!
Did you take any time at all to view the polling data and get a feel for what happened and why the middle left the Republican Party?
If you did, you would have seen the exact opposite of what you claim.
Most middle of the road voters see the democrats as more fiscally responsible than the republican politicians that are now on the sidelines! You have to give the democrats credit for pulling off this feat of deception that even the best magician would admire!
This could never have happened if your vaunted RINO’s hadn’t pulled the party so far left that they lost the middle!
The second real reason why republicans lost was the Iraq conflict. Speaking as someone that knows, The President was fallen into the trap of trying to reprove that the Vietnam Conflict Model could be used again. I am absolutely amazed that we have a republican president that thinks we can fight a limited engagement conflict and expect to win.
Political correctness may have finally destroyed this country and its strength. If we cannot do what is necessary to win in Iraq, then we are only a paper tiger.
If we are only a paper tiger, then you are now witnessing the beginning of our gradual decline. Trust me, the islamo-fascists will gain great comfort if they also see the above and it will be a sign to them that
“Allah” backs their war against the “Great Satan”. It will only be just a matter of time before a major calamity will befall another major american city in the form of an attack.
Political power and influence will never be the strength of the Republican Party. To be honest with you, If the Democratic Party ever became more conservative than the republicans guess who I would vote for?
Having said that, I will tell you that I voted last Tuesday almost straight republican because the alternative was even worse.
I hope and pray that the party ignores the nonsense from people like you. Our future depends on it.
12:03 pm
First and foremost, I will not tolerate anyone coming here and challenging my conservative bona fides. I voted for Ronald Reagan three times so screw you.
I was a conservative while you were still in books. And my admiration for the Rockefeller wing of the party does not extend to any kind of support for some of their positions. I was pointing out a fact; that only with their support was LBJ able to push through the civil rights legislation of the 1960’s.
The rest of your analysis is so far off as to be laughable. Amatuerish and shallow.
Don’t come to my site telling me what I believe. Maybe if you read the damn post, you would have been able to comment more intelligently.
12:08 pm
Xenophone:
Going back to your original post which suggests that you, Mr. Brady, Doc Welby, and Mr. Cleaver want to do everything your own suburban way (your values, decide your taxes, etc.)
Who did you plan on defending your little piece of America? Build your church? Make your cars? Pick your oranges? No, you can’t do it yourself your way.
The republicans lost because most americans do not believe in the xenophobic, isolationist, evangelical neconservative dream.
You guys are always real big on spreading democracy right up to the point that the majority says something you don’t like (i.e. palestine, venezuela, nicaragua, Virginia, Ohio, Montana…)
12:14 pm
Jeff:
I’ll take issue with your inclusion of foreign countries in your list of democracy promotions.
If the Palestinian people want a terrorist government, they must learn to deal with the consequences, i.e. no American support. Do you really expect us to give money to people who have sworn destruction to the State of Israel?
As for Venezuala and Nicaragua and any other country who freely elects a government hostile to the US, do you really expect us to harm our own national interest by supporting governments who wish to do us harm?
Keep it up. I sense a GOP landslide in 2008.
12:33 pm
Rick,
Careful son, I served in The Air Force under the infamous Pres. Carter and also voted for Pres. Reagan both times.
I am also probably older than you and have watched the Reagan Revolution from the beginning.
You can call yourself a conservative all you want, but that doesn’t make it so. Pres. Reagan would have become sick if he would have seen the way the republican party has turned into the party of big government.
You can thank your RINO buddies for that one.
Now, I gave you several facts that, I believe, support my opinion.
How about debating me on the facts and leave the name-calling to the trolls?
12:40 pm
Of bigger concern to me would be the state-wide wins in Missouri and especially Virginia.
Webb beating Allen was probably the single biggest race of the year. Webb shows that a Wes Clark type—populist/liberal on economic issues with impeccable national security credentials—can win in in a red state with sizeable connection to the military.
1:04 pm
Rick,
Another important point. The conservative movement is not a fixed target, it is a concept.
Let me explain what I mean. If you go back to the beginning of the Reagan Revolution, you will remember that it was a “visionary movement”. At the time of its inception, it was right of the country and the vast majority of america’s political power. Over time we have actually watched the country move to the right over the years to where we are today. Reagan Republicans were responsible for many of the current policies that we now take for granted. The biggest is a 180 degree change in the way the military is treated and viewed. I know this because I was in the military and saw how we were treated first hand.
Conservatism is an “idealistic” movement that attracts people of principle and character. Contrast this with the nutroots on the radical left.
They are what some career politicians in the republican party had become. Win at any price and damn convictions and principles.
The nutrootsof the democrat wing will now expect their blood-lust to be satisfied now that the dems have won. If they do not get what they want, do you think they will be willing to conceed?
I doubt it. These people are too irrational and emotionally driven to do that. This is the achilles heal of the current Democratic Party.
If the democrats in congress do not appease them, a war will begin soon. Remember what they did to Sen. Lieberman?
2:28 pm
[...] The reasons the voters decided to “throw the bums out”, of course, vary widely. However, while Krauthammer (and others) see a more conservative political world in both hemispheres, there’s little mention made of something I’ve heard everywhere: a desire for bipartisanship, and a return to Congressional oversight. [...]
2:41 pm
The reason the Republicans lost is that they had ceased to be Republicans. What happened to small, moderate government and fiscal conservatism?
Instead, the GOP became an unethical bunch of fiscally profligate spenders, pigging out at the government trough and ballooning the deficit. Stay out of peoples lives!
2:44 pm
As a Democrat who believes in fiscal integrity and small government I am happy to say that Jaybo is right that Democrats seem like the more fiscally responsible party to many but it isn’t just an act. Just look at who has overspent in the last 30 years. People talk about tax and spend liberals but what about borrow and spend conservatives? We have had more than our share of them in Washington.
I disagree about moderates being to blame for what happened as I think blaming moderate Republicans or RINO’s for what happened misses what people are upset about. It isnt’t what the moderates stand for or because they are too liberal but rather the problem lies with what the Republican party requires from any who call themselves Republicans,i.e., kneeling before the altar of big government social conservatisim. If moderates aren’t to blame then why did so many get sent packing by the voters? Maybe it is because people are becoming aware that sending a moderate to Washington really supports the big spending “conservatives” who don’t mind big government just so long as government is telling the rest of us to do what they think is right. People can see that moderate Republicans may mean well but they have limited influence and have become just window dressing.
3:23 pm
Ah – the NEW, IMPROVED GOP!! The party of the Christian Right, Torture & Pedophilia! The party opposed to Gay Marriage and Evolution, the party of The Former Confederacy!
My biggest worry before the election was the fear that some Republicans would have enough brains to figure out that if they dumped Rumsfeld and lead the impeachment of Bush & Cheney, they could position themselves as the Reform Party for ‘08 and retain the White House.
I shouldn’t have worried – there’s not a functioning brain cell as far as the eye can see.
3:32 pm
At the risk of being flamed, I think you all are being a little uncharitable to what Xenophon says. I think the main point he makes is that there is no longer any party that is opposed to centralization of power in DC, and that we would be better off if the US were more federal, with the States and other smaller units, including communities, recapturing some of the power that has been usurped by the federal govt since the Great Depression/WWII (or even earlier, with the rise of progressivism in the late 19th/early 20th century). I think his point is that both moderate and conservative republicans, for different reasons, sold out on any idea of restoring the federal balance. If that is what he means, then I think he has a point. During the 80s some Rs and conservatives did talk about taking power away from DC and restoring it to the States et al., but nobody talks about that anymore. I think that decentralization and federalism should be part of the political debate. And I think most voters do too; people don’t want anyone, social-engineering Democrats or religiously-conforming Republicans, messing about in their personal lives. But when politicians get to DC, they can’t help themselves. The Democrats will succeed, and build on their gains in 2008, if they only go for small-bore initiatives, and interfere as little as possible in Americans’ lives. However, I doubt it is a temptation they will be able to resist, any more than DeLay, Santorum, and the rest of the crew just thrown out, were able to.
6:33 pm
I would probably be a republican were it not for their support of government intervention on social issues. I don’t understand how a party can on one hand hold liberty and freedom from government on one hand, then attempt to codify acceptable social behavior on the other. It’s my opinion that the social/religious conservative wing in the party is what is killing it.
7:17 pm
The Party of Goldwater? Get real. GOldwater was an actual conservative not some theocratic dictator. Goldwater believed in women’s right to chose their own reproductive situation, believed there was nothing wrong with a gay person serving his or her country inthe military forces, etc…
What we have left now is a bunch of True Belivers screaming like Eric Cartman of South Park, “Respect my authority!” We can only hope that some day actual Conservatives regain their true place.
7:55 pm
jaybo: rick can’t debate you on the facts, all he has is hatred for social conservatives (christians)
I was SO GLAD to see those moderates LOSE
it made the election worthwhile! christians are going to vote for pro-life people of any party, we’re not wedded to republicans, and as far as I’m concerned they can go back to their ‘country club’ days…as a permanent minority, since they’re too ‘proper’ for us!!
9:25 pm
beornn52 @28,
It really remains to be seen if the democrats are really going to give any power to the blue-dog democrats that are now coming to congress.
Their money and their constituencies are going to put a lot of pressure on them.
I will wait and watch, but so will the voters.
10:01 pm
Here is further proof of what I mean when I doubt the “new-found” middle ground that the dems seem to stand on.
(posted on The Daily Kos)
Lamont’s challenge to Lieberman in Connecticut was a victory for the movement
I was working on a post to explain how we won in Connecticut by targeting Joe Lieberman (even though Ned Lamont did not ultimately defeat him in the general election) when I observed this morning that Markos had already written something like that for DailyKos.
And since our friends over at unSoundPolitics have already tried to jest at Markos for the loss (which is hilarious, considering that we had a huge series of victories while they lost big) I’m going to excerpt him instead:
In some DC circles, there’s a lot of chortling about Lieberman. But we did what we set out to do—to make clear to the party leadership that the war was going to be this year’s decisive issue. Until Lamont won his primary, that obvious point wouldn’t pierce the DC bubble. So we had to make our point in a dramatic fashion.
Furthermore, Lieberman will caucus with the Democrats. That’s fine. Hopefully he’s learned his lesson and will actually go back to representing the people of Connecticut. If he does, he’ll be fine in six years.
If he doesn’t, he’ll be right back where we started and will face an even more mature people-powered movement. And all he has to do is look at the 2008 Senate calendar, and the almost dozen serious Democratic pickup opportunities, to realize that any thoughts of switching parties would be a short term power-play at best.
Lieberman has been neutered. If he leaves the caucus for short-term gain, he loses all leverage and power and harms his long-term interests. Yet he doesn’t stay in the caucus as a Democrat, but as an independent. And in that capacity he can criticize the Democratic Party all he wants without it being a story of “Democrats versus Democrats”. He can flirt with Bush without it being a case of “bipartisanship”.
In any case, Lieberman is the old. An artifact of a bygone era. Let him sunset in the Senate as we look to our future leaders—people like Tester, Webb, Klobuchar, Brown, McCaskill, Whitehouse, and so many exciting new faces in the U.S. House.
Our challenge to Joe Lieberman was a victory for people powered politics. We didn’t even expect to beat him in the Democratic primary, but we did, and that had an important effect on dozens upon dozens of races across the country.
Could Lamont have campaigned harder after winning the primary?
Probably. He didn’t have to lose momentum by waiting to see if Lieberman just might change his mind. He could have benefited from a slight change in strategy.
I am not sure what other commentators have meant they said our challenge of Joe has given him all this power and leverage. Joe was already a traitor to the party. He could choose to caucus with the Republicans, yes, but what’s in it for him?
A final act of desertion would have to be permanent. Neither caucus would tolerate him going back and forth. And if he caucused with the GOP, he could easily end up in a smaller minority after 2008. Joe knows this, and that’s why he and the Democratic establishment have made a deal.
Lieberman is indeed ultimately irrelevant. We will continue electing populist progressive champions to the U.S. Senate in the effort to build a people powered governing majority.
11:35 pm
I don’t get why people are “afraid” of Social/family values Conservatives. 20 years ago, I believe most people lived their lives with basically the same “scary” morality Social Conservatives espouse today. American Society as a whole has moved to the left, and the traditional American values that built this great Country have seemingly all but disappeared. We need to hold on to & cherish these values, not discard them like yesterday’s garbage. Conservatism is about Liberty AND Values. So is America. At least it used to be.
1:04 am
I agree with Mr. Moran that the Republicans are in danger of being a marginal party that can hold most of the South, and most of the West, but will not be able to win elections.
If they purge the non-true-believers, this will come to pass, and they will be a regional party for up to, or longer than, a decade.
That might be a good thing.
I don’t think the Democrats will screw things up enough in JUST two years for the national public to regret what they have just done this November 2006. It will take more than two years for the disaster to become clear.
– The Democrats will not be blamed for what happens in Iraq the next two years, though the American people might give them an equal share of the blame. If it goes WELL, they will try to seize the credit. Iraq will remain a Republican albatross. Now I know that’s not fair – but it will be the perception. – The economy is so big and so strong, that the disaster caused by the Democrats will take more than two years to become apparent. – The Republicans will purge and fight to set a new direction. Will a winning coalition be able to come together in time?
In short, it doesn’t look good for 2008. Unless the Deomocrats do in fact totally screw it up. Given their history, they just might. I am REALLY hoping for it. Because I do not believe the Republicans will be able to settle on a good winning message in time.
1:19 pm
The Four Republican Parties
The national Republican Party is really four regional parties, each fairly distinctive from the others. This, I believe, is something that many people (Karl Rove included) simply do not understand. You’ll see all four regional parties get lump…
2:43 pm
Jeff @ 36 said,
“American Society as a whole has moved to the left, and the traditional American values that built this great Country have seemingly all but disappeared. We need to hold on to & cherish these values, not discard them like yesterday’s garbage.”
This statement is really a misrepresentation of the facts. From a christian’s perspective, immorality has increased but we are more conservative in a secular sense than we were in 1980.
I am a christian and, as I have said in previous posts, I watched the Reagan revolution from the beginning. We did not have any misconceptions that Pres. Reagan was going to legislate christian values to our country. We simply believed that his conservative philosophy would allow this country to give us the freedom to continue to promote what we feel to be our great commission.
Some of what has happened is the result of christians (like myself) forgetting who really has the power to change things; and putting our faith in a political party to legislate righteousness.
We were wrong. Righteousness can never be legislated, it can only come as the result of a change in a person’s heart (or a society’s). Christians should continue to do their duty as americans and vote, but we need to go back to the real power that can change a society. We need to go back to promoting the gospel and leaning on God to
do what only He can do to change this gradual slide into immorality. God is no respector of persons. He can work through democrats as easily as republicans.
Putting the above aside, I was very encouraged to hear that Michael Steele was being considered as the new head of the RNC.
It is way past time that republicans realize that the democrats are more than happy to keep african-americans ignorant of their true potential. That’s why they continue to lie and scare them with fables of republicans wanting to take them back to the 1950s. If republicans cannot see the weakness and irrationality of this methodology and provide a positive, hopeful alternative; then we (republicans) are in more trouble than I first believed.
This could even be the next big visionary goal of the new Republican Party. We (republicans) have succeeded in changing our society and it is no longer a “new deal” culture. Our next great challenge will be to welcome all ethnic groups into this superior way of thinking.
As christians, our job is to do what we do best. Promote the gospel of Jesus Christ and lean on Him alone to change the heart of America. This is not the responsibility of The Republican Party. Unfortunately, we seemed to have forgotten this.
3:12 pm
Moran, how exactly are you right wing or conservative? Or is that irony that my fundie brain failed to compute?
Also, you fail to mention that the “big tent” philosphy that gave a home to the blue-blood elitists in the Republican party is the trust of one Ronald Reagan, whom you so despise.
Sod off.
7:10 pm
You say, “...the GOP is now truly a conservative party, the kind envisioned by Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater many years ago.” My God, son…you may have known RR but you clearly have no clue what BG was about. He wanted government out of our lives except for defense against attack, plus building roads, dams, bridges and schools. Gay marriage? Abortion? Personal choices, not government’s business. He would have gone into orbit at the first sign of Jesus on the Campaign Trail. He would’ve personally throttled anyone who got this country into the kind of debt we’re in now. Barry Goldwater? You’re dreaming.
8:53 am
It seems to me that one of the problems for us this year was that we seemed to have abandoned too many of our core principles.
1. Big spending/big government. We are now drastically more in debt than ever.
2. Abandonment of the military. We are sending our soldiers off to Iraq and not providing them with adequate armor and other supplies when they are there, and when they return wounded, they are not given proper support. I read an article about how huge numbers of soldiers’ wives are on food stamps and have to go to soup kitchens to get food while their husbands are in Iraq. Not to put to fine a point on it, but WHAT THE HELL IS THAT? And under those circumstances, would you want to send your noble, idealistic child to fight in that war as it is being run now?
3. We are not standing up for individual liberties. We have always stood for the right of the individual, as in the right to own guns to protect ourselves. But now it’s OUR party that wants to give up the right for people to have privacy in their own homes. When did we become such freaking cowards over one terrorist attack? It was a terrible thing, but just as I’ll protect my right to own a gun, I want to protect my right to make a phone call to my doctor without having the government know all the gory details!
11:10 pm
This is all very interesting. I tend to agree with the aggregate of the comments that the problem is that the GOP gave up on Goldwater conservatism and embraced big government conservatism. I did my own analysis of the election and found that there are very few “red” states left, at least not this year. The upper midwest and the northeast are now very blue. This is quite disconcerting for Republicans, as these regions were fairly divided between the parties after 2004. Sure, states like Massachusetts were blue long before this election, but New Hampshire used to have two GOP House members, CT had another two, PA, OH, IN…they all lost a number of Republicans. And it adds up. The region went from about 50/50 to 70/30 Democrat/Republican in the balance of power. That’s a huge shift. Absolutely huge.
My analysis also shows that the West can be divided into three or four parts. The prairie west, states like the Dakotas, Kansas, Oklahoma, these are still red. The West Coast, Cali, Oregon, etc, are blue. The mountain west and the southwest are getting pretty purple. The southwest is slightly more amenable to Democrats than the mountain west; the folks of Idaho still don’t quite trust the Dems, but no longer have any love for the GOP.
So basically the GOP has its base in the south and a few prairie states while the Dems have their base in the northeast, the west coast, and now the midwest. The question is, will the Dems listen to their new moderate overlords in the midwest, or will they push them right back out of the tent? If the midwesterners moderate the Dems, the GOP will have a really hard time winning back the House for the foreseeable future. The West is just sort of observing all of this as if all we easterners are crazy (and perhaps they’re right) and I really get the impression that westerners are sort of waiting for the right time to send another Ronald Reagan out here on a white horse to clean up our mess, which is what they usually have to do.
Advice to Republicans for 2008: find a Bill Clinton. That is, find someone who can win the blue states, the way Clinton won all those red southern states after 1994. McCain and Giuliani seem the best bets right now.
9:48 am
Sometimes, leaving “communities alone to govern as they see fit” is not such a great idea. Think Jim Crowe. Mobs, I mean communities sometimes decide that someones civil rights are not so important, and it is against “their values” to allow some other American the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I am glad for federal do-gooders in some cases. Because my civil rights are not up for negotiation or a vote.
You need to deal with the reality, xenophone, that the Constitution of the United States is not there for you to alter and shit around with. The government exists to enforce the constitution. It is not subject to your whims, my son.
8:04 pm
>>Jeff Said:
>>I don’t get why people are “afraid†of
>>Social/family values Conservatives.
>>20 years ago, I believe most people
>>lived their lives with basically the
>>same “scary†morality Social Conservatives
>>espouse today. American Society as a whole
>>has moved to the left, and the traditional
>>American values that built this great
>>Country have seemingly all but disappeared.
Well, what exactly do you mean by “social value” or “family value”? To one person it means a decent minimum wage and affordable health care; to another person it means banning gay marriage. What you may see as loose-morals liberal dreck coming out of an out-of-touch Hollywood, I may see as sexist high-profit shlock from a moneygrubbing media industry made possible by excessive deregulation of our public airwaves—and we can both see this as a “values” or even a “morals” issue.
As a fiscally-conservative, socially-liberal Independent, what makes me “afraid” of “social/family values Conservatives” is that they’ve demonstrated that their version of “family values” is largely focused on what people do in their own bedrooms, with their bodies, and on their own computers and TV screens. They’ve approached incredibly complex issues like abortion and gay rights with vitriol and myopic extremism, while largely ignoring real family issues that affect millions like meaningful jobs, affordable health care and childcare, quality mass education, the shrinking middle class, etc.
I groaned when I saw Bill Clinton sharing a stage with Al Sharpton back in the 90’s. But seeing Pat Robertson and James Dobson being all buddy-buddy with President Bush after Robertson publicly blamed gays and lesbians for causing 9/11? Now that’s frightening.
Get a Goldwater on the ticket, and you’ll get the Independent vote again. Until then, I’ll take my chances with marginally competent Democratic Party focused on Iraq over a wingnut Republican Party focused on gays and stem cells.
2:26 am
Submitted for Your Approval
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…
9:00 am
[...] The Slaughter of the Moderates, Right Wing Nut House [...]
10:46 am
[...] Right Wing Nut House, “The Slaughter of the Moderates†[...]
3:33 am
The Council Has Spoken!
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… the winning entries in the Watcher’s Council vote for this week are The March of Folly by Joshuapundit…
7:58 am
Watcher’s Council Results
The winning entries in the Watcher’s Council vote for this week are The March of Folly by Joshuapundit, and Why Intellectuals Love Defeat by TCS Daily. You can find the full results of the vote over at Watcher of Wasels. ...