Where does the Republican Party go from here? They seem to want to blame everything on the unpopularity of one man, George W. Bush, though the party went along with him in lockstep for eight years. They have a tough choice to make: hew to the conservative line or move to the center. The toughest decision will involve what to do about their base of social conservatives.
The best chance for a rapid reversal of Republican fortunes would be for President Obama and the Democratic Congress to be unable to achieve much of a substantial economic recovery by 2010 or 2012. That could make it less imperative for the Grand Old Party to have to revamp its own tool kit.
But aside from that, Republicans find themselves divided between those who feel the party lost its way by not staying conservative enough, as evidenced by Bush's deficit spending, and those who feel the party should move toward the center on things like social issues.
In the short term it will likely prove impossible for the Republicans to effect a divorce from the social conservatives and their veto power over party policy. Ever since Ronald Reagan added them to the coalition they have been indispensable to its victories. Now, though, their function is increasingly to narrow the party's appeal as the electorate grows younger and more ethnically and culturally diverse. Not to mention more fed up with theocratic ideology wedded to an abysmal capacity to govern.
Surveys show the people getting more liberal on practically every major issue. You name it-global warming, renewable energy, health care, gay rights, the Iraq War, immigration, environmental protection, regulation of business, progressive taxation, abortion rights-the majority of Americans do not support the hard right position. Yet it is so unassailable in Republican politics that even a moderate like McCain had to do it unending obeisance to secure the nomination and dared not deviate in the general election campaign either. Thus we saw the "Drill baby drill" and culture war campaign and the Palin phenomenon. But these focuses, given the nation's current problems and experience with an Administration that thinks in such terms, drove away more moderates than it energized conservatives.
Yet given the power these social conservatives marshal in the primaries it is probable the Republicans will proceed to run another couple of hard right campaigns and get lathered in them before they bring themselves to de-emphasize trying to be the party of evangelical theology and get back to the limited set of principles that motivated their appeal in previous days. Until then the Democrats will have a golden opportunity, should they govern well, to reassert their previous majority status in American politics for the next generation.
5 comments:
I believe the main problem with both parties is our nominating system as it stands today.
Blame the Primary system if you don't like the candidates. There are things to be said for the old "smoked filled rooms" that used to decide who the candidates would be for President. With the primary system, the rank and file, usually the more dedicated members of each party go out and vote and we tend to get less Centrist and more left or right candidates which tends to polarize the other side. Middle of the road candidates tend to be elected.
You know, I'd say normally that's the case but this time around the Republicans actually nomninated a candidate on the relative moderate side for them. Thompson, Huckabee, Brownback, Hunter and Tancredo were all more conservative than McCain's overall record was. Of course he did have to swing right to secure the nomination and never tacked back in the general election campaign.
When you say social conservatives... might we also call them the "religious-right?"
Personally I am turned off by the extreme intolerant ideas of ANY religious group! It seems that the "stem cell research" debate highlights this ideology that can truly hinder the advancement of our society.
If the Republicans replace religious dogma (and Rovian tactics) with thoughtful common sense... I will listen.
But there was the problem in that he didn't tack back to the center. Actually, it really wouldn't have mattered who the Democrats nominated this year. I think Obama was going to beat whoever they threw at him, so I really think they threw someone who they knew couldn't bother the "base" again in future elections.
And if the base thinks that Palin is the heir apparent, they really dumber than I think they are.
Good comments, John and Webfoot. Yes, I'd say most but not all of the social conservatives are the same people as the religious right. And agreed, there's no reason Republicans can't come up with some good ideas. If they avoid dogma and seek practicality they will come up with more.
As for Obama and McCain, yes, no doubt any decent Dem candidate should have beaten most any Republican this time around. Republican primary voters chose McCain, but not strategically to set anything up for next time. They just liked him better and some of his competitors knocked each other out playing for the same voting blocs.
As for Palin, I'm sure Obama would love to have her as his opposition next time around.
Post a Comment