So . . . do the Republicans learn their lesson?

[Griswold]

First of all, I'm glad I went hunting this morning and couldn't read some of the posts on here. I'm seeking out the posts of those whose opinions I've learned to value and avoiding quite a bit of the rest, because from the looks of things, there are a lot of people who need to get a serious grip . . . if they don't, they're in for a long, miserable 4 years. Look at yourselves: You're acting remarkably like the Democrats you laughed at after the 2004 election. Sitting 20 ft. up a tree and watching a beautiful sunrise over the mountains (the rut is just heating up in my neck of the woods; the deer I'm looking for chased a doe through an hour or so after daylight but didn't offer a shot), I thought long and hard about where we're headed as a nation these next 4 years, and where we've come from the past 8 years. And my thinking really hasn't changed much based on last night's election.

I made a post last week about McCain's status in this election and said that I believed I would feel vindicated by the exit polls. Well, I feel vindicated. I won't reiterate the things I said last week, but I certainly feel like they're valid.

I have a confession to make: I was a Late Decider. Not on whether I would vote for McCain or Obama; if Obama ran in 100 elections, I would vote against him in 100 elections. His ideologies are that much different from my own. But I was a Late Decider on whether I would vote for McCain or an independent/third party candidate. At the very last moment, 1 hour before the polls closed in my precinct, I made the decision not to vote for McCain. Of course, it isn't like it was a nailbiting choice to make. My state is deep red anyway; McCain didn't need my vote, so I felt pretty comfortable making a protest vote. If I lived in an Ohio or a Virginia, I would've been much more apt to vote McCain.

But I said that to say this: Don't blame conservatives and others who didn't vote for McCain. Someone will say "If you didn't vote for McCain, you have yourself to blame for an Obama presidency." I realize this is an area where a lot of us will have to agree to disagree . . . but I disagree. I said in the primary season that I was finished voting for the lesser of 2 evils. I wavered on that stance a little in July and August. The addition of Sarah Palin to the ticket made the choice a little tougher, because I like her. I like what she stands for, the manner in which she conducts herself, and I hope she has a positive future with the Republican Party, though I'm skeptical about that.

At the end of the day, though, there was nothing about McCain that excited me. Apparently, hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- of other American voters felt the same way. And that's why Obama won this election, just as I said last week. If anything, Obama was even a weaker candidate than I expected. For all the hype and the speculation, it appears that there will be fewer people who voted in the 2008 presidential election than in the 2004 presidential election. Does anyone realize this? Fewer people voted in an election featuring the agent of change who drew 100,000 to rallies and prompted folks to wait for hours outside stadiums and faint inside stadiums than voted in the '04 election featuring a weak conservative incumbent and an unexciting liberal challenger. It's pretty clear: If the conservative, Republican base had been rallied, this board would be filled with folks taunting the vocal minority represented here instead of making posts that are borderline embarrassing.

So does the Republican Party learn its lesson? Or does the Republican Party continue to plod down this road to nowhere? It isn't rocket science. For all the talk this day after about how the GOP needs to restructure and the GOP is going the way of the dinosaur, the fix is really quite simple: Republicans need to get back to being Republicans. Rediscover their roots as the party of fiscal responsibility. Battle internal corruption and scandal. And finding a way to infiltrate the MSM and win the propoganda war wouldn't hurt, but that's a topic for another day.

In the meantime, Obama is president, and I'll be damned if I let that stand in the way of my pride for this country and the hope for its future, no matter how much I railed against the idea of him becoming president. As for thumbing one's nose at and insulting the leader of our great nation, I'll leave that sort of behavior to the liberals who set the standard during the Bush days. Obviously Obama is going to have some policies that we all disagree with, and that makes for good discussion. I said earlier I had some fears about what an Obama presidency might mean for the fundamentals of this country, and I still harbor those fears. Only time will tell whether they're unfounded. In the meantime, I'll hope and pray for him to make the right decisions for this country. And while I make no secret of being a social conservative, I realize that the next 4 years aren't going to feature an agenda I like, and that's OK. If I can look back in 4 years and say I've done well from an economic standpoint without any net loss of rights, then Obama has done all that can be asked of a president.

Last night was not a mandate for the liberal faction of our government. If they take it as such, they'll find themselves facing what they faced in the '90s. This nation is still a center-right nation, as evidenced by the various ballot initiatives. If California, of all states, rejects gay marriage, our country cannot be as immoral as some wish to pretend.

So the ball is in the GOP's court now. What will you do with it?

[gamespooker]

the fix is really quite simple: Republicans need to get back to being Republicans. Rediscover their roots as the party of fiscal responsibility. Battle internal corruption and scandal.

X2. good post.

[Lanse couche couche]

They might start doing a much better job of spin doctoring. Despite the fact that the Dems were culpable in many of the problems, somehow it turned out looking like the Reps were entirely responsible for everything including the Lindberg Baby kidnapping and theIndian OceanTsunami.

[Vizsla Vince]

What we need is a good, old fashioned conservative revolution! We need to either choose or be the next generation of conservative politicians. We need to support the leaders in our party who actually stand up for the things WE believe in, and ignore the ones who don't. Here in Ill, we've got alot of work to do to salvage the Republican party. I've been personally disgusted with Il rep. leadership ever since the Jack Ryan debacle. I don't know exactly what the solution is, but we've got to choose leadership that will LEAD!!!

[James B]

I voted but it was just going through the motions as North Dakota has only voted democrat two times in history. I knew McCain would get ND's three votes.

[falcon]

This is what some prominent Republicans have to say about their party:

Saying the party's image has been tainted by "scandals and broken promises," Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina declared: "We have got to clean up, reform and rebuild the Republican Party before we can ask Americans to trust us again." He called for party leaders to "embrace a bold new direction" or hit the road.

In 2001, Bush set up shop in the White House with Republicans firmly in control of both the House and Senate. His chief strategist, Karl Rove, envisioned building a long-term Republican majority by broadening the party's base in part by building support among women, labor groups and Hispanics.

Two years later, Rove said: "Political parties kill themselves, or are killed, not by the other political party but by their failure to adapt to new circumstances." That turned out to be true "” for the GOP.

"The party just simply lost its way," said Republican Dick Armey, the former House majority leader from Texas. "It was no longer about small government and individual liberties ... and the party became enormously unattractive to the American people."

"Try as it might, the party has been unable to get it off its back," said Frank Fahrenkopf, a former Republican National Committee chairman. He also pointed to Hurricane Katrina and a spate of scandals, including the leak of a CIA operative's identity, as kindling that fueled distrust of government and disgust with the GOP.

[boysda]

excellent post, Gris.

ORIGINAL: Griswold

So does the Republican Party learn its lesson? Or does the Republican Party continue to plod down this road to nowhere? It isn't rocket science. For all the talk this day after about how the GOP needs to restructure and the GOP is going the way of the dinosaur, the fix is really quite simple: Republicans need to get back to being Republicans. Rediscover their roots as the party of fiscal responsibility. Battle internal corruption and scandal.

but what is the republican base? is it the fiscal conservatives, or is it the evangelical christians?

As for thumbing one's nose at and insulting the leader of our great nation, I'll leave that sort of behavior to the liberals who set the standard during the Bush days.

take a look around the board. looks like 8 years of anti-bush vitriol may have been exceeded in one fell swoop today. a veritable internet-based projectile vomit of ignorant venom.

what worries me most aboutconservatism is evidenced on this board today. your thoughtful, forward thinking post about the underpinnings, and intellectual direction of, the republican party has a handful of responses. racist threads talking about Obama in the vilest, most hateful terms, spouting end of the world hysteria, on the other hand, have a rapt and eager audience.

[Griswold]

ORIGINAL: boysda

take a look around the board.Â* looks like 8 years of anti-bush vitriol may have been exceeded in one fell swoop today.Â* a veritable internet-based projectile vomit of ignorant venom.Â*

Very true. I would hope that this board isn't representative of the conservative community in general. But because I was in the woods and not among the general populace today, I really have no idea.

but what is the republican base? is it the fiscal conservatives, or is it the evangelical christians?

I think it's both. The fiscal conservatives are more traditional, of course . . . Revitalized by the Reagan revolution, but stoic disciples of old-school conservatism. The evangelicals the new brand brought into the fold by the Moral Majority movement. Then I think there's a 3rd, also relatively new, faction that's much smaller than these 2 but still a very solid bloc: Pro-gunners. The key of course is balance. Otherwise they choke off the blood supply at either end and the entire base withers up and dies. Reagan achieved this balance quite nicely. Bush failed miserably.

[boysda]

ORIGINAL: Griswold

Very true. I would hope that this board isn't representative of the conservative community in general. But because I was in the woods and not among the general populace today, I really have no idea.

I think it's both. The fiscal conservatives are more traditional, of course . . . Revitalized by the Reagan revolution, but stoic disciples of old-school conservatism. The evangelicals the new brand brought into the fold by the Moral Majority movement. Then I think there's a 3rd, also relatively new, faction that's much smaller than these 2 but still a very solid bloc: Pro-gunners. The key of course is balance. Otherwise they choke off the blood supply at either end and the entire base withers up and dies. Reagan achieved this balance quite nicely. Bush failed miserably.

true. my brother is an old school conservative-favors fiscal restraint, smaller government and progun. just pretty much wants to be left alone. he abandoned the republican party this time around and voted OB because he sawhis partyas being completely in the thrall of the evangelicals. said those folks scared him more than liberals. i suspect there's a lot out there like him.

(to be fair, he also said liberals can't govern worth ****, and figured we'd shoot ourselves in the foot trying to get anything too radical implemented)

[Griswold]

I hear that a lot about the evangelicals and the Republican Party, but I don't get it. The evangelicals have less influence right now with the GOP than they have in 30 or 40 years. Jerry Falwell is dead, Pat Robertson is disgraced and Dr. Dobson is reduced to has-been status. They're still an important voting bloc, however. See Ohio. I don't have the exit poll in front of me but I think 1 in 3 voters in Ohio identified themselves as evangelicals, and those numbers went to McCain in smaller numbers than for Bush. That hurt. It was just one of the problems in Ohio, of course, but a significant problem nonetheless.

I suppose the sentiment comes from the fact that Bush seemed to further the evangelical agenda while pissing all over the agendas of those who favor fiscal restraint and smaller government.

I still think a balance can be achieved between the 2. But it's a precarious balance. Look at this election season. Fiscal folks latched onto Romney and swore they wouldn't vote for a ta-raiser like Huckabee. Evangelicals condemned Romney and latched onto Huckabee. The GOP wound up with a nominee who didn't truly satisfy either group.