i dont' agree with all of the author's observations, but his discussion of demographics is persuasive. many of the recommendations are counterintuitive, at least to me, but a thought-provoking analysis.
Couldn't et through it, I started laughing too hard. Scarborough a conservitive? Hardly. Running the moderates out of the party a bad thing? hardly. It's the moderates and independents ruining America. As already pointed out, the idiot independents and moderates got their candidate elcted in the primary, John McCain. Now did they back him? No they broke for Obama who ran to the right of McCain but just like a Dem, they're liars. They do exactly the oposite of what they promised. The biggest joke is the fiscal spending. Obama has brought us 1.5 trillion dollar deficit this year alon without any light at the end of the tunnel showing he plans to even bring that number down to under a trillion.
The Conservatives are gaing steam and are set for a major upset in 2010. Just watch boysda.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
I think there is some merit to that piece, but I also think there are several flaws.
To the degree that the political pendulum is ever swinging, conservatives may recover on the national scene, but there's also no denying that they've fallen out of favor with the mainstream at an alarming rate over the past five years. There is always going to be a certain segment of the populous that will shed political identities like a snake sheds it's skin for whatever is popular at the moment (Fieldmouse will agree with that []), but I'm not sure the GOP can recover all their losses of the past half-decade by maintaining the status quo.
Of course, liberals came into power in 2006 and 2008 not so much because of a radical change in the American electorate but because of mismanagement by those in power. There's nothing to say that can't repeat itself. If the economy continues in the sorry shape it's in for the next 12 months, it's hard to envision a scenario in which the Democrats don't lose a number of seats in Congress in the midterms, and Obama will have to start looking over his shoulder as we head towards 2012.
With all that said:
1.) I think I would use the term Obama consensus very loosely. I think there's probably a consensus for social reform, but it's certainly for a much more moderate reform than what Obama has proposed. Hell, I'm for social reform, but my views and Obama's views on how to achieve it are pretty much 180 degrees apart. His health care overhaul and climate change initiatives are quickly losing steam, and he's only six months in. Maybe something happens to turn the tide back in his direction, or maybe it doesn't. I think we're too early into his presidency to know whether his ideologies won him a mandate last November or whether Americans were running from the GOP.
2.) Agree to a point. Social conservatism shouldn't be abandoned, but at some point the Republicans need to dial down the rhetoric on these issues. And that's coming from someone who votes social issues first. Things have shifted. The Moral Majority is gone. Jerry Falwell is dead, Dr. James Dobson is out of favor and Pat Robertson has lost all credibility. Oppose abortion? Definitely. But understand that it won't win you many elections right now. Tax cuts are a different story. The Republican brand is fiscal responsibility. They've lost the right to call themselves that in the 21st Century, but that doesn't mean they should go about rebranding themselves. Tax cuts may not be a hot-button issue right now in the metro areas, but after a few years of higher taxes due to the social reform agenda identified by Obama in point #1, that just might be a different story.
3.) Republicans don't love minorities? This is a stigma that is heard to overcome. And it's going to be ever hard for Republicans to win elections without the Hispanic vote. But if winning the Hispanic vote means compromising your values to support open borders, I don't see how this is a viable option. On the other hand, the Republicans have GOT to do a better job reaching out to minorities and showing them how their policies aren't necessary policies that will hurt minority groups. The Democrats are winning this battle of rhetoric in a big way.
4.) Definitely. The Republicans just aren't seen as "hip." That has to change. Has to. But the young are always going to favor the more liberal candidate, and always have. There's a reason for the old saying that goes something like If you're 20 and conservative, you have no heart; if you're 30 and liberal you have no brain. Today's Obama voters may be tomorrow's [insert GOP candidate's name here] voters. Unless the increased young voter turnout of 2008 proves to be a trend, this is not a huge issue. And it's too soon to know whether it is a trend.
5.) Some good points here. I spoke to freshman Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) a couple of years ago, and he was very frank: "If the Republicans don't get serious about health care reform, they're going to wind up with health care overhaul that they don't want." Two years later, the Republicans haven't gotten serious about health care reform, and they're on the verge of getting health care overhaul they don't want. If Obamacare is successful, it will be in part because Republicans sat on their haunches and didn't do anything to address health care, which -- ice-cold reality here -- is unaffordable for too many Americans. It isn't like they didn't know it was going to resurface after it failed in the early '90s; they just chose to ignore it. The environment is another key area. More and more Americans are becoming concerned about the environment. The Bush presidency was a disaster for environmental concerns. Being environmentally-friendly doesn't mean you have to abandon support for ANWR drilling or coastal drilling. It just means you have to adjust your way of thinking a little.
I'll add a #6 that I firmly think Republicans need to think about:
6.) Win the rhetoric war. I firmly believe that while GOP arguments of bias in the press are often times overblown, the mainstream media is certainly left-leaning. When 80+ percent of journalists are Democrat, it's going to happen whether it's a concerted effort or an accident. This is a battle that was exemplified in the '08 election. I don't necessarily think the press elected Obama, but I do think that if the two candidates had been treated equally, McCain would've had much more of a fighting chance. So change that. Fox News may win a lot of the ratings wars, but it isn't the network you see when you're in an airport or a doctor's office. The Wall Street Journal has some very thought-provoking and well written conservative editorials, but the WSJ isn't read by the people who matter most. You have got to find ways to change this. The GOP is even off to a terrible start with "new media." Conservatives don't have anything to compete with the Huffington Post and DailyKos.
__________________
Politics, it seems to me, all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong. ~Richard Armour
FM: i don't doubt for a moment that 2010 will NOT be a good year for the Ds. I have advised several friends who were considering runs for higher office against running in this cycle. Midterms are always a down year for the incumbent party, and if you couple that with an economy that still hasn't rebounded, and if Obama continues his liberal death-march...
DLG: i don't think the author was saying Rs need to become more like Ds, rather, they need to become better Rs. Ron Paul had some clear messages that were embraced by a wide cross section of voters, demographically if not numerically speaking, yet he was shut out from his party's mainstream. it would appear that some core republican principals scare some core republicans.
the main problem i see with the Rs is "brand credibility". R's are against government interference in people's lives, unless it's in an area important to the religious right. R's are against deficits, unless it's a deficit WE run up to fight a war we feel we should be waging. R's are in favor of a free market economy, unless our supporters on wall street need a bail-out. we could go on and on.
And before someone points out that the Ds are guilty of all of the above, yeah, I know. Problem is, by and large, those are things that the voters already associate with the "Democratic brand". By and large they are what they stand for. Years of Republican hypocrisy have critically wounded the credibility of the brand with the american public.
I still believe that America is a fundamentally moderate-leaning-right country (with the caveat that this could change if the younger demographic stays engaged in large numbers). But the Rs will need to rebrand in a way that communicates a new message and approach to the electorate, while remaining consistent with their fundamental principals. Moreover, they will need new and eloquent spokesmen and women who can carry the message, without the taint carried by the current party apparatchiks.
Ron Paul had some clear messages that were embraced by a wide cross section of voters, demographically if not numerically speaking, yet he was shut out from his party's mainstream.
How so?
Quote:
R's are against government interference in people's lives, unless it's in an area important to the religious right.
How so? Government always restricts people's lives.
Quote:
R's are against deficits, unless it's a deficit WE run up to fight a war we feel we should be waging.
Dems are also all for this. I remind you all our wars have been deficit spending. This war was no different and it was a solid bipartisan vote.
Quote:
R's are in favor of a free market economy, unless our supporters on wall street need a bail-out.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. For one, the Tarp bill was voted yes by way more Dems then Rep. It was the Republicans that voted no the first time when Polosi pulled the bill and didn't send it along. They wanted "R"s for cover. Two, Wall Street overwhelming support "D"s over "R"s. The contribute by far to "D"s in campaigns.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
How so? Government always restricts people's lives.
Dems are also all for this. I remind you all our wars have been deficit spending. This war was no different and it was a solid bipartisan vote.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. For one, the Tarp bill was voted yes by way more Dems then Rep. It was the Republicans that voted no the first time when Polosi pulled the bill and didn't send it along. They wanted "R"s for cover. Two, Wall Street overwhelming support "D"s over "R"s. The contribute by far to "D"s in campaigns.
**sigh**
you know, you're right FM.
The bailouts began in january, not october like i thought.
the republican party apparatus didn't give ron paul the cold shoulder, and try to have him excluded from debates and citizen forums.
republicans have not maintained that government should play less of a role in people's lives, and then disregarded this princiapal out of convenience.
and i thought you glossed over my point that the Ds are guilty of these same offenses, but then i realized i never typed it. thank goodness you could get a both irrelevent and superfluous partisan shot in.
and the deficit never spun orgiastically out of control under 8 years of republican leadership.
all is well with the republican party. they are a bedrock of good government ideals, and have no credibility problems with the american electorate.
The bailouts began in january, not october like i thought.
the republican party apparatus didn't give ron paul the cold shoulder, and try to have him excluded from debates and citizen forums.
Ron Paul did have some good ideas here at home but he had no clue on National Defense. He wasn't polling at all well so frankly, I don't blame the party to restrict people on stage. My biggest problem are open primaries. If you don't belong to the party you shouldn't vote.
Quote:
republicans have not maintained that government should play less of a role in people's lives, and then disregarded this princiapal out of convenience.
Hey boysda, I want to run out of the party the moderates and independents. You can hold the party totally responsible for the middle ground of either party voting on these social issues. Our major debt begasn but didn't show up back under FDR. Johnson then piled on. We can't get things under control unless we drastically cut the federal government. We are screwed right now because we are facing 100 Trillion in debt and that not due to defense spending. How exactly do you propose we climb out from under that hammer?
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
DLG: i don't think the author was saying Rs need to become more like Ds, rather, they need to become better Rs. Ron Paul had some clear messages that were embraced by a wide cross section of voters, demographically if not numerically speaking, yet he was shut out from his party's mainstream. it would appear that some core republican principals scare some core republicans.
.
It's a continual rant by liberals and the liberal wing of the Republican Party. It doesn't seem to register with these folks that the liberals already have a Democrat liberal to whom they can give their vote. They don't need a Republican liberal.
As a Catholic, I'll admit the the "Christian Right" makes me a little nervous. But I have more in common with them than I do with the pro-gay rights, pro-abortion, pro-sensible gun control, "moderates."
And how did Ron Paul get into this discussion? The only nomination he's ever going to get is "Guy Least Likely To Ever Be Nominated For President."
Proud to be a Right Wing sheep
__________________
Proud parents of our own "Daddy's Little Girls"
I heard Jesus He drank wine and I bet we'd get along just fine.
good read
]), but I'm not sure the GOP can recover all their losses of the past half-decade by maintaining the status quo.
Just more irrelevant tripe
How about that famous RINO Colin Powell to head up the New and Improved Moderately Republican Party
Did we read the same article?
