State of the Republican Party

[Habib]

I made a post in the heart the election concerning the ideational bankruptcy apparent in the Republican Party. Since the swearing in of a new President, the future of the Republican Party has become a subject of interest, especially since it hasn’t learned from the loss, but appears to be digging in for the long haul. Nowhere is this more evident than the current stimulus package. Republican opposition has manifested itself as a disorganized and vague opposition coupled with random tax break amendments (in addition to the tax breaks already included in the bill).

 

Here are a few excerpts from David Frum's Newsweek article. Overall, I found the article to be weak, but I think these are the salient points.

 

A generation ago, the great majority of the most educated Americans voted Republican. The elder George Bush, for instance, defeated Michael Dukakis among college graduates by 25 points. But that advantage has been eroding, and last year Barack Obama became the first Democrat since Lyndon Johnson to win a majority of American voters with four years of higher education.

 

[…]

 

We need to regain our historic advantage as the party of competence. College-educated Americans are among the hardest-working people in the world. They expect their government to work hard, too. Instead, Republicans have presided over Iraq, Katrina and the catastrophic mortgage meltdown—the worst sequence of public-sector fiascoes in a generation.

 

Republicans champion limited government, and well we should. Unfortunately, we sometimes talk as if we oppose government altogether and welcome its failures as opportunities to say, "I told you so." This is foolish. Americans don't blame "the government" for Iraq. They blame the people they hired to run the government. If we Republicans keep telling them we cannot make their government work as expected, they'll hire somebody else (as they already have).

 

We Republicans cannot recover the votes of the college-educated until we understand why we lost them. So long as we think Barack Obama won because of a fluke—because he waltzed into an economic crisis, or because his supporters somehow mastered better election technology, or because he somehow bamboozled the American public with vague, endearing promises of change—so long as we think those things, so long will our troubles continue. Barack Obama won because a majority of Americans believed he was an intelligent, levelheaded and responsible person who could solve problems they cared about. If we're to beat him—or succeed him—we're going to have to convince them that we can do the same or better.

 

Newsweek

 

Here, a few excerpts from an interview with Republican governor Tim Pawlenty. I really think he's on the right course here. If you read the entire interview you will see a person who understands politics, public perception, and how Republicans can climb out of the mess they are in. He is spot on about the worship of Reagan, as well.

 

Give some examples of that sort of future-thinking.

 

I'll give you two actual examples that we should have seen coming instead of dragging behind on it. One is environment and conservation. This was an issue that, in many Republican quarters, conservative quarters, was dismissed as recently as a few years ago, much less in the 1990s. .... A second one would be health care. It wasn't that long ago that quietly, confidentially, Republican consultants would say, "health care, we can never win that. It's too difficult. It's a morass. We shouldn't be involved in that as a leading issue." Well, nonsense. That's one of the main concerns of everyday, average Americans, and to say, we're out of the game on that? We should have been pushing and leading with our own solutions to that and showing progress.

 

In your state of the state address, you called for cutting business taxes during this deep recession to balance the budget, and you called for increased educational spending per pupil, tied to results. The reaction has been interesting. Some Democratic voices have said, look, How realistic is this, though, with Democrats in control of the legislature? since Democrats control both houses, it's nice that he threw a net set of ideas into it.

 

I don't feel constrained by the fact that the legislature is Democrat to not throw out ideas that I believe in, and push them and lead on them. In Minnesota, we have a good educational system, but we need to improve. I believe the future, in so many of these areas, is to align money with results. So, right now, we've got money into education; it all goes into inputs, and factors that are unrelated to results. The public gets it. You go to a forum and you ask, how many of you, if you're not government, get paid for seniority? No hands go up. The private sector has paid for hundreds and hundreds and millions of dollars around training people into performance measurements, performance metrics. That needs to happen in government, and that particularly needs to happen in education. Do the Democrats like that? No. Do the teacher's unions like that? No. But that's the way the world works. I submit to you that you're young enough that you'll eventually see that happen. Even in a mild way, President Obama embraced that. The gentleman who is going to be the Secretary of Education , from Chicago, has embraced that. This is about an evolution that is going to take place. On the issue of tax cuts, Minnesota has got a big budget deficit, but we can't just focus on getting the books balanced. We have to focus on say, how do we get this state to a place where we're going to be able to offer good-paying jobs and have employees want to stay there, grow there and be there.

 

The Atlantic

 

As both Frum and Pawlenty note, Republicans have lost their ideas. They have a great long list of policies and initiatives they oppose, but very few novel solutions to problems most people face. Republicans have also cultivated an image of being the cantankerous opponent of these issues, rather than promoters of solid ideas of their own. They’ve sold this image in an attempt to win elections by appealing to the least common denominator among the electorate.

 

I couldn't find it, but another quote seemed relevant. It was from a South Carolina Republican, and it was to the effect of "voters aren't voting against us because they think we aren't conservative enough, they think that we are too conservative." Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with being a conservative, but the image Republicans have been selling the last decade has finally caught up to them; the public views them negatively, as politicians who are merely divisive rhetoricists.

 

Where does the future of the party lie? I think, if it is to be anything but token opposition for the indefinite future, they need to cut some dead weight and move in a different direction. If Sarah Palin – who, to me, represents everything the Republican party has become, and everything it needs to flee - is the future of the Republican party, then they have resigned themselves to years of irrelevance.

 

I have a few more thoughts about which direction Republicans need to head in, but I’ll wait to post them as discussion unfolds. I also do not intend to make this thread about Obama or Democrats, either.

[ladiesbballcoach]

As long as the Dems continue to support the killing of unborn children in this country, there will be support for a party that does not.

[mcpapa]

As long as the Dems continue to support the killing of unborn children in this country, there will be support for a party that does not.

 

Support? Yes.

 

Enough support to regain control of the legislative and executive branches? Don't know about that one.

 

Pawlenty, from what I've heard, seems to be one of the (admittedly few) Republicans I could get behind.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Support? Yes.

 

Enough support to regain control of the legislative and executive branches? Don't know about that one.

 

Pawlenty, from what I've heard, seems to be one of the (admittedly few) Republicans I could get behind.

 

Well, I am praying that some day Christians see that when they use the Constitution to justify their support of choice, that God is not going to be using that same piece of paper in judging them come Judgement Day.

[UKMustangFan]

Why should the Republican Party change what they stand for?

[ladiesbballcoach]

Why should the Republican Party change what they stand for?

 

Well, first they have to prove somehow that they are the party of fiscal conservative.

 

They lost all credibility on that in the 6 years they were in charge of Congress and the Presidency.

[UKMustangFan]

Well, first they have to prove somehow that they are the party of fiscal conservative.

 

They lost all credibility on that in the 6 years they were in charge of Congress and the Presidency.

 

They need to regain credibility I agree. However, to change what a person stands for to cater to others is pathetic IMO, (that's what I took from this thread at least) and I hope they don't do so.

[mcpapa]

Why should the Republican Party change what they stand for?

 

I guess I've had a difficult time ascertaining what that is over the past several years.

[UKMustangFan]

Well, I am praying that some day Christians see that when they use the Constitution to justify their support of choice, that God is not going to be using that same piece of paper in judging them come Judgement Day.

 

I have a very hard time believing that God will be forgiving of those who blatantly support the murder of the innocent come Judgement Day.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I have a very hard time believing that God will be forgiving of those who blatantly support the murder of the innocent come Judgement Day.

 

I don't. Why would you?

If they have asked for forgiveness.

That is the key.

Our sins are covered by Jesus' blood and there is only one unforgivable one and abortion is not it.

All we have to do, is ask for forgiveness and repent from that lifestyle.

[cch5432]

It does seem that they have lost their direction. It is interesting too, because I believe that the Republicans have an actual political philosophy- small government- that should be the backbone of all policies. On the other hand, I don't see the unified political ideal that the Democrats are striving for. However, in the public forum, it is the Democrats who are strongly speaking out on issues, and the Republicans think they can skate by and rely on Americans believing the Democrats are wrong enough to vote for them (the R's).

[cch5432]

Why should the Republican Party change what they stand for?

They shouldn't change what they stand for; instead, they should actually take a stand. Small government is a great idea and many Americans agree. However, the Republicans are so disorganized that there actions don't reflect that ideal.

[ladiesbballcoach]

It does seem that they have lost their direction. It is interesting too, because I believe that the Republicans have an actual political philosophy- small government- that should be the backbone of all policies. On the other hand, I don't see the unified political ideal that the Democrats are striving for. However, in the public forum, it is the Democrats who are strongly speaking out on issues, and the Republicans think they can skate by and rely on Americans believing the Democrats are wrong enough to vote for them (the R's).

 

 

When I was young, I would have agreed with you.

 

But life has taught me that this country is filled with people that a) fill that they needed to be provided for in many different forms from corporate handouts and individual support through welfare and unneeded disabilities; b) people that fill that everyone is such a victim and we need to take care of them because of ______ and get elected into office by the people in a) and b).

[UKMustangFan]

I don't. Why would you?

If they have asked for forgiveness.

That is the key.

Our sins are covered by Jesus' blood and there is only one unforgivable one and abortion is not it.

All we have to do, is ask for forgiveness and repent from that lifestyle.

 

 

I assume this would be a discussion for a different thread, but I don't agree. Asking for forgiveness isn't enough IMO. When you support the murder of the innocent you don't get a second chance. Now I have no biblical evidence to support my line of thinking, it's just my opinion, but I just don't see it happening.

[UKMustangFan]

They shouldn't change what they stand for; instead, they should actually take a stand. Small government is a great idea and many Americans agree. However, the Republicans are so disorganized that there actions don't reflect that ideal.

 

I agree with that.

 

What I took from the excerpts and Habib's original post is that those quoted feel they need to change what the party stands for, not how they project those ideas.