In the last two posts, I described the major differences between Republicans and Democrats on the issues of 1) Size of Government and 2) Foreign Policy. As discussed in detail on this website, a stance on either of those two issues is instantly defined as Republican or Democrat (which is not necessarily conservative or liberal; more on that later). Even with the advantage of an intellectual approach to these issues, Republicans will surely remain the Minority Party in Congress after the election this November.
Let’s look at the United States Senate. Currently, the Senate is considered Democratic, consisting of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and 2 Independents who lean Democratic. Obviously, Republicans want to retain as many seats as possible, but in this 2008 election, 5 Republican Senators are retiring, with another 18 up for election; that means 23 Republican seats are open. With Democrats only having 12 seats up for election, with none retiring, this is the “largest open seat gap between parties in 50 years,” according to Congressional Quarterly. If the Democrats were able to get 60 seats in the majority, the Senate would be filibuster-proof, and if they were able to obtain 67 seats, a vote in Congress would be veto-proof. So, that being said, the threat of a lasting Democratic Congressional majority, coupled with a Democratic President with very little experience and a very liberal voting record, is now possible. Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty has correctly compared Senator Obama to “a man who jumped to the front of a moving parade.”
The time is ripe; Democrats are within striking distance of facilitating this shift. It is understandable for the Republicans to lose even more, given the track record of the last eight years, but for the public, this is a dangerous combination in government, especially given these rocky times. To summarize my last two posts, we cannot simply tax our way out of this recession, and we cannot free-wheel negotiate our way to world peace. Solving our nation’s problems will call for bold yet sensible solutions and reform, an American coalition, and the renaissance of a particular political party.
Plight of the Parties
Being in the minority in troubled times may not be so bad; the Republicans are in a place to seize an opportunity and once again be the party of a real coalition. Today, there is a gaggle of disenfranchised Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, and independents looking for a message, and eyeing Senator McCain as their possible candidate. Drawing all of these individuals into the Republican fold is a hefty goal, especially given today’s hostile political climate towards the Republican label. The multiple issues boil down to a couple of specific missions both parties will undertake for victory in November. Success will depend on the outcomes of these missions.
Both candidates must perform this dual task: first, energizing their base, and secondly, appealing to crossover voters. In the past, politicians achieved this goal by altering their forward rhetoric while giving a wink and a nod backwards. In this Presidential race, both candidates already appeal to the independents, but both have their own troubles. For John McCain, his Republican base already distrusts him due to his history of bipartisan dealings. Some see this as an asset; the Far Right does not. Unlike most Americans, they do not appreciate his “maverick” past. McCain also has the plight of dissociating himself from an unpopular President without disenfranchising the support the Bush Administration still receives on the Right.
It is indeed evident that since the 2000 presidential election, the country as a whole has shifted to the left. Both candidates are further to the left than usual, with Obama far to the left, and with McCain calling himself a “right-of-center Republican.” This is a result of more Americans identifying themselves as “Democrats” than they do as “Republicans.” As this may help the Democrats as a whole, it may hurt that their Presidential nominee is so far left. The priority for both candidates will be fighting for the middle! Since both candidates will try to gain these crossover voters by appealing to the center, Obama may have a larger chore, as he has further to go than McCain does. In past elections, this has lead to certain comical attempts of gun-toting, food-serving, and other Dixie-whistling activities, and if it didn’t work with Kerry in 2004, I don’t foresee it working with Obama in 2008.
Race in the Race
Here, I would be naive to say race will not be an issue of some sort in this election, and I would be remiss to not mention it in its proper context, at least how the advisors will assess it. In 1963 Robert Kennedy was quoted as saying, “The Irish were not wanted here. Now an Irish Catholic is President of the United States. There is no question about it, in the next forty years a Negro can achieve the same position.” Thankfully, that is a possibility today. To totally overcome the race issue, Obama must appeal to blue collar, Middle America, a group with which he has had little to no relations that generally votes Republican (these days, at least). In his book, Born Fighting, Democratic Senator Jim Webb sums up Middle America, the Scots-Irish descendents of Appalachia, saying, “They came with nothing, and for a complicated set of reasons, many of them still have nothing. The slurs stick to me: Rednecks. Trailer-park trash. Racists. Cannon fodder. My ancestors. My people. Me.”
Dave “Mudcat” Saunders, possibly the only Democratic strategist to have a Confederate flag for a bedcover, claims that Obama must, “get on the ground regularly in Appalachia and say this: ‘If you’re not going to vote for me since I’m black, then go to hell. I don’t care. But my people are suffering. I’ve worked in south Chicago, and I’ve seen their problems. I’ve been out to rural America, and I’ve seen your problems, and they’re a mirror image of each other.’” To win in 2008, Obama must befriend the Bubbas. This is a problem, as Obama has never known a redneck, absent some political motive in rural Illinois. I do not think it is fair to say Southern working whites would not vote for a black man today; while a few may not, I think most actually would. Most are more concerned with Internet rumors that he is a Muslim than they are with his race. I think at this point Appalachian whites don’t favor Obama because he has almost purposely not appealed to them; his quote that, “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion,” stems from his answer why he lacks support from working whites.
The race issue swings both ways: it is projected Obama will carry greater than 95% of the black vote. Is that due to his political ideology? His tax policies? His positions on gun control, abortion, or energy security? Obviously not. His background is rooted in liberal, urban America, and while racism is more overt in the South with a minority of whites, covert racism is more rampant in the North and in urban areas. Overcoming this may be a larger hurdle for Obama than winning over the Dirty South.
History of the Parties
For 250 years, party membership and platforms of the parties have continually shifted over time. The Democratic Party as we know it made its major shift in the 1960s, with John Kennedy in 1960, Johnson’s Great Society of the mid-sixties, and Robert Kennedy’s short-lived movement in 1968. The working class was reached, the antiwar movement had a place, and entitlement projects thrived on the Left. This rebuilding now defines the Democratic Party.
On the Right, Republicans began its successful rebirth in 1980 with Ronald Reagan. He understood ideology, often relating issues back to our founding. When speaking about farm subsidies (of all things) in Barry Goldwater’s 1964 Presidential campaign, Reagan said, “The (Founding Fathers) knew that governments don’t control things. A government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.” This message helped create a movement; a coalition.
This coalition brought in the “Reagan Democrats” by appealing to the economic concerns of the time, while bolstering the strength of this nation by restoring its confidence. The problem today is, the newfound Republicans have hijacked the party platform. These former-Democrats brought a strong stance on national defense, paired it with fiscal conservatism, and neoconservatism was born. Today, “neocons” outnumber traditional conservatives, or to use a name thrust upon them, the paleoconservatives.
As a result, Republicans these days are not necessarily fiscally conservative anymore, either. Abandonment of the party platform over the last eight years has endangered the party as a whole. Therefore, to revive the party, Old Conservatism must be reawakened, with the Republican Party standing on the shoulders of the greats who came before them. Economic conservatism comes first; reform, second. If Republicans ignore fiscal responsibility, in the Burkean tradition, as the top priority in 2008, it could ruin the GOP indefinitely. And why let Democrats steal the “Change” mantra? Republicans should point out the significant difference between “Change” and “Reform.”
Forming a caucus from the rubble of the Republican Party carries its own set of issues, as political danger awaits those with the good intentions of fixing these problems. Consider the assassination of James Garfield in 1876, when his assassin claimed, “I am a Stalwart of the Stalwarts; Chester Arthur is now president.” Then, within the Republican Party, there was a rift between the “Half-breeds” and the “Stalwarts.” Half-breeds were deemed as such due to their willingness to work with the Democrats. Such a rift cost Garfield, a Half-breed, his life. These rifts can truly destroy a party. It is the duty of every member of the coalition to respect others within the ranks.
Coalition of a Party
I personally do not think any major faction or segment must concede any of its ideas in order to come together over basic issues. Need some hints? Try energy security, fiscal conservatism, incentives over entitlements, border security before immigration reform, family values and the promotion of education, strong yet benevolent national security, common sense in foreign policy, and transparency in government, just to name a few. These issues appeal to those willing to think while feeling, instead of just feeling.
It is time for Republicans to regroup with a very solid and easy to understand platform with general appeal, based on core principles that date back to the 18th Century. This may require painting Democrats as perpetual protesters who lack real leadership. Look at the current Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House as an example. Republicans should acknowledge the emotional and moral appeal to liberalism, and fight to secure the obvious economic and intellectual appeal to conservatism (and then, actually be conservative). Appeal to pocketbooks. Advance the superior sense of patriotism within the Republican Party. It may take bold acts such as the FairTax, the Enumerated Powers Act, drilling in ANWR, or all-out Congressional voting reform to energize a populace. John McCain has the voice to champion these issues and do something without increased taxes, advanced entitlements, or expanded executive powers.
Finally, the GOP must readily admit to the recent mistakes and missteps of the Party. Don’t cling to past errors, or try to cover them up. Remain candid, and honestly, gracefully, point out Bush’s mistakes (and successes, such as the recently improved relations with North Korea). And remember, this is a Renaissance, not a Revolution – not yet, at least. If the Republican Party is rebuilt, its leaders need to ensure the “Grand New Party” emulates Edmund Burke’s definition of a conservative statesman, who has the “disposition to preserve and an ability to improve.”
Share on Facebook