Motley Moose – Archive

After their resounding defeat in the 2008 general election there was a fairly common consensus that the Republican Party would, of necessity, remake themselves.  A new party would emerge disassociated from the opprobium of the Bush administration and its policies with a recalibrated ideological compass; with upgraded doctrine and technology for the upcoming political battles of the new millenium.

And this internal discussion commenced among Right intellectuals and pundits, including a fair bit of intramural finger-pointing over perceived failures of the Republican party apparatus in general and the McCain campaign in particular.  This debate quickly focussed on the controversial nomination of Sarah Palin as candidate for the vice-presidency, an issue which sharply polarised the respective factions.

Little did they realise that this process would be derailed and abandoned in a scramble by incumbents and aspirants alike to align themselves with a minority, populist movement which has, already, damaged the prospects of the party beyond measure.  The angry, heckling supporters evident in the later stages of the national campaign, the same ones whose shouted epithets the candidates themselves were sometimes obliged to publically disown, have somehow become the Promised Land constituency to which an increasingly broad spectrum of Republican candidates are pitching their policies and oratory.

The debate over the future of the Republican Party has hardly progressed beyond the desperate and defamatory sloganeering of the McCain campaign in its closing weeks.  Apart from the ongoing divide over the perils of Palinism the ideological battle for the ‘soul’ of the Republican party is apparently over and it was aptly summarised recently by Jonathan Rauch of the National Journal:

The history of the modern Republican Party in one sentence: Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller got into an argument and George Wallace won.

Jonathan Rauch – It’s George Wallace’s GOP Now National Journal 27 Feb 10

Instead of resetting the Republican platform to core conservative values they have allowed themselves to be co-opted into settling for a national agenda which appeals to an increasingly incoherent, marginalised and aggrieved minority.

Their gamble, of course, is that the Tea Party anger is reflective of a broader hostility among independents towards the Democratic administration in general and their incumbents in particular and in the short-term economic conditions that will no doubt be the case.  But there are manifest problems with this approach.  Firstly, it assumes that apparent demographic shifts toward Republicans among independents indicate support for current strategy, not just disenchantment with the economy in general.  The map still makes sober reading for Republican strategists:

Nationwide, party support shifted in a slightly more Republican direction in 2009 after a historically strong Democratic year in 2008. Overall, 49% of Americans in 2009 identified as Democrats or said they were independent but leaned to the Democratic Party, while 41% identified as Republicans or were Republican-leaning independents. That 8-point Democratic advantage compares to a 12-point, 52% to 40%, Democratic advantage in 2008.

Thus, even with the reduction in Democratic strength, the party still maintained a solid advantage over the Republicans nationally last year. It follows, then, that most states continued to be Democratic in their political orientation.

Despite the modest shift toward a decreased affiliation with the Democratic Party and an increased affiliation with the Republican Party in 2009 compared to 2008, the United States remained a Democratically oriented nation last year. In all, 33 states and the District of Columbia were either solidly Democratic or leaning Democratic in terms of the political party leanings of their residents. Twelve states were fairly evenly balanced between Democratic and Republican supporters, and 5 states were solidly or leaning Republican.

Jeffrey M Jones – Party ID: Despite GOP Gains, Most States Remain Blue Gallup 1 Feb 10

Reaping windfalls from economic discontent is not a strategy, it is mere opportunism just as likely to be reversed when the economic winds blow more favourably.  It would be imprudent to consider any gains by Republicans in 2010, though they will probably have us believe otherwise, as an affirmation of their party platform, such as it is.  And it spite of the inevitable hand-wringing it is also no reason for the Democrats to revise theirs.  We are winning this thing.

For all the fractious dissent from the Left and our apparent legislative malaise Democrats have strong leadership and a strategy largely based, for better or for worse, on the campaign platforms of the current president.  A retrospective glance at our performance during our years in opposition would tend to confirm this improvement.  And, surely, this is typical and appropriate for an incumbent party but it puts us at an enormous advantage.

Republicans are operating in a virtual leadership vacuum.  A vacuum which invites the intrusive participation of demagoguing non-politicians whom inherited the media bully-pulpit originally intended for the ‘street fighting’ branch of the party.  So who is setting ethical and ideological agendas on behalf of Republicans?  Here’s a disturbing picture from last year:

PRINCETON, NJ — Asked to name the “main person who speaks for the Republican Party today,” Republicans across the country are most likely to name three men: Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney. Democrats are most likely to say Limbaugh speaks for the GOP, followed by Cheney. Both Republicans and Democrats overwhelmingly say Barack Obama is the main person who speaks for the Democratic Party…

The responses to the Republican leadership question provide hard evidence that there is in fact a significant leadership vacuum confronting the GOP today. Forty-seven percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents could not come up with a single name in response to the party spokesperson question.

Frank Newport – Limbaugh, Gingrich, Cheney Seen as Speaking for GOP Gallup 10 Jun 09

Current Republican politicians rarely contradict or publicly disavow these spokespersons for fear of losing their ‘core’ constituencies or being publicly called out with partisan calumnies similar to those incessantly slung at their Democratic rivals.  They have tolerated a dragon which has now curled up on their own throne.  The outcome is entirely predictable, here’s Tim Pawlenty, a Republican moderate and presidential aspirant, throwing out some surprisingly red meat:

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty tells the CPAC audience that conservative “can learn a lot” from the Tiger Woods saga, saying they, “…should take a page out of [Tiger’s wife’s] playbook and take a 9-iron and smash the window out of big government in this country.”

Kyle – Pawlenty: Conservatives Need To Be More Like Elin Nordegren Right Wing Watch 19 Feb 10

Unbelievable?  Surely, but this is the impasse which Republicans have created for themselves.  They are terrified of militant grass-roots primary challenges from a newly empowered, angry minority within their own party which takes its cues from arguably xenophobic and racist shock radio.  They are desperately trying to hold together the increasingly shaky coalition of their lower-to-middle class ‘values voters’ constituencies, on the one hand, and their elite corporate campaign contributors whom have been wringing out enormous profits and lavish bonuses at the expense of the former for decades.  They are without leadership and their demographic prospects are discouraging.  Their moderates, including those whom might actually get elected, are either caving to the militant rhetoric or wisely staying out of the fray while sacrificing essential media exposure.  

They have missed a golden opportunity to reinvent their party in a way that would appeal to independents for a generation, instead of merely an election cycle, and their strategists know it.  The best they can do is prepare to quietly beat off a nomination bid from the likes of Sarah Palin which, if it were successful, could destroy their party altogether; all the while wishing they were half so ‘popular.’  It must suck to be a Republican these days.

It is a sorry mess and it is ironic to note that Roger Ailes and Fox News have probably already done more damage to the future prospects of the national Republican party than any number of Left progressives could ever accomplish.  Jonathan Rauch concludes, emphasis added:

First, with the important exception of race, not one of Wallace’s central themes, from his bristling nationalism and his court-bashing to his anti-intellectualism and his aggressive provincialism, would seem out of place at any major Republican gathering today.

Second, and again leaving race aside, any Republican politician who publicly renounced the Wallace playbook would be finished as a national leader.

Third, by becoming George Wallace’s party, the GOP is abandoning rather than embracing conservatism, and it is thereby mortgaging both its integrity and its political future. Wallaceism was not sufficiently mainstream or coherent to sustain a national party in 1968, and the same is true today.

Jonathan Rauch – It’s George Wallace’s GOP Now National Journal 27 Feb 10

Pity the poor Republicans, grab some popcorn and wish in your hearts for a genuine opposition with some ideological and moral integrity.  Sooner or later we’re gonna’ need them.