Calling Paul Rahe
Peter Robinson ·
November 9, 2011 at 6:24pm
Paul Rahe, predicting the rise and eventual triumph of what soon became the Tea Party, speaking on Uncommon Knowledge on November 12, 2009:
The election of Barack Obama was a gift to the friends of liberty.
On the front page of the New York Times this very morning:
Voters turned a skeptical eye toward conservative-backed measures across the country Tuesday, rejecting an anti-labor law in Ohio....Taken together, Tuesday’s results could breathe new life into President Obama’s hopes for his re-election a year from now.
A mere temporary setback? Or should the friends of liberty despair?
Paul?
- Comment (24)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Mar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Now starts the heavy lifting. The Tea Party had its initial uncontested victory, much like a sneak attack because no one took it seriously. Now its seen as a legitimate movement, the battle has been joined, and victories will be harder to come by. Our adversaries have years of experience at political infighting, and we can't expect them to blithely roll over and play dead. If we're confident in the rightness of our ideas, and are willing to take the field with them, we'll prevail.
Edited on November 9, 2011 at 6:39pmMar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Oops, duplicate. My bad.
Edited on November 9, 2011 at 6:39pmRe: Calling Paul Rahe
Temporary, local setback. More after I get done teaching.
Mar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Peter Robinson
A mere temporary setback? Or should the friends of liberty despair?
While waiting for Paul, I think Mr Delingpole's recent post on Socialism in the UK is relevant. This is all looking like deja vu all over again for those of us who lived in the UK after 1949.
So, yeah, I'm leaning towards despair.
Dec '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Ohio mostly proves that demagoguery still works.
Mar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
I vote for meaningless.
These off-year elections are far too over-hyped. A poor performance by Obama in the general election next year could lead to changes in state legislatures that would have much more impact than the passage of the initiatives in Ohio would have.
Oct '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
I tend to be a Steynian pessimist about this sort of things. However, it's hard to argue with someone as sharp as Dr. Rahe after listening to this wonderful interview that RJ Moeller did with him.
Mar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
There is always that.
Aug '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
I was going to do a post on this over at the member feed but I'm too lazy so I'll make my point here.
What these votes in Ohio prove is that this is a center/right country - not a right/right country.
If the Republican candidate doesn't appeal to these people who voted down the union restrictions in Ohio he will not win the state and will not win the election. That is why we must nominate the most electable conservative candidate because an unelectable conservative only ensures 4 more years of radical socialism.
I wish the electorate were more conservative than they are but they just aren't. Appeals to Reagan are moot at this point because the country is not as conservative as it was in the 80s. Rush Limbaugh may say that if we just nominate the most hard core conservative we find people will elect him but I think El Rushbo is wrong on this one.
The electorate is getting more moderate all the time for a myriad of reasons that have been detailed elsewhere. The path of our country is fixed - we can only seek a reprieve from the inevitable.
Mar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
The path of our country is fixed - we can only seek a reprieve from the inevitable.
I could not be more opposed to the idea I just quoted. Nevertheless, I do agree, Frozen, that the country is more "moderate" than Maha-Rushie's sermons connote.
All in all: I absolutely refuse to yield to notions that say that the trajectory of our nation is inevitably set to arrive at some fixed place. I think we can see in Europe these days, for example, that there are many, many models of this kind of "end of history" society that are failing. Woe unto you, "end of history"-ers, it appears something akin to nature, though thrown out with a pitchfork, has itself reasserted.
Fatalism? My temperament is anathema to you.
Defiance.
May '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Ohio proves that we have to be tactically wise, even while having longterm conservative goals.
Kasich tried the swing-for-a-five-run homer approach -- a big, sweeping, change-the-state-in-one-fell-swoop bill that united opposition. A Mitch Daniels-esque, swing-for-solid-line-drives approach would have accomplished so much more. (Note Daniels' rejection earlier this year of his legislature's drive to make IN a right-to-work state. He sensed a battlefield that wasn't yet prepared, and so he backed off.) We need to take risks, natch, but like Gov. Daniels, we need to be calculating in doing so.
If we win the presidency, the temptation will be to take the Kasich approach, to drive for everything immediately with no bi-partisanship -- to be Obama, in a sense. Very, very bad idea. Come to Ohio and see.
Jun '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
No, the friends of liberty should not despair. The good news is that the American people still love liberty and are very reluctant to vote to deny others their rights.
The bad news is that the left knows this, and has done a great job cloaking their preferred policy outcomes in the language of rights: a woman's "right to choose," or the "right to health care."
Here's how the WSJ (hardly a left-leaning paper) described the vote in Ohio: "the law would have stripped the state's 350,000 public employees of most of their collective-bargaining rights..." As long as the dominant narrative remains "Republicans want to take away workers' rights" we're going to lose this issue.
Jul '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Best thing that could have happened there. Now the folks need to find a way to pay for things and the base of people agreeing with unions will drop as the tab comes through. This will turn many swing voters more fiscally conservative since liberal ideas are flowery fantasies until the bill comes in.
I agree with Frozen Chosen, ....the path is fixed. I am an Atlas Shrugged fatalist and the disease of "Big Government" largesse exists on the right as much as it does on the left.
Until paid career politicians are eliminated (as in term limits and death/jail for bribes, take your pick) and special interest lobbyists are outlawed (death/jail for bribing, take your pick) we are traveling inexorably toward the Randian vision.
The stomach for either a public uprising or a "producer" strike will not come until true desperation sets in.
May '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Pease read T. Elliot Gaiser's post. He's got it. Don't despair today. And in some exuberant tomorrow, remember your Burke and don't over-reach.
Mar '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
I'd say temporary, but the battle-within-the-war metaphor is the most useful way of assessing what happened (besides waiting for good polling data).
Part of Prof. Rahe's point in that episode, I think/extrapolate, was that the left's ideology was taken as final victory, a new dawn for progressivism (Pelosi & Schumer regularly talked like Gingrich '94, i.e. fundamental shift in the American electorate). They reached WAY too far, making their ideology obvious, but America has never taken to far-leftism when sold explicitly.
Given the tsunami of bills coming due and the economy, people seemed to have gone to their mod-con roots nationally, but America as a whole is simply not that philosophically driven for major, intentional ideological shifting in a few election cycles (if ever). So I would expect the general trend to continue electorally (of reps) to the right. However, specific issue-based elections/battles like yesterday can be much more easily spun (worker's rights v. anti-union, mother's rights v. anti-choice) by the left in their favor.
May '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Scott Reusser: Ohio proves that we have to be tactically wise, even while having longterm conservative goals.
Kasich tried the swing-for-a-five-run homer approach -- a big, sweeping, change-the-state-in-one-fell-swoop bill that united opposition. A Mitch Daniels-esque, swing-for-solid-line-drives approach would have accomplished so much more............
.................If we win the presidency, the temptation will be to take the Kasich approach, to drive for everything immediately with no bi-partisanship -- to be Obama, in a sense. Very, very bad idea. Come to Ohio and see. · Nov 9 at 10:52am
I can't express loudly enough how right Scott is here. This was the same error Ahnuld made in his initiative and referendum set that got bombed at the polls- and that Obama made when force-feeding ObamaCare to us through the reconciliation process after being told, loudly and often, that we wanted him to slow down and do something bipartisan.
Obama got a big reminder in 2010. If we are stupid, we'll get Johnson-Goldwater in 2012.
Reusser for President. You heard it here first. Articulate, center-right, key state, small businessman.
Jan '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Ohio's defeat of issue two was not an endorsement of Obama or the Democrats. Look what happened to issue three a complete rejection of Obamacare by Ohio. Think of issue two as a vote for Teachers, Firemen and Police in the minds of the voters. Minds that will soon be reeling from higher taxes or laid off teachers, firemen and police. Kasich will regroup and find another way to lessen the power of the the public sector unions. No worry s mates.
Aug '11
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Sure it was a temporary set back for the Right.
These things happen. But Prof. Rahe's 2009 insight still holds: Barack Obama is the best thing that happened to the conservative movement.
President Obama's policies have only reinforced this assertion. He has governed as a liberal on domestic matters. He staunchly defends Keynesian economics and the administrative entitlement state, both of which have been shown as colossal failures in recent years. He got his stimulus. He got his health care bill. He got financial regulation reform.
None of these ideas have delivered. Indeed, they've prolonged the pain and suffering of ordinary Americans. His ideas have been put into practice. The results aren't pretty. 9% unemployment. A miserable housing market. Wall Street still operating as if the financial crisis never happened (see MF Global). Rising costs in food/gas/health care. If this isn't malaise, what is?
The Right has plenty of bold ideas. Tax reform. Entitlement reform. Reducing the regulatory state. A pro-growth agenda. It's a stark difference from the president's vision.
Obama stands for the status quo. The Right stands for change. With that in mind, I'm optimistic about 2012.
May '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
Duane Oyen
Reusser for President. You heard it here first. Articulate, center-right, key state, small businessman. · Nov 9 at 11:47am
Kiss your own damn baby. (and thanks)
Nov '10
Re: Calling Paul Rahe
And don't forget that money matters.