Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
At the behest of the Blue Yeti -- who'd like you to know that Mike Murphy will be guesting on an upcoming episode of the Ricochet Podcast -- I offer for your consideration Mr. Murphy's diagnosis of what ails the GOP, courtesy of his latest entry at Time's Swampland blog:
The Republican challenge is not about better voter-turnout software; it is about policy. We repel Latinos, the fastest-growing voter group in the country, with our nativist opposition to immigration reform that offers a path to citizenship. We repel younger voters, who are much more secular than their parents, with our opposition to same-sex marriage and our scolding tone on social issues. And we have lost much of our once solid connection to the middle class on kitchen-table economic issues.
A debate will now rage inside the GOP between the purists, who will as always call for more purity, and the pragmatists, who will demand modernization. The media, always culturally alien to intra-Republican struggles, will badly mislabel this contest as one between “moderate” and “right-wing” Republicans. In fact, the epic battle we Republicans face now is a choice between two definitions of conservatism.
One offers steadfast opposition to emerging social trends like multiculturalism and secularization. The alternative is a more secular and modernizing conservatism that eschews most social issues to focus on creating a wide-open opportunity society that promises greater economic freedom and the reform of government institutions like schools that are vital to upward social mobility.
Over at Bloomberg, Josh Barro dissents:
The Republican Party's key electoral problem doesn't come from social conservatives or nativists. It comes from the economic policy demands of the party's wealthy donors. Murphy allows that Republicans "have lost much of our once solid connection to the middle class on kitchen-table economic issues." But his prescription won't do anything to fix that problem.
What are the "kitchen-table" economic concerns of the middle class? They're high unemployment, slow income growth, underwater mortgages, and the rising cost of health care and higher education. Democrats have an agenda that is responsive to these concerns. Republicans don't -- and they don't because the party's donor class specifically doesn't want one.
Have you spoken with a wealthy Republican donor in the last few years? By and large, they are outraged about Obamacare, easy money and stimulus spending -- that is, at policies aimed at easing middle class families' economic situations. They are often delusionally convinced that the country faces imminent economic collapse. What they believe will prevent that collapse is tight money, spending cuts and continued tax cuts for the rich. And so long as Republicans pursue those goals, they will be the party of anti-middle class economic policy.
Now, both Murphy and Barro are not exactly known for towing the standard conservative line. But everyone seems to agree that something needs to be done. How perceptive do you find the analysis here? What are they getting wrong? And what alternative strategies might you propose?
- Comment (132)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (13)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Louie, I really don't believe that to be true. There is no point to being an American unless being an American means something. There is very little that the Republican Party stands for, as we often witness, immediately after elections.
The promotion of a brand as a parachute, rather than a conveyance, is problematic to folks that don't live politics.
Jul '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Erik Larsen: Murphy is exactly right on every point. The American populace has changed.
· 41 minutes ago
The American populace may have changed, but that doesn't mean Murphy is reading it correctly. Let's look at just one point, for example:
"We repel Latinos, the fastest-growing voter group in the country, with our nativist opposition to immigration reform that offers a path to citizenship."
Polling has repeatedly shown immigration is not the primary concern of Hispanics. It polls behind unemployment, healthcare, economic growth, and income inequality. So let's put to bed the idea that immigration is the overriding concern of Hispanic voters.
Murphy is intellectually dishonest when he describes opposition to immigration reform that would provide a path to citizenship. That implies there is not currently a path to citizenship. There is one; it's called legal immigration. Mike is a smart enough guy that he knows this, and he loses credibility for his argument and himself when he deliberately distorts how he frames the discussion by repeating the Left's smear that opposition to illegal immigration is by default opposition to all immigration. This is the kind of strawman I'd expect to see on HuffPo.
Jun '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
We need more Church in our elections. And denial. Lots and lots more Church and denial in our elections. Because that will fix the American electorate's preference for the Democratic alternative.
The GOP refuses to acknowledge certain key facts about the culture. For one, "social issues" don't get fixed in elections; battles over that stuff are fought at ground level over a period of years. See the success of the pro-life movement for verification. Secondly, core morality transcends denomination, even religion. There seems to be a lot of confusion on that point. Third, the GOP has ruined its credibility with the populace on gay issues, drug legalization, immigration, the "safety net," etc., through either willful blindness, outright hypocrisy, or inattention to the one reason most Americans even consider voting Republican: spending.
To put it starkly, why on Earth would anyone consider the GOP if they haven't already woken to the evils of progressivism? What does the Right have to offer voters that isn't also offered -- with less up-front strings attached, or the appearance of intrusive social policy -- by the Democrats? The donkeys are wrong on almost all issues, but we have no convincing alternatives.
Dec '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
If we have to "modernize" to win then we've already lost.
Dec '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Murphy is a joke. Clients include Rick Lazio, John McCain, Whitman, Romney, Aaanold. Losers all! He gets a much deserved trashing in "The Quisling Consultants" by Jeff Lord in The American Spectator website today.
Dec '11
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
It reinforces something else I have also been saying. The only worthwhile part of the republican party is the commercial real estate, and it is better used as a cupcake store run by reformed drug addicts.
There is no forward path through the republican party, and if you think that winning isn't an end to itself, than its time for conservatives to walk away. Sure it will take some time to build something new, it took a new conservative party in Canada 10 years or so, it was 10 years or so to bury the Whigs. Its not like the republicans are going to win anyway, so its not like there is a lot to lose.
So yeah, as someone pointed out its easy to see who isn't wanted, and should vote accordingly.
Aug '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
CJRun: Louie, I really don't believe that to be true. There is no point to being an American unless being an American means something. There is very little that the Republican Party stands for, as we often witness, immediately after elections.
The promotion of a brand as a parachute, rather than a conveyance, is problematic to folks that don't live politics. · 1 minute ago
I am not advocating for anything other than and end to the sad and ugly legacy of Joe Arpio-ism run rampant in the GOP. That needs to be met head on without respect to any other changes in policy.
Someone needs to Sista Soulja that geezer soon.
I am not advocating give aways. I am advocating against alienating people.
Latinos, Hispanics, whatever you call them, they are staying away in crowds on election day.
I realize that many here believe that nativism is simply a false accusation, maybe a distortion, wholly without merit for the entire conservative electorate, but I assure it is not.
Believe what you will, general election results do not lie, and do have consequences.
Jun '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Whiskey Sam
The American populace may have changed, but that doesn't mean Murphy is reading it correctly. Let's look at just one point, for example:
"We repel Latinos, the fastest-growing voter group in the country, with our nativist opposition to immigration reform that offers a path to citizenship."
Polling has repeatedly shown immigration is not the primary concern of Hispanics. It polls behind unemployment, healthcare, economic growth, and income inequality. So let's put to bed the idea that immigration isthe overriding concern of Hispanic voters.
It's not immigration per se that repels most Latinos from the GOP. The outright hostility they face in agricultural red states (Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, north Florida) has a lot to do with it, and generational acculturation to statist and socialist government in their home/ancestral countries picks up most of the remainder. The fact that all of those states made up the bulk of the last twenty years' new housing and service industry growth -- the other arms of the Latino work triangle -- makes it a perfect storm of perceived unwelcome. We give them no reason to vote for us, and every reason not to.
Edited on November 30, 2012 at 3:13amJul '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Casey Taylor
It's not immigration per sethat repels most Latinos from the GOP. The outright hostility they face in agricultural red states (Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, north Florida) has a lot to do with it, and generational acculturation to statist and socialist government in their home/ancestral countries picks up most of the remainder. The fact that all of those states made up the bulk of the last twenty years' new housing and service industry growth -- the other arms of the Latino work triangle -- makes it a perfect storm of perceived unwelcome. We give them no reason to vote for us, and every reason not to. · 12 minutes ago
Edited 1 minute ago
Hostility to illegal immigration is not hostility to Hispanics or legal immigration.
Jun '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Whiskey Sam
Hostility to illegal immigration is not hostility to Hispanics or legal immigration. · 0 minutes ago
You and I know that. None of the Latinos I've spoken with over the last year, in either the military or metro-Atlanta civilian setting, believe us. Demographic data from recent elections reflect that.
Edited on November 30, 2012 at 3:25amMay '12
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
If you're worried about "hostility" then you better have the GOP actually confront illegal immigration and secure the US-Mexico border. If you pander and avoid securing the US border you'll likely gain one group of voters at the expense of another. With the losses outweighing the gains. The more the GOP ignores the legitimate concerns by people about illegal immigration, the more the economy crashes, the more Obama plays Identity politics, the more whites will figure out the best way to work the system is identity politics for whites. Down that road lies the American version of the BNP.
And don't think there aren't people out there seeking to seize on that dynamic. There are and I encounter more of them everyday.
Edited on November 30, 2012 at 3:28amJul '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Casey Taylor
Whiskey Sam
Hostility to illegal immigration is not hostility to Hispanics or legal immigration. · 0 minutes ago
You and I know that. None of the Latinos I've spoken with over the last year, in either the military or metro-Atlanta civilian setting, believe us. · 1 minute ago
Then we're at a dead end. If they simply refuse to believe us, there has to be a better way to show we're sincere than nakedly pandering for votes.
Aug '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
@Casey: "It's not immigration per se that repels most Latinos from the GOP. The outright hostility they face in agricultural red states (Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, north Florida) has a lot to do with it..."
Immigration is simply the issue that brings to mind that hostility. Saying immigration ranks fourth in their concerns does not measure what emotions, offenses, or family memories are stirred up by the topic.
For example: my grandfather earned his citizenship in the U.S. Navy, fighting for his country in WWII. All the implications of that story reside in me on election day.
Speaking hypothetically, I am lot more concerned by the prospect of my own unemployment than I am of some random hombre's deportation, but it still took a little flex on my part to vote for "self-deportation" Romney.
Two-Fence Giant Mexican Bug-Zapper Cain was a non-starter. Both were shameless panderers on this issue, but Romney was merely off-putting whereas Cain was seriously off-pissing.
Sep '12
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
One sad fact occurred to me while thinking about this thread. You don't win elections, in the short term at least, by challenging the conventional wisdom. You win votes by telling people what they already think is true.
It doesn't actually matter that Republicans don't hate Hispanics. The general consensus says they do, and a winning Republican is probably going to have to go out there, stab his compatriots in the back, and say "But I'm different."
Sep '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
You can blame the extensive Ontario migration that made Calgary the Toronto of the West over the past 20 years.
Jul '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Louie Mungaray (Squishy): @Casey: "It's not immigration per se that repels most Latinos from the GOP. The outright hostility they face in agricultural red states (Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, north Florida) has a lot to do with it..."
Immigration is simply the issue that brings to mind that hostility. Saying immigration ranks fourth in their concerns does not measure what emotions, offenses, or family memories are stirred up by the topic.
For example: my grandfather earned his citizenship in the U.S. Navy, fighting for his country in WWII. All the implications of that story reside in me on election day.
Speaking hypothetically, I am lot more concerned by the prospect of my own unemployment than I am of some random hombre's deportation, but it still took a little flex on my part to vote for "self-deportation" Romney.
Two-Fence Giant Mexican Bug-Zapper Cain was a non-starter. Both were shameless panderers on this issue, but Romney was merely off-putting whereas Cain was seriously off-pissing. · 3 minutes ago
Mitt Romney was explicitly referring to illegal immigrants when he referred to self-deportation. Am I misunderstanding, or are you pro-illegal immigration?
Jun '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Jim Ixtian
If you're worried about "hostility" then you better have the GOP actually confront illegal immigration and secure the US-Mexico border.
I'm not worried about any of it; I'm just giving y'all some friendly advice from the ever-growing field of people who've given up on the Republican Party.
The border is a serious issue, and it's one that the GOP refuses to take seriously. Red state legislatures have, since the 1980s, actively encouraged illegal immigration to their states, and for the most part continue to do so to this day. The Feds have aided and abetted for the entire period, even when the government was dominated by Republicans. Yet all Latinos get in return is a broad painting with a pretty bigoted brush. How do you think this schizophrenic policy squares with the average first- or second-generation American of Latino descent?
It doesn't. I live in the reddest enclave of the nation's reddest state, and none of my Latino friends have ever voted Republican for those very reasons.
Jun '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Whiskey Sam
Casey Taylor
You and I know that. None of the Latinos I've spoken with over the last year, in either the military or metro-Atlanta civilian setting, believe us. · 1 minute ago
Then we're at a dead end. If they simply refuse to believe us, there has to be a better way to show we're sincere than nakedly pandering for votes. · 12 minutes ago
It's not pandering to acknowledge that Republicans at all levels of government are equally responsible, along with Democrats, for mass importations of cheap *illegal* labor. It shouldn't be too difficult; acknowledging past sin and moving to rectify it is supposed to be a conservative virtue, right?
Jun '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Louie Mungaray (Squishy): @Casey: "It's not immigration per se that repels most Latinos from the GOP. The outright hostility they face in agricultural red states (Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, north Florida) has a lot to do with it..."
Immigration is simply the issue that brings to mind that hostility. Saying immigration ranks fourth in their concerns does not measure what emotions, offenses, or family memories are stirred up by the topic.
Exactly. Loose, undisciplined talk on immigration is an easy reason for those of Latin descent, who may be on the fence about voting (R), to pull the switch for (D).
Jul '10
Re: Mike Murphy's Diagnosis
Casey Taylor
Whiskey Sam
Casey Taylor
You and I know that. None of the Latinos I've spoken with over the last year, in either the military or metro-Atlanta civilian setting, believe us. · 1 minute ago
Then we're at a dead end. If they simply refuse to believe us, there has to be a better way to show we're sincere than nakedly pandering for votes. · 12 minutes ago
It's not pandering to acknowledge that Republicans at all levels of government are equally responsible, along with Democrats, for mass importations of cheap *illegal* labor. It shouldn't be too difficult; acknowledging past sin and moving to rectify it is supposed to be a conservative virtue, right? · 0 minutes ago
When has anyone advocated mass illegal immigration in the GOP? Advocating more open borders, easier access to work visas, new classes of work visas for Mexicans, and amnesties for illegals already here, do not count.