Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
The question of the hour: How can the GOP rebrand itself as the “Party of Cool”…or at the very least as a party that’s less uncool now than it has been for the past 25 years?
Never having excelled at being cool myself — and having recently scored a mere 36 on Pew’s “How Millennial Are You?” quiz (Millennials should score between 73 and 100) — I feel like a fraud proffering up any advice on the subject.
But for starters, I’ll second everything Glenn Reynolds counsels in his column today in the New York Post. His first item of advice: lower the drinking age!
Introduced by Republicans (it was spearheaded by Elizabeth Dole) in the 1980s, it was always a lousy idea. The result has been more, not less, alcohol abuse on campus, as student drinkers have moved from public venues, where there was supervision, to dorm rooms and frat houses, where there’s less.
And it’s fundamentally unfair. At 18, people can sign contracts, get married and sign up for student loans that will haunt them for decades. They can join the military and go off to die in foreign lands. But federal law presumes they’re too immature to have a beer.
Professor Reynolds goes on to recommend that Republicans ought to become advocates for revising the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) so that such things as unlocking one’s cellphone no longer land someone looking to switch mobile carriers in prison; and that the GOP should champion policies that offer solutions to the problem of skyrocketing tuition. Realistically, I think these latter suggestions are small potato issues.
The two major obstacles standing in the way of Republicans ever winning over young voters in a meaningful way are same sex marriage and marijuana. And though some liberty movement Republicans —folks like Rand Paul and Justin Amash and Tom McClintock — might individually support SSM and the legalization of marijuana, there is no way on God’s green earth that the GOP will ever embrace these things en masse. At least no time soon.
But that doesn’t mean that the Republican Party can’t pivot at all on these issues. On the matter of marijuana, why not support a decriminalization of possession so that law enforcement resources are freed up to attend to more serious crimes? And on the matter of same sex marriage, I commend Rod Dreher’s thinking to your attention. Dreher's argument boils down to this: SSM opponents would do well to abandon the fight against SSM, and instead focus on the threat SSM poses to religious liberty.
These are concessions, to be sure. But they are concessions consistent with an overall theme of liberty. Before the Republican Party writes off young voters forever, my sense is that we ought to give the robust message of liberty a fighting chance.
Image of hipsters from Shutterstock.
- Comment (121)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (39)
Comments:
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Am I hopelessly un-hip if I admit I can't figure out if the person on the right in the photo is a boy or a girl?
May '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
I think the GOP may be able to navigate SSM and marijuana via federalism. Get the federal government out of the marriage business and let each state decide what is marriage. It may also be possible to do something similar with marijuana.
The key to keeping the more socially conservative members of the GOP on board is ensuring that one state's choices don't have consequences for another. Hence the part of the DOMA that ensures states don't have to recognize other states' SSM would be enforced and marijuana transportation across state lines would need vigorous enforcement and draconian penalties.
I agree with Doc - the more liberty principles the GOP endorses the better its chances. Reign in the federal government to its Constitutional limits, stop mortgaging young people's future and there is a conversation to be had.
May '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well.
Jun '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Yes. +1. Like. Etc.
If "constitutional conservative" means anything, this is what it means. We will not win proposing statist means achieve conservative ends.
BrentB67: I think the GOP may be able to navigate SSM and marijuana via federalism. Get the federal government out of the marriage business and let each state decide what is marriage. It may also be possible to do something similar with marijuana.
The key to keeping the more socially conservative members of the GOP on board is ensuring that one state's choices don't have consequences for another. Hence the part of the DOMA that ensures states don't have to recognize other states' SSM would be enforced and marijuana transportation across state lines would need vigorous enforcement and draconian penalties.
I agree with Doc - the more liberty principles the GOP endorses the better its chances. Reign in the federal government to its Constitutional limits, stop mortgaging young people's future and there is a conversation to be had. · 0 minutes ago
May '10
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Don't bet on it. Federalism doesn't work on marriage. My wife and I were married in the state of Michigan and we are just as married in the other 49 states. You can't be married in New York, move to Ohio and find out you're not married.
And federal law always trumps state law. You can't argue the legality of Arizona's immigration law on one hand and give in on drug laws. Either it has supremacy or it doesn't.
Mar '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 5 minutes ago
Only if you are worried about it.
Jun '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
I believe that "wondering" is a protected class these days...
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 1 minute ago
Jul '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
You can't really tell until you do a chromosomal analysis. So pull down the genes an find out.
May '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
It just so happens that my Grandmother's Republican Party was the party of Calvin Coolidge*, so I'd rather prefer that this one emulate that one.
*We have a photo of her as a flapper, which just blew my mind as a kid.
Jul '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 2 minutes ago
They are both clearly transgender individuals.
Dec '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 15 minutes ago
I do consider myself to be a hipster and even I couldn't figure it out! :)
Even worse, I was slightly nauseated at the androgynous image. That is so 70s, man.
Sep '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Sorry to pop your bubble, Diane, but Dreher doesn't know what he is talking about. You will not be able to save religious freedom if you give up on marriage. It will not happen. These people will not rest until they ground religious freedom to a powder. The lefties want power unobstructed by the power of religion. Aaron is right. Marriage is the hill. I don't think we're going to die on it, but it is the hill.
The party also needs to be aware that if they gain mils in that way, they LOSE grandma.
No, we need to convince millennials on economic grounds. THAT is where they are, and should be, seriously aggrieved.
Edited on February 26, 2013 at 12:41amRe: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Barkha Herman
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 2 minutes ago
They are both clearly transgender individuals. · 2 minutes ago
"Clearly" Barkha?
That seems to be the problem for me.
May '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Barkha Herman
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 2 minutes ago
They are both clearly transgender individuals. · 0 minutes ago
My first thought upon seeing the guy was 'eat a sandwich for Christ's sake...'
Dec '10
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Barkha Herman
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 2 minutes ago
They are both clearly transgender individuals. · 0 minutes ago
Will you guys just stop, I looked at the picture and snap decided the one on the left was a girl and the boy was on the right ... then you guys start in with this who's on first stuff and now I'm not sure which is which ... sometimes, I really miss the old days when the world was divided between football players and cheerleaders ...
Edited on February 26, 2013 at 12:45amJul '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Tommy De Seno
Barkha Herman
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 2 minutes ago
They are both clearly transgender individuals. · 2 minutes ago
"Clearly" Barkha?
That seems to be the problem for me. · 3 minutes ago
I guess I am not as funny as I am hip :-D.
Jul '11
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Jim Ixtian
Barkha Herman
BrentB67
Don't feel bad, I was wondering as well. · 2 minutes ago
They are both clearly transgender individuals. · 0 minutes ago
My first thought upon seeing the guy was 'eat a sandwich for Christ's sake...' · 5 minutes ago
Jim - is the sandwich gluten free?
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Nathaniel Wright:
One can be extremely socially conservative, say a devout Roman Catholic, and believe that using the coercive power of government to advance social mores is damaging to society. Government should be minimal because empowering the government to enforce moral issues allows those you disagree with to use the force of law against you -- case in point is the Contraception mandate.
Argue strongly for your socially conservative positions. They are valid and beneficial and if followed would lead to a better society. Don't seek to use government to advance those positions, it will do so poorly and will empower those you disagree with in two ways. First, to accuse you of being a tyrant. Second, by utilizing the power you have granted to government towards ill ends. · 31 minutes ago
I don't disagree with you at all here. But it will be no easy feat for the Republican Party to recast itself as an honest pro-liberty party in a way that doesn't completely repel the demographic within the party that typically gets pretty upset when their social issues aren't front and center in an election.
Mar '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
I got a 12. It is glorious.
May '12
Re: Not Your Grandma's Republican Party
Merina Smith: Sorry to pop your bubble, Diane, but Dreher doesn't know what he is talking about. You will not be able to save religious freedom if you give up on marriage. It will not happen. These people will not rest until they ground religious freedom to a powder. The lefties want power unobstructed by the power of religion.
No, we need to convince millennials on economic grounds. THAT is where they are, and should be, seriously aggrieved.
Totally agree. Dreher aka 'Crunchy Con' has developed his own reputation for being quite sleazy and cowardly. Anyone pointing out Dreher's lack of logic or facts on his blog will quickly find themselves banned. Dreher's tactic when presented with facts that contradict with his own is often to run away.
What people refuse to admit is that the Left(of which the LGBQTXYZ movement is a part of) is expressly ideological. They're not going to stop at SSM. They don't want compromise or contrition, they want conversion.
The Millenials like everyone else are going to have to make a choice; whether SSM & pot are more important than national bankruptcy, dollar collapse, and modern day serfdom.