The GOP's Challenge Now
The election is now 24 hours away, and unless virtually all the nation’s pollsters are pulling a collective Dewey-Truman, it seems fairly clear that the Republicans are poised to regain control of the House of Representatives and reach at least near-parity in the Senate. And while there will be much rejoicing on the Right over this clear and unmistakable rejection of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda, as well as over individual results (go Rubio!), it is important to remember that the GOP is still digging itself out of a very large (and largely deserved) hole, and that this election, for all the focus on the “Tea Party movement” and “conservative revival,” will represent far more a stern rebuke to the Democrats than an endorsement of any specific, actionable, alternative path forward.
The Republicans actually face three major challenges if they hope to go beyond this tactical victory and build an effective and sustained electoral majority at the national level. First, they have to coalesce around an agenda capable of gaining and retaining the support of a majority of the electorate. In theory, this shouldn’t be that hard to do; this is a center-right country, so a center-right agenda – or even, after the left’s excesses of the past two years, a right-center-right agenda – ought to be broadly popular. A squishy, Bush-ite, “moderate” agenda won’t do – recent experience ought to make that perfectly clear. A “purist” Tea Party agenda won’t do either – there are simply too many moderate conservatives and independents who are cut from different cloth. But an agenda that harnesses the impulses of limited government and fiscal responsibility that are driving both the Tea Parties and the massive turn of independents toward the GOP, that proposes practical conservative policies to reignite economic growth while retaining the irreducible “safety net” that voters want, and that de-prioritizes the most divisive social issues, ought to be an achievable thing.
It’s the coalescing part that I think will be the real challenge. While the GOP is a long way from the “civil war” some liberal commentators have tried to suggest is emerging, there remain some significant fissures in the center-right coalition that is about to de-fang the liberal Democrats – most notably between upscale, educated voters and the “down with elitists” crowd; between “social issues” voters and more libertarian, pro-growth voters; between foreign policy hawks and semi-doves; and even between the “short-ballers” who want to focus on immediate, near-term problems first and move the country gradually to the right, and the “long-ballers” who want to jump right in and go after entitlement reform, scrapping the tax code, and other Really Big Issues right away. These fissures tend to fade into the background in the glow of united opposition to the status quo, but they will come to the forefront again pretty quickly after November 2, and they will need to be addressed.
Second, having united around a potentially winning agenda, the GOP has to sell that agenda to the electorate – to win the hearts and minds of a decent majority. This is not primarily a matter of politics and politicians; it is a matter of the battle of ideas, and necessarily requires regaining the allegiance of a sizeable part of the “thinking classes” (not the super-elite Ivy League professoriate, but the whole broad segment of decently educated people who pay attention to political and economic ideas in some form, and who greatly influence the way other people come to think). I recall vividly – because I was young and aware and very engaged in all this at the time – how in the late 1970s conservative ideas were simply winning the argument almost everywhere. Bill Buckley, Irving Kristol, and Norman Podhoretz were in their prime; George Will and Jeff MacNelly were the rising stars of the editorial pages; and Milton and Rose Friedman came out with Free to Choose – a huge best-seller and highly successful TV series. Ronald Reagan did not “turn the country right” in 1980 – he merely extended and consolidated a rightward movement that had begun over a decade earlier and had really begun to pick up steam in the years before his election. In effect, a large part of the “thinking classes” had been won over to the notion that conservative ideas represented a superior alternative to the stale liberalism of the 1960s and 70s. This process needs to be repeated. The disillusionment with liberalism is there, but the selling of the virtues and practicality of a specific, coherent conservative alternative is far from complete.
Third, the Republicans need to solve their leadership vacuum problem – fast. The GOP has a number of able, intelligent, virtuous “leaders” in Congress, in the state capitals and elsewhere – and there will be several more after tomorrow. But whether any of them would be considered papabile by both Southern evangelicals and Chicago suburban professionals is something I very much doubt. Among those who are national figures today, the prospects are grim. Sarah Palin? There are simply too many thinking people who wouldn’t touch her with a barge pole. It’s true that something along the same lines could have been said of Ronald Reagan, circa 1976. But by 1978 Reagan was holding his own against Buckley and Will in the famous Panama Canal debate and by 1980 was able to destroy President Carter in their debate. Does anyone seriously see Palin reprising this role? Others (Romney, Huckabee) are liked by parts of the coalition but deeply distrusted by other parts – I have a hard time seeing either as a unifying leader. Many others are simply too obscure (by presidential politics standards) or too regional at this stage. Could a Chris Christie or a Marco Rubio or a Mitch Daniels really become a truly national figure with a national following in time for 2012? I don’t know. But conservatives had better hope so, because without a unifying and at least somewhat charismatic leader the Presidency is going to be an uphill climb in 2012, and without the Presidency any victory tomorrow – no matter how big – will ultimately be hollow.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Aug '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Steve, I agree with your point about the leadership vacuum for 2012. I'm a Romney guy but I know he's not a perfect candidate. There just doesn't seem to be anyone with the right combination of philosophy, experience and name recognition. It's definitely a concern.
As far as the next two years, the GOP-controlled House should turn the tables on Obama and make him become Dr No. Make him veto legislation to repeal Obamacare, make the Bush tax cuts permanent, cut spending, etc. They should send bills up there to reduce government and cut spending as fast as they can pump them out. That will keep the tea parties and the base energized for 2012 and give Republican candidates a solid record on which to run.
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Yep. For proof, just look at what happens when a Liberal Republican loses a primary challenge - Mike Castle, Lisa Murkowski, and what happens when a conservative Republican loses a primary - Ovide Lamontagne.
The former examples pitch a hissy fit and refuse to do right by the party, while the latter immediately closes ranks with the victor and presents a united front.
The coalescing problem is one that resides almost entirely with the RINO wing of The Stupid Party.
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
The GOP has been SAVED from Bush and the Washington establshment by the Tea Party. This election is not in favor of Republicans, but it is in favor of common sense conservativism (don't spend so much, don't regulate so much, don't reward failure). And the Republican elite is resisting this call big time (as this article demonstrates well). Republicans just want to reward their big corporate friends (see Murkowski-AK) as much as Democrats wanted to reward their big union friends. The Tea Party is the last, best hope for this nation. The government pendulum is swinging in the right direction again.
I think the American people are done with "charismatic leaders" for 2012. The mood has turned towards a practical, humble but aspirational leader that speaks to the "better angels of our nature" rather than messianic over-promisers like the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Another topic--where are the rising stars of the Democrat party? I don't see anyone matching the buzz of rising stars such as Rubio, or even legislative stars like Paul Ryan?
Edited on Nov 1, 2010 at 2:17pmMay '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Nice analysis...especially concerning the difficulty in defining the specific policies that this loose coalition can agree on.
It's one thing to have a large group shouting "stop!" It's another thing to answer the question, "where to?" A couple of ideas...
1. This "coalition" has come together around a common desire to stop what Obama and Co are doing to America, and that fight will continue for the next two years. There's an opportunity to find unity in an ongoing struggle against a recalcitrant President and his still powerful party.
2. The anger in the electorate derives not only from what the Democrats are doing but also how they are doing it. Terms like "arrogant", "elitist", or "tyrannical" get tossed about. The Republicans and Tea Party movement can find common ground by championing a politics that genuinely respects Americans and their rights, and wisdom of the "common people." (For some Republicans this will be a very new thought.)
May '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
There are three fundamental issues that are real problems and threaten to split the Right again as it did after 2005.
First, the non-problem. Regarding leadership, cream rises, and no one is going to bestow a mantle on anyone. No one had heard of Rubio before he decided to run, and Jeb Bush did not create his buzz. Those who connect with people simply connect, the basic problem Romney will probably never overcome.
But. These three will do us in internally before any opponents attack.
1) Isolationists vs. internationalists, particularly regarding the GWOT. Another key sub-issue is wartime approach- that is, annihilation vs. "surgical" population-protection.
2) Strident anti-immigrantism.
3) Eyes on economic holes rather than donuts. The problem is not earmarks (which mostly allocate already-agreed budget ceilings), or the Dept. of Education- though it would be great to see them bite the dust. It is entitlements, which you don't kill with an ax- the public still supports them in principle and mostly wants them saved. Bush tried to reform both SS and Medicare, and was blocked, and now he is villified by people who talk about NCLB as though that was a driving expense.
Edited on Nov 1, 2010 at 3:38pmJul '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Every law passed by a legislature by definition restricts individual freedom: it either compels people to do something they would not otherwise do or prohibits them from doing that which they would otherwise choose to do.
That being so, I want a legislature that does a whole lot of nothing, other than rolling back past laws that have brought us to the brink of Socialism.
May '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
I'm with you here, Kenneth, despite the fact that you (inaccurately) labeled me a ginger in some previous thread! Your heart-rending hate speech aside - my attorneys will be in touch - I'd love to see the GOP take the "Party of No" label and run with it. Boehner has already done some of this, though too much has been ham-fisted theatrics.
For that to work, the GOP must be seen as proactive; at least half of what bothers people about obstruction is the lack of real alternatives. Duane's points all ring true, but surely there are things in Paul Ryan's Roadmap that meet the requirement of being economically helpful and politically feasible.
Here in Ohio, I'm optimistic for a Kasich win and really hope he holds a magnifying glass over our public unions, taking advantage of The Buckeye Institute's great legwork for cuts nearly everyone can embrace!
Jul '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Jason Hart
I'm with you here, Kenneth, despite the fact that you (inaccurately) labeled me a ginger in some previous thread! Your heart-rending hate speech aside - my attorneys will be in touch - I'd love to see the GOP take the "Party of No" label and run with it. Boehner has already done some of this, though too much has been ham-fisted theatrics.
Here in Ohio, I'm optimistic for a Kasich win and really hope he holds a magnifying glass over our public unions, taking advantage of The Buckeye Institute's great legwork for cuts nearly everyone can embrace! · Nov 1 at 4:37pm
We don't allow Buckeyes in here, pal.
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Don't make me send Brutus over to your house :-)
Go Buckeyes!
May '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
I don't mean to come off as too hopeless on this. There is plenty to agree on and accomplish, as long as we stay on common ground and don't go crazy the way the Dems did.
1) We all agree that spending should be frozen
2) We all agree that free markets are preferred to government action/dictates
3) We all agree that ObamaCare is a disaster
4) We all agree that a solid physical fence should stretch from Baja to Laguna Madre
5) We all agree that cheap energy is essential to economic growth
There are a lot of policies that can be put in place to further those objectives. To start with, write a specific law that protects Health Savings Accounts so that HHS cannot kill them by administrative fiat. Finish the fence. Mandate processes for on-shore drilling approval. Freeze spending at pre-stimulus levels.
And tone down the rhetoric- it is words that kill you, not calm and sober actions.
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Ken Sweeney: The GOP has been SAVED from Bush and the Washington establshment by the Tea Party. This election is not in favor of Republicans, but it is in favor of common sense conservativism (don't spend so much, don't regulate so much, don't reward failure). And the Republican elite is resisting this call big time (as this article demonstrates well). Republicans just want to reward their big corporate friends (see Murkowski-AK) as much as Democrats wanted to reward their big union friends. The Tea Party is the last, best hope for this nation. · Nov 1 at 2:10pm
Edited on Nov 01 at 02:17 pm
You're on point Ken. We must learn from the lessons of '94. The entrenched establishment on the Republican side, not to mention the "pigs at the trough" phenomenon that that seems to co-opt freshman legislators, is a form of entropy that must be overcome by a vigilant and vocal electorate. We must have the attitude of Churchill after the Battle for Britain when he said " this is not the end, it is not the beginning of the end, it is the end of the beginning".
Edited on Nov 1, 2010 at 10:00pmAug '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Duane Oyen: There are three fundamental issues that are real problems and threaten to split the Right again as it did after 2005.
2) Strident anti-immigrantism.
Amen to that Duane.
The political ascent of Marco Rubio terrifies the left. He's a leg-tingler, and Latinos will be the majority ethnicity in our lifetime. Race matters when the curtian closes. The beauty of the secret ballot is the freedom of choice it offers, and many left and left-center Latinos might one day vote for Rubio in a presidential race, despite the R after his name.
The presence of the spittle-flecked Yosemite Sam's of strident anti-immigrantism is a serious concern to those who hope win a significant and lasting base within the Latino community.
Meg Whitman had to appease them in the primary. Her high speed u-turn with heavy ad rotation on Univison and Galavision was worthy of Steve McQueen in Bullit.
There is no future in repeating that strategy.
Beyond bad politics, some of us consider the plight of those fleeing the horrible violence and chaos in Mexico to be and essential part of any immigration policy we might support.
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
I was sort of hoping to enjoy the victory for a day or so before you brought us all thudding back to earth. But, yes. Every word you write here, Steve, strikes me as just and true.
Darn it.
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Duane Oyen:
1) We all agree that spending should be frozen
2) We all agree that free markets are preferred to government action/dictates
3) We all agree that ObamaCare is a disaster
4) We all agree that a solid physical fence should stretch from Baja to Laguna Madre
5) We all agree that cheap energy is essential to economic growth
Nov 1 at 7:58pm
That does it. Duane in '12!
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Here's what i see as the GOP's mandate:
1) Undo Obama agenda. Stop dems from doing any more damage. Public knows what it doesn't want--Obamacare and Socialism.
the only issure where obama and GOP may see eye to eye is education reform. Even the left is on board with "Waiting for Superman" and "The Lottery." If obama is serious about good schools, he needs to throw teachers union under the bus. if dems are serious, they should stop voting against guys like mayor fenty.
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
There is a very thoughtful article on NRO by Henry Olsen of the American Enterprise Institute that should be an input to creating a governing plan for the next two years that provides a solid foundation for building a successful and lasting center right coalition: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/251670/day-democratic-dead-henry-olsen
Aug '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
Good thoughts. The word is pugnacious. The House needs to be pugnacious. The GOP needs to destabilize the Democrats even further. The GOP needs to be relentless. This will buy time and space and I believe do the things you mention. As an aside, I heard Haley Barbour yesterday talking on the Laura Ingraham show talking about the virtues of compromising! Terrible. If nothing else, his timing and judgment are very poor and ill suited for tasks ahead. There must be compromising, of course, but it is our job to make sure that it is the Democrats who need the compromise most. Republicans also need to try to win as much as possible without needing compromise with the proponents of destructive and failed ideas. As someone here indicated, "Stop!" is not enough. Now, this car must now go somewhere--with a new vision of governance.
Oct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
On NPR's Talk of the Nation on Wednesday, Linda Chavez made an interesting point about illegal immigrant rhetoric in the Nevada senate race. She said that Angle went off message by ramping up the rhetoric on illegal immigration, with predictable consequences at the ballot box. Chavez noted that in the Nevada gubernatorial race, the Republican Sandoval won 60,000 more votes than Angle. If Angle gets even half of those votes, she beats Reid.
On illegal immigration, there was a thoughtful article in NR a few years back entitled "dissent on immigration," I believe. I forget the author's name, but he has since passed away. He pointed out that when Republicans with hard lines on immigration lose to Dems in the southwest, the Republicans lose congressional votes for free trade, entitlement reform, tax reform, and so forth.
No, I haven't read much on this topic (Mexifornia and The Immigration Solution come to mind), but the GOP might need to consider demographic reality here. One possibility would be to tie something seemingly radical, like amnesty, to fundamental welfare reform and a repeal of the minimum wage law.
Edited on Nov 4, 2010 at 1:46amOct '10
Re: The GOP's Challenge Now
And a note on compromise: the key here (in addition to choosing battles) is using rhetoric. Rather than watering down principles by compromising on bipartisan legislation, Republicans should take the opportunity to admit to bipartisan responsibility for failures. If, for instance, they push to kill farm subsidies ($26 billion yearly), they need to explain that the subsidies were implemented in the New Deal, that economists know better now, that the subsidies have done great damage to ordinary Americans (as well as poor farmers abroad--Dems might go for that), and then admit that both they and the Democrats share the blame for allowing this waste. And then present the sound fiscal and constitutional principles that underpin their decision.