Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What’s a Party for?
What is a political party? By the intensity of internecine conflict among Republicans, you might conclude that it’s a church. Senator Ted Cruz is among the leading voices of a faction that wants to treat the Republican Party as a confession – singing to the choir, denouncing heretics, and damning sinners to hell.
This appears to be part conviction and part political calculation on Sen. Cruz’s part. He’s fully convinced that a Republican can win in 2016 by energizing the base. “The evangelical vote,” a Cruz strategist told National Journal, “is the largest unfished pond of voters – it’s a frickin’ ocean.” Convinced that dispirited white, evangelical voters stayed home in recent elections but can be roused by a sectarian candidate, Cruz barreled into Washington DC in 2013 spitting fire not just at Democrats but at his own party too. They were all part of the “Washington cartel,” he thundered. Republican leaders were not just weak or ineffective — they were treacherous.
A terrible thing happened on the way to Cruz’s plan to ride popular outrage with his own party to the Republican presidential nomination: Trump offered an even more attractive brew of misdirected anger and indignation. If the Republican Party is now being hijacked by Trumpkins – and I truly pray that it is not — Sen. Ted Cruz is hardly in a position to protest. He helped stack the tinder for this auto da fe.
This is not to say that Republicans have enjoyed unblemished leadership during the Obama years – but that’s not the point. Cruz indicted the Republican House and Senate leadership, and nearly all of his colleagues, for cowardice and cupidity. It was this, and not Cruz’s firm conservatism, that alienated fellow senators. It was all a carefully choreographed prelude to his bid for a great swell of white, evangelical Protestants he hopes to inspire to his standard.
So what is a political party for? The Democrats seem to have long since decided that their party is a coalition of interest groups: blacks, women, gays, Hispanics, Asians, and unions. For the past few decades, the Republican Party has rejected identity politics in favor of smaller government and more individual liberty, more free enterprise, a strong national defense, and traditional values. The party I joined did not seek to vindicate the interests of white people, or the native born, or Christian conservatives. It was open to all who shared its principles.
Trump represents a total collapse of Republicanism in favor of nativism, protectionism (that worked so well with Smoot-Hawley), and American-style Putinism. If he were nominated, he would be soundly defeated. Trump is viewed more unfavorably than any other candidate, including Hillary Clinton. He peddles identity politics for white people, but even most white people disdain that. For what it’s worth, I could not vote for him, for these and many other reasons.
Cruz’s strategy is a bit more subtle, but also includes polarizing the nation – thus his dig at “New York values.” As outlined by National Review’s Eliana Johnson, Cruz’s theory rests upon belief in the “missing evangelicals.” Many pixels have been expended on the subject of voters who stayed home in 2012. When 42.5 percent of eligible voters refrain from voting, millions of African Americans, Hispanics, and others are also on the list of nonvoters.
The case for a wave of previously unmotivated evangelicals flocking to the polls for Cruz is shaky at best. Consider that the last time a Republican won a presidential election (2004), evangelicals comprised 23 percent of the electorate and Bush won 78 percent of their votes. In 2012, they represented 26 percent of voters, and Romney won the same share, 78 percent, but still lost. Besides, the 2012 drop in voter turnout was much less pronounced in the battleground states that really decided the election than in places like Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Arkansas, where an evangelical tide would not have changed the outcome.
Or consider the sobering possibility that evangelicals are not all that conservative. Among evangelical voters today, according to an NBC poll, fully 37 percent support Trump, with only 20 percent backing Cruz. As he watched Jerry Falwell Jr endorse Donald Trump, Senator Cruz saw his theory circle the drain.
The appeal to groups as groups is the bane of modern politics. The resort to shrill appeals to “base” voters on either side is shredding our national unity. To succeed, the Republican Party will have to win the votes of moderates as well as conservatives in states like Florida, Virginia, New Hampshire, Ohio, Colorado, and Nevada. A conservative can do that with a straightforward pitch to Americans as Americans. Anything less is unworthy – and unlikely to be successful.
Published in General
The problem I have with Cruz is that he’s not a team player. You handle the dirty laundry on the inside. If you do it in public, then you’re grandstanding and self serving. That’s what Cruz did. As much as I despise Donald Trump, he would be a better pick for the country than Ted Cruz.
Not quite. He’s convinced a Republican can’t win without energizing the base.
“What’s a party for?”
A lot of GOP voters have come to think it’s a fundraising scam, a perpetual direct-mail outrage machine (“Is Obama destroying America? Take our survey. Vote Now! (And donate below, please)”. a long con that makes money for a group of people while never actually rolling anything back.
Excellent analysis Mrs. Charen
Point understood but let’s not take solace in the fact that they were only weak and ineffective. I’ll still take Cruz over the lot of them even if he made this point of Congress being treacherous.
We describe it as thought and action.
Must they be white? There are plenty of black Evangelicals, and I’ve never heard Cruz define a racial litmus test to support him – only his critics have done that.
Just because the other party subordinates white people, the native born and Christian conservatives doesn’t mean we exclude any groups – it means they do. We naturally have the groups they exclude.
It was 2 years ago this month that Governor Cuomo said conservatives are not welcomed in New York. Like it or not, Cruz was right about the current state of NY values – it doesn’t include us. Besides – what’d he lose? Which Republican candidates do you see getting the NYC vote?
Don’t even get me started about National Review (I know you were a part of it and mean no disrespect). The whole thing reminded me of when Buckley and the NR crowed decided who was or wasn’t a good conservative and went after the John Birch Society because they thought it would help Goldwater. Goldwater lost, today no one questions where the government gets the power to medicate the water and National Review was as wrong then about beating up other conservatives as they are today.
I agree with you there.
Have you made a pick? Who do you think will do that?
It wasn’t Cruz who doubled the size of the Department of Education, passed a massive unfunded liability in Medicare Part-D, created a whole new cabinet department full of redundancy, and paid back all of the banks for their idiocy in 2008.
It wasn’t Cruz who made promise, after promise, after promise in 2010, 2012, and 2014 only to cower and whine and moan about Harry Reid still pulling the strings in the Senate.
It isn’t Cruz claiming they would rather have Donald Trump because they know he won’t cut off the subsidy spigot to ethanol and whoever is paying Trent Lott to scarf up Federal taxpayer dollars.
Maybe, just once, the analyst and think-tank class will take a look in the mirror and ask whether they actually believe in small government, you know government that is small, not just a government where they get to suck the teet of the taxpayer instead of the DNC. I grow very, very, tired of the sanctimonious arrogance of those in D.C. looking down on us flatlanders who actually expect conservative politicians to do their job.
I agree with most of the comments. The anger is organic. Cruz or Trump didn’t stir up anything. It was the “party” that constantly let us down for the last six years. “The party” had control of the money and could have stopped all of this, but instead they kept signing the checks for Obama. My advice to Mona (whom I respect greatly) and the writers at NRO is have some humility and understanding. Every election we feel like the battered wife who keeps going back because “he’s changed.”
I don’t support Cruz or Trump, but I understand why others do. It’s about time the “Gang of 28” does also.
Gosh, Mona, who do you like who is left? How about coming on her and making a positive case for your candidate of choice?
I can say this: I think most Americans all but despise the people in New York City. Heck, the people of NYC despise Trump, best I can tell. Hated by all the “right” people.
I am not a big Trump fan, and I like what Cruz stands for. Like Mr. Glazer above, I am tired of being looked down upon by people from DC or NYC. I have detailed, well thought out political views. I am also tired of my team constantly not playing to win. the GOP constantly tells me that they will fight the good fight after they win the next election. I have been hearing this since 1996. The last time the GOP actually fought was in 1994.
You might not like Cruz (and I am sure there is not one iota of emotion in your dislike for him or Trump, that it is 100% Cold Vulcan Logic), but Cruz actually fights. That is more than the other leaders in Congress do.
The thing I like about Cruz is that he’s not a team player. The team that he has to play with stinks to high heaven. How else could Trump game the system unless the powers in the “team” were so incompetent that they let the anger simmer and blow to a boil and even then they won’t take any blame whatsoever for Trump’s rise. It’s a hostile takeover by Trump of an incompetent leadership. It has to happen for things to change. The incompetent GOP and conservative punditocracy simply won’t cure themselves — all they can do is talk wonky talk and hide behind the “conservative” shield.
Do you think that when Cruz talks about the base, he means African Americans?
The problem with a class war focus, promising to punish government employees (eg. sending the whole of the IRS to the Southern Border) and sneering at large chunks of America, isn’t just that the people you focus your hostility at might be concerned. It’s that decent people look to elect a President for all Americans, and there’s a lot of Ohioans whose patriotism includes a love of New York.
It was Cruz who made a promise to fight for conservative policies, and then got into the Senate and accomplished precisely nothing. The closest thing to an achievement, the star of his book and his ads is a moment when, rather than moaning about Harry Reid, he did Harry Reid’s bidding.
He wanted a filibuster on a bill that could not be filibustered, so Reid had a choice about whether to give him the floor for a nineteen hour speech. He went to Reid, we don’t know what promises he made, but the outcome was that Reid gave him the platform and he used it to savage Reid’s opponents.
She’s a Rubio gal.
No. This is what they SAY they’re for, but they’re not spending effort and political capital to work toward these goals (anymore). And therein lies one of the big problems with the party ‘leaders’ and their base.
Let me help you out. Besides arguably Jim Demint at Heritage Action nobody in the think tank class, donor class, consultant class, or incumbent class has any interest in limited government. If there was less government there is less to raise money to think about.
Life is much easier after you give up the fantasy that conservative = limited government.
Lily, who do you believe has been pushing for, say, increased gun rights and budget cuts?
The Republican Party, as presently constituted, is a venal, mercantile group that has no intention of serving any principle but the interests of their donors. I won’t support any candidate who has their support. I’ve had enough of Potemkin village candidates whose imaginary opposition to big government and socialism is actually a worse alternative to an actual socialist. If it’s an establishment lane republican then let Hillary win. Tim
Well that was cheap. How about some actual quotes of all this Cruz/Christian bigotry rather than your assertions? This freshman pariah Senator managed to convince enough of his fellow GOP congressmen to “shut down” (pause) non-critical operations for what – two weeks? He didn’t do it alone – best couple days I’ve had during the Reign of Obama.
I’ve made it known that I don’t like Trump but you slander Cruz supporters with your assertions. Cruz had nothing to do with Trump’s rise, though both campaigns have been fueled by the anger generated by the ‘ineffectives’ that you most likely mix with. Face it Mona – that ridiculous Manhattan Comb-over has made you and many other scribes look like utter fools this year. Same with Cruz.
Perhaps you should marshal that army of straw men to convince Bush, Christie, Carson (the black guy), Fiorina, and Kasisch to make way for your Tiger Beat crush Rubio.
This simple fact is an 800 lb. gorilla in the living room that these stupid people at NR refuse to look at and refuse to acknowledge.
They are to blame that they have so weakened the Republican name that it can be EASILY taken over by a hostile buyer.
Trump has made absolute fools of them all — and this is the very thing they simply can’t afford to discuss. So, they do stuff like this against Cruz and stuff like “Against Trump” instead of doing the right thing.
I guess they put up a sign in the break room at establishment headquarters that this is slander Cruz day. Ms. Charen and Bret Stephens clearly got the memo.
I’ll tell you what. I don’t always agree with Ms. Charen, but she’s sharp, and she goes into the dragon’s lair (NPR) and presents the conservative voice where there is none. Then she argues with some on the right, too. Wherever she does come down, her arguments are forged in fire. God bless her!
She also got me on the Great Courses: The Symphony.
I’m for Cruz, Rubio, Carson. In that order.
No, Cruz is not a racist. Yes he stands for principle, and no, I don’t want a team player.
I want someone who will shake things up, not someone who is willing to make a deal…
Only the last 6 years? I would say the last 14 years. Granted, Bush was preferable to Obama, but that’ s a low bar.
I think the republicans have been good on 2nd Amendment rights. But I cannot give them a good grade on “budget cuts”.
The Republican base does seem to suffer from Battered Wives Syndrome while their supposed husbandry cheats on them openly. Many new and fresh husbands are in order, the crusty one’s not so much. Air fresheners in a foul house are no cure Mona –
Mr. Glaser. Ditto.
James, this is beneath you, and perhaps beneath Ricochet.
I know that Mona Charen gets to call whomever she wishes racist without having to actually engage (ever, apparently) with people who disagree, and whom she calls racist, but you and I are not contributors. We don’t get paid by Ricochet, nor by any political campaign, and should stick to the rules.
Mona can do whatever she wants. You and I, not so much.
Well, that might explain the diminishing shrill echoes of shrewish shrieking as fifteen minutes have run out, and somebody is being dragged down the long cold hallway into the infinite darkness of has-been status.
(Psst, it’s Marco Rubio)
Worse than anything else on display this election season is the GOP’s Chamberlain choice regarding Cruz. They have decided to double-down on doing nothing. Where’s that quote from McConnell about how they know that if they blow it again, they will have lost the trust of the American people, “and rightfully so”? I think it was in his Congressional Oscar acceptance speech in early 2011.
Mitch voice: “They tawlerate us. They really tawlerate us.”
While of course “it could be worse”, but merely supporting what is clearly spelled out in the Constitution is not exactly the game-winning touchdown when the other team just nationalized another ten percent or so of the economy. Rah rah for second amendment gains — let me know when those rights are “not infringed”, which is still an awful long ways off.