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.
The GOP Needs To ‘Primary’ The “Old” Strategists/Commentators
So … we find that the veteran (experience is not a strength if it is all bad) political class of “strategists, commentators and consultants” (join us on our next cruise … please, clap) and their fans are gearing up for another failed run in 2020. Oh my, but they are gaining in confidence once again, listening to each other in their extremely comfortable echo chamber. Mitt! Jeb! John (my dad was a postman)!
Seriously?! C’Mon Man!
President Reagan is rolling over in his grave … “There you go again”.
It’s bad enough that they are regurgitating all of the old, tired and losing ideas of their conventional “wisdom” (lol, how many times do they need to lose to learn from their loserdom), but once again they embrace the corpse of President Reagan to wrap themselves in, as if they ever had anything to do with President Reagan’s policies, popularity or prosperity. No, they fought him in 1976 and 1980 and only embraced him after he defeated them, all merely in order to claim his personal successes as theirs and to promptly turn around and end the legacy he had built. ‘Conservatism’ to them was, and is, icky. They say it needs a “thousand points of light” or “compassion” (wretch) to accompany it, or it is a nasty thing to be avoided. Nah Baby, nah.
President Reagan’s policies and perspective on government are much closer to President Trump’s, than to the failed rhetoric of the GOP, Inc. losers and their handlers. Limited government, lower taxes, peace through strength and the fact that America is a country of exceptional people and the freest country on the face of the earth. Make it great again indeed.
And what is with all of this pretentious and emotional fixation on the person? The failed GOP commentariat and their zombie sycophants are obsessed with Trump, the person. Trump, Trump, Trump. And they conversely focus on their “ideal” profile of a candidate. To them, it’s all about the person, the elitist chin and the image (vomit). People! That’s what the Dems do. And they do it better than Kristol, Murphy & Co.’s ‘socialism lite’. You are playing a losing game to follow their lead. Again.
No one knows who will be running in 2020. It is light years away, politically speaking. President Trump is unconventional in every way. He is not predictable and most especially to this collection of GOP, Inc. buffoons genius’. He may not even run for re-election. Peggy Noonan (a NeverTrumper who still can make good observations) writes last week that he could say … “I accomplished in four years what other guys couldn’t do in eight!” … “My work is done!” But make no mistake, if he goes this route, he will select his successor and set them up for victory in 2020, unlike W, who basically set his party, and country, up for failure in 2008 and the imposition of Obama socialism for eight years.
But whether the candidate is the re-election of President Trump, or his hand-picked apprentice, GOP, Inc. better get on board with the winning direction and message for their voters. MAGA, version 2.0. Voters equal ‘populism’ and populism is not a bad thing. President Reagan was a populist. That is only a dirty word to the GOP, Inc. elitists. The only future success of the GOP is to be the proudly American party and the bold and courageous opposition to the Socialist Democrats. That means ditch Mitt, John. Jeff, Ben and whatever other milquetoast ‘magic ponies’ Kristol/Murphy come up with. There is a lesson to be learned with the demise of the Weakly Standard. The party and magic pony of Kristol/Murphy is dead.
2020 is either the re-election of President Trump or it is a continuation of the Trump policies and his Apprentice ticket. Elect Mike Pence/Nikki Haley if the President chooses not to run. And it’s all about the policies, not the person.
Get with the program, GOP. Or lose again.
Published in General
The party and magic pony of Kristol/Murphy is dead.
Please clap.
I have always liked Mike Murphy and I believe he is a smart funny guy.
Mike Murphy’s niche is the RINO (R) candidate, and there is a place in the world for the RINO (R) candidate such as the Blue and and Purpley states and Congressional districts. He seems to have become even more niche as of late specializing in well funded(ie: highly lucrative for Mike) RINO (R) lost cause campaigns (ie: Whitman, Jeb Bush).
Mike’s political reality is that with which he surrounds himself: his (D) wife, other RINOs(ie: Rob Long), and Beltway/Manahattan MSM’ers, with whom Murphy must always try to find common ground in order to maintain comity.
So when Mike expounds on the future of the (R) Party, take what he has to say as the future of the (R) Party as a RINO would want it, not necessarily the future of an (R) Party which reflects the reality on the ground.
Ronald Reagan’s American Exceptionalism
In 2014, Ashley Pratte at Townhall.com penned Reagan and American Expceptionalism.
President Trump was the antidote to bring back American Exceptionalism as articulated by President Reagan.
A party name is a product brand. The brand has to be understood as shorthand for something to have value to consumers. For example, when you buy a “Coke” you know what you are getting. 20 years from now it will be exactly the same thing. Same taste, same quality, … Political parties must do the same. “GOP” or “Republican Party” should be a well-known shorthand for a specific set of ideas. If the ideas are desired, then the party will succeed.
The GOP and DNC are both ill-defined right now. That makes the parties weak. They are not filtering out bad candidates and are unable to help out good candidates with a powerful message. I think the GOP should return to its roots and adopt a slogan of “Prosperity, Security, and the American Way” to rebuild the brand. They should get all candidates (and there are 1000’s) to use the slogan over and over again. If they can do that for a few years, then the brand will have value and attract voters. The brand cannot be replaced by an individual (eg, Trumpism or Obamaism) because people are transient and brands must be persistent.
The slogan “Prosperity, Security, and the American Way” should manifest itself in a set of principles and specific policies at the local, state, and national levels. With the brand -> slogan (vision) -> principles -> policy hierarchy, the various party candidates will be in muddled conflict and become defined by the opposing party. Today, the GOP and DNC are largely defined by the opposing party and that is formula for losing.
Nicely put. He can run GOP campaigns in Massachusetts and Maryland. Not that there is anything wrong with that! We do need some GOPers there even if RINOs. But ignore him on a national level.
I never understood Carl Rove being reverently referred to as “the Architect”. OK, maybe he got GWB elected, but he architected a one room house with no room for expansion. There was no plan for a follow up
The reviewer of the book, “Behold America,” in last weekend’s review section of the WSJ, might point out that this slogan would not be the GOP returning to its roots. I, for one, don’t want to march under that banner.
Read Republican Platform of 1856 and see what you think. I’ll summarize.
Those are great things and they fit into the categories of Prosperity, Security, and the American Way. You can’t have prosperity without security. You cannot enjoy prosperity without liberty of American Way.
The WSJ article has nothing to do with this thread. It is just a rant about racists using patriotism and is intellectual worthless.
I agreed with everything up to that point.
Like it or not, it is about the person at least at the presidential level. I have no problem with Trump as a person despite his flaws. In fact, I like many of his flaws – or what other call his flaws. In-your-face brashness is exactly what is needed at the moment.
Trump has been enormously successful because of both what he has done and – even more important – what he has kept from being done. Nobody can know with 100% certainty exactly what kept from being done, but you can have a pretty good guess. The Never Trumpers are worse than useless – dangerous idiots is more apt description – because they claim to be on board for what has been done, but seeming totally oblivious to what has kept from being done.
Murphy is a male Stormy Daniels – all about the loot and lining his pocket. That Trump is not lining his pocket and makes it difficult for him to line his own pockets makes Trump the enemy for Murphy. He is a band of one.
Kristol is all about starting the next war. And thus both evil and dangerous.
Not clear that Trump is building even that. He didn’t expand the parties base in 2018 midterms. I guess we can see what it will be in 2020. But what happens if he loses? What is the interpretation then? I don’t see Trump implementing some grand plan to expand the party. He is mostly using the party to defend himself from his own legal and ethical troubles. The only legislative accomplishments were those prioritized and set up by Mitch McConnell. Now they will sit on their hands for two years hoping to squeak out a not defeat.
The thing lost on “GOP, Inc.” is that had they just given him the wall and a couple of other things he would have been happy to leave after one term.
You make it sound as if Donald Trump ran for president to get out of trouble. That seems inaccurate.
You’re confusing the book and the review. Yes, there is some of it that, but it is not just that and is not intellectually worthless. I may write an OP about it.
There’s an old maxim: When a strategist writes a book it means their career is over.
The maxim should be extended to YouTube interviews.
If your strategic insights are really that valuable you don’t just give them away. You sell them to candidates.
I only read the review and commented on that. But please do make an OP. We can noodle that into something intellectually interesting. Perhaps the evolution of racial identities like “white”. Or, maybe the use of govt. propaganda to promote wars. But not the silly idea of a un-American ideas (eg, KKK) as invalidating the American Way.
The failure is not his alone. Paul Ryan was completely AWOL for most of 2018. At least Trump was doing some rallies and promotion.
Back to the GOP brand. In Texas, the GOP slogan is “True Conservative”. This is functional in primaries, but useless in the general election. At best it is a negation of “progressive” that only has success, because the DNC is so weak in Texas. If you ask 10 people what “conservative” means, you will get 12 answers. Having an ill-defined or negation-defined brand makes it hard to expand the base and does not build any loyalty.
Is that a promise? Then by all means, give that man a wall!
Good comment. It is about the policy and the person. Pence/Haley looks good from a policy pov. The key that surrounds the person is how strong/brash and others adjectives they will be under the pressures of opponents which will include many who spend a lifetime pretending they are supporting your preferred policies. I posed a question on another thread about a step aside and endorsement such as this by Trump. What would happen in terms of the campaign and convention?
Typical near sighted Trumpist power-worship. It used to be that conservatives understood that their was valor in standing athwart history. Not so today–God forbid that one be found even an inch out of step with the populist zeitgeist. I take it Goldwater was a “loser” in ’64 and Reagan in ’76?
Speaking of Reagan, can we all agree to stop invoking his corpse in each and every internal GOP feud? It’s morbid at best. I imagine if he had anything to say from the grave it would be to ask for a restraining order.
The thing about men and movements is that they pass. When this one does you’ll be left with nothing but venom and a few undistributed crates of red trucker hats. Sorry, but I’ll keep “muh principles.”
Aren’t you just fed up with all that phony baloney nostalgia for Reagan? And much of it coming from RINO’s!
Reagan succeeded because of his personality as much or more than because of his policies.
Trump was elected also because of his personality.
One word may be used to describe both men: real.
Both may be described as anti-politicians.
Every other GOP candidate in our lifetimes was a fake, without much grit (and neither Bush, despite bellicosity and war making, much of a fighter).
What you warm to in both Reagan and Trump is the fight in them, a refusal to accept the status quo.
Anyway, Columbo, an all around fantastic post.
You wouldn’t prefer a world where the “Great Society” never happened?
Who in politics is conservative?
You nailed it perfectly.
Columbo, I just think you should have put a little spirit and not understated your position so much. But every word in it brought a smile to my face.
And yes, I think Trump might rather be the guy who makes the next president rather than be the next president. And it would make things a lot easier on the poor schlep who has to face the media’s Osterizer. It’ll still take a strong man to be president, and Trump to keep tweeting all through his presidency. Trump would love it (maybe can’t resist) and he would be a better issue framer as President Emeritus than 0bama ever will be.
And if your running a campaign, you need to pick some key issues and clearly articulate them. Since I have been old enough to vote what have the GOP presidential candidates stood for? Here is the impressions they left on me:
Reagan – Lower taxes, strong defense, less spending
Bush – um . . . a thousands points of light . . . which means????
Dole – ??? “Hey, it’s my turn”?
Bush W – ??? in 2000 and “Let’s keep this war thing going” in 2004.
McCain – “It was my turn in 2000 so you guys better pick me this time. I want to be president . . . although that Obama guy seems pretty nice. I won’t attack him they way I would a GOP primary opponent.”
Romney – “Hey, I look the part . . . ” I gotta give him that one.
Trump – Border wall and End Obamacare (Still waiting on those, and Reagan’s spending cuts, but at least I remember what the ran on)
If there is a strong primary challenger in 2020, they have to have more to offer than their dislike of Trump. “I’m not Trump” might win a primary but it will be a definite loser in the general, although maybe that’s the goal.
Columbo,
First, the Tea Party won the House in 2010 in the face of the high tide of Obama lunacy. Next, the party diddled around with the likes of Murphy making a fortune giving bad advice. Next, Trump came along and single-handedly won the Presidency. Finally, the mainstream party came through and managed to win a few extra Senate seats but in the process turned the base (old Tea Party people) off so badly that they lost the House. With no ground game, they left their House candidates exposed to the corrupt practices of the local Democratic machine without any real message to unify the counterattack against the psychotic identity politics.
Of course, it’s all Trump’s fault. The fact that Trump has proved himself in domestic economic policy (3% growth, 3.5% real wage growth), foreign policy (confronting the worst threats), domestic social policy (placing 2 real conservative supreme court justices, tough on illegal immigration), and all of it while a psychotic media/Democratic mob/phony Justiceless Dept investigations attack him viciously and relentlessly, doesn’t mean a thing. It’s all Trump’s fault. While the lazy parasites like Murphy take the credit for everything that they didn’t do and the fights they didn’t fight.
What a guy.
Regards,
Jim
Which are…..?
Any negative aspects of the ‘populists zeitgeist’ can be worked with or waited out. Not so the ‘progressive’ zeitgeist the rest of us standing athwart (‘the right side of’) history to resist.
Bush was kinder and gentler conservatism, which Nancy Reagan was alleged to have asked, “kinder and gentler than whom? Us?”.
If you want the Republican Party to be a populist rather than a conservative party with no prospect for success in urban and suburban areas or with college educated women, keep riding that Trump train.
The fact is Trump won only because he was running against Hillary Clinton, a singularly unlikable and unpopular candidate who made some very poor campaign choices. His percentage of the vote was less than Romney’s! His unpopularity cost the Republican control of the House and winnable Senate races this year. His approval rating is almost 20pts below the historical average for this point in a term and have rarely broken 40%.
Convincing yourself against all available evidence that Trump is some sort of electoral juggernaut is a recipe for disaster.
conmen grifters and shills oh my.