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.
Jim Geraghty writes about the viability of a third party consisting of has-been Republicans (my words) most of which I agree with. There’s not much hope – or threat. However, this paragraph struck me as interesting:
That said, there has to be a chunk of the American electorate who is either opposed to the Democrats and the Biden agenda, or that is rapidly souring on Biden’s approach to the issues, that likes the traditional Republican stances of pushing for lower taxes and less regulation, support for the Second Amendment, strict constructionist or originalist judges, border fencing and immigration law enforcement, Israel, and law enforcement in the absence of evidence of wrongdoing, and opposition to abortion, woke cancel culture…
I can’t help but laugh at this description of the rationale for this third party, even though it was serious (I think).
Notice how Geraghty – an excellent writer to be sure – phrases his description of the chunk of the electorate who like the traditional Republican in terms of “stances of pushing for…”
Yes, there are people who like those stances and the “pushing” but seem little concerned with results and accomplishments. Those people would welcome the return of the Tom Ridges, Christine Todd Whitmans, and Bill Welds. Will we get it with these people? Their collective record, along with the other politicians these people have supported, answers a resounding, “No!”
It’s pure fantasy. It’s not even an update on what was being “fought for” in the 1990s when these people were in office! It’s like going through the Disney ride It’s a Small World After All in a little boat and thinking you just toured the globe and learned all about foreign cultures.
But even on the retail level, the specifics – if you can call them that – are worn-out Republican platitudes.
lower taxes and less regulation
Who among these hundred founding members accomplished these goals to any significant extent?
support for the Second Amendment
Many of these 100 people are extremely squishy on this issue, only slightly better than Democrats, and possibly more damaging because of their perceived sympathies. Democrats always smuggle in their toxins in new legislation introduced by this type of Republican.
strict constructionist or originalist judges
Gotta laugh out loud at that one! Look at how our judges vote, including the Trump-appointed judges, in all fairness. Sadly, Alito and Thomas are the only draft-picks who can play on the field.
border fencing and immigration law enforcement
Notice how this is phrased. Fencing (the word wall too Trumpian for their taste? “Build the damn fence!” – John McCain) and immigration law enforcement – no mention of needed reform or new laws.
What does this mean exactly? He names a country. Does it mean, for versus against? Not especially enlightening, but I guess it serves the Republican platform of posturing.
opposition to abortion
This has become quite meaningless in politics. More realistic phrasing would be, reduce the increases in Planned Parenthood’s federal subsidies by 10 percent. Again, not especially cogent.
woke cancel culture
The current record of all Republicans on that issue is abysmal, but the anti-trumpers are considerably worse. These people couldn’t be more cowardly when it comes to standing up to the left.
Pure fantasy. But it sells. See you at Disney and don’t forget to mask up!Published in