People keep pointing to the GOPs performance in this last election as a sign of them being strong, but that was entirely driven by Trump. They can’t throw up another McCain or Romney up there and get 74 million votes, even someone closer to Trump like Ted Cruz simply cannot capture the same spark that drove an unprecedented amount of rural voters to the polls. Even if they get Trump again, they run into the same problem they had last November, whatever enthusiasm he brings to their side he brings more for the other. You cannot look at the GOPs performance with Trump and extrapolate that to future elections.
Until they get a guy who’s a similar bombastic salesman to Trump but is actually a competent tyrant, not a clueless ADHD one. Then we’re screwed.
There’s about 100 guys and a few gals auditioning for that role right now. The winner of that contest will be a formidable threat.
…which is why I think it’s important that Biden be perceived as successful, and the way to do that is to tackle the most pressing problems facing the country. He needs to be viewed as being a part of getting the pandemic under control and helping people get back to work or at least protecting people’s bank accounts.
I think the House and Senate had no choice but to impeach but there’s no chance of a conviction and it’s better to fold the tent now. Put it to a vote. Put it on record. Move on.
I’m not so sure.
I have come to believe that the conservative vote is a visceral and reactionary vote against liberals.
The more viscerally anti-liberal someone is gets the vote. End-of-story. Nothing is worse than being a liberal.
That would be the My Pillow guy.
[quote]but is actually a competent tyrant, not a clueless ADHD one.
[/quote]
Ah, then we’re safe – at least from him.
Although I am humble about my ability to predict the future, I am cautiously optimistic. It appears to me that the GOP does have serious problems.
The base is committed to the Trump cult of personality, which is radioactive with the majority of voters. More broadly, it’s politics of white grievance is getting less and less demographically tenable. Although the inequities in the Senate and Electoral College, together with aggressive gerrymandering, might allow them to remain somewhat relevant for a while, it’s hard to see them putting together a stable national coalition until something changes radically (assuming they don’t manage to entirely overthrow democracy, of course).
Looking at the last few years of elections, it appears that Republicans will turn out to vote for Trump in large enough numbers to win elections or come close to it (2016 and 2020). However, Democrats will turn out in large numbers to vote against Trumpism, even if Trump himself isn’t on the ballot (2018 and the various special elections).
So, they’re kinda screwed if they keep riding the Trump train. Problem is that backtracking and becoming the party of McCain and Romney again, even if it were a plausible option, really wasn’t working for them either. Their best bet would seem to be going for some sort of “big tent” approach where they can run crazy candidates in places where they can win and relatively sane Chamber of Commerce types in most of the country. Happily, the Trumpists appear to be busily working to prevent that outcome by purging all the revisionists.
The Trump movement is such a cult of personality that it’s hard for me to imagine it staying around as a cohesive political bloc once Trump himself is out of the picture.
Past history suggests that something will happen; the Democrats won’t just keep winning all the elections forever. Either the Republicans will find a message and messenger that can win national elections, or they’ll fade away and some new party will replace them, or the Democrats will split into two parties.
But I do feel like they’ve reached an ideological and demographic dead end, where they aren’t going to be a national majority party until they re-invent themselves in a much more dramatic way than the losing party usually has to. Of course, many of them appear prepared to take the option of simply not having elections anymore. Another option would be to retreat to those States where they do have the majority and start plotting secession.
OK, those were a lot of disconnected thoughts. TLDR, “exaggerated” probably, but maybe not “greatly” exaggerated.
The difference is that while Nixon appealed to the MAGAs of his day, they weren’t his base. His base was the middle class whites in suburbia, soccer moms, educated professionals, and such. This showed in his accomplishments. He founded the EPA, ended the draft, opened trade with China, and despite personally being a racist and starting the southern strategy, he also supported affirmative action and other policies to help Black people. This left Reagan with the opportunity to inherit two bases, the 1980 version of the MAGAs and the 1980 version of the Lincoln Republicans.
Up until the 1/6 riot, I think the Republicans could have held the coalition together. Now unless the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot I don’t see the Lincoln Republicans supporting a MAGA running for office. The MAGA base is large enough for this strategy to be viable in red states and probably even the purple states that have been trending red like Florida and Ohio. But it probably won’t cut it in the purple states that are trending blue like Georgia, Arizona, and North Carolina.