The Limbaugh-Steele spat only confirms it ; the GOP is in a terrible state. They have received a drubbing in the last two elections and face a highly effective and popular president; you would think they would use this opportunity to take a deep breath and figure out where they have gone wrong but they seem intent on becoming even more of a joke.
The prevailing wisdom inside the party seems to be that they are losing only because they haven't been conservative enough and if they move further right all will be well. This is madness. They are losing because:
a) they are widely perceived as incompetent
b) they are perceived as acting in the interests of the wealthy and not the middle-class
To recover they need to pick leaders who project competence and achievement but also genuine empathy for the well-being of average voters and back that up with specific policy proposals. There are leaders who do bits and pieces of this: Romney certainly projects competence and Huckabee is quite good at speaking about economic concerns; the GOP needs leaders who can do both and some sensible policies which appeal to the independent voter. What it doesn’t need are populist gimmicks like Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. Above all it needs less of Rush Limbaugh. The Democrats are trying to make Limbaugh the face of the Republican party and the Republicans, unbelievably, are playing into their hands.
It’s certainly not the Democrats who give Limbaugh his power. They don’t force Republican politicians to apologize to him. They don’t circulate his rhetoric through the right wing infrastructure and up to Fox.
The right has to take responsibility for their own mistakes and make their own corrections without blaming the Democrats for everything.
Democrats took power with two advantages:
-in 2006, six years of incompetence and corruption from a Republican president and twelve years from a Republican congress;
-In 2008, one of the savviest campaigners in our nation’s history (IMO, natch).
I strongly suspect that, whatever else happens, Obama will not present the Republicans with any years of incompetence and corruption. I suspect equally strongly that if the Democrats maintain control of congress for twelve years, they’ll have just as profound a culture of corruption. In 2018, the Republicans stand a very good chance of regaining control of congress if they haven’t done so already. I suspect they’ll stay out of the White House at least until 2016 (2017 for the pedants).
In terms of the second advantage, I just don’t see Republican on the national scene who can hold a candle to Obama in terms of political savvy combined with personal charisma combined with strong personal ethics. (Note that I don’t list intelligence there–while I think Obama is highly intelligent, I don’t think intelligence nets that many votes).
A move by a losing party in a change-of-party election to the wing is not unusual. Goldwater in '64, McGovern in '72, Mondale in '84 are all examples. When you lose the confidence of the center of the political spectrum, you naturally try to shore yourself up with pandering to the strongest part of your political base.
The real problem with the Republicans right now is that they are unable to adequately meld the two main themes they have: lower taxes and spending with “family” values. The squawking about cutting taxes has begun finally to lose some credit with the general public, as they see that it doesn’t equate to increased economic productivity, and makes it very hard to provide proper social services and infrastructure. And it isn’t like the Republicans were eager to reduce government spending when they had control of the trough in Washington, D.C. Many of the people in the central part of the political spectrum who are eager to see the conservative social message adopted find all the emphasis on “cut taxes” to be distracting from a more important goal: getting government to support policies that encourage “traditional” values.
Be careful in attributing too much to Limbaugh. Some of this meme just may be due to Emanuel, and others, trying to spread it in order to discredit the party. In just the same way, GOP mouthpieces have traditionally tried to play up Al Sharpton’s influence with the Dems.
The issue for the GOP isn’t necessarily its getting its leadership from an entertainer, it’s that they are seriously espousing the same attitudes that the entertainer espouses for entertainment purposes.
Statement released to the press from RNC head Michael Steele:
“It both smells good and tastes wonderful.”
This is great. Simply great. I never thought I would fall in love with Rush. He is going to do for the Republican Party in 2012 what Barry Goldwater did for it in 1964.
Everybody from Barack Obama to the NY Times keeps repeating the same line you do. Until the Republicans coherently argue the opposite, more people will become less and less familiar with Mr Laffer, and more familiar with how FDR ‘Saved Us’ from the Great Depression. Supposedly.
My advice to the Republicans:
Drop the Religious Right and Rush Limbaugh. They drive the center over to the Democrats. Enough of the social conservatives and ditto-heads will vote for you anyway. 90% turnout amongst a segment that is 20-25% of the voting populace isn’t going to cut it anymore. Settle for 60-70% turnout and grab more of the center.
Make a much more coherent argument for growth. Couple it with an explanation of how government regulation chokes job creation. This has to be more than ‘lower taxes’.
Develop and articulate small-government approaches to education and healthcare reform. They are possible. You’re going to lose the teachers’ unions. But you never had them anyway.
Stay silent and/or remain neutral on the environment for the next election cycle or two. The ‘Drill, Baby Drill!’ thing should have embarrassed you. Even if you have reasonable approaches to these issues, you’ve lost credibility on them for awhile. The economy will probably trump the environment in the voters’ minds for awhile, so this may not be that important anyway.
It could only affect the equation if Revenues went down. Revenues did not go down. Revenues went up.
How can a ‘Fact’ (from FactCheck.org) exist when, by the authors own admission, it is impossible to run a controlled test in two alternative universes? That is an opinion. Or perhaps a hypothesis. It is not a fact.
The only fact is the actual tax receipts. Which went up.
I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t I read, or see, or something that Romney won the CPAC straw poll indicating he may very well be their pick in 2012?
If your equation is “Deficit = Revenue - Spending”, then Revenue will always affect the equation. Taxes are 98% of the government’s revenues, so they will always affect the equation, up or down.
True enough. But it seems to me there *is *a way the Republicans may nominate Romney. I was just addressing **The Second Stone’s **statement that it would never happen. It seems it could.