home

The Coming Remaking Of The GOP

David Brooks get his licks in early. Most of it is nonsense but it is fun to read this:

McCain and Republicans stayed within their lines . . . the old resentments and the narrow appeal of conventional Republicanism. As a result, Democrats now control the middle.

Markos previews the coming GOP civil war:

Things are headed the opposite direction for the GOP. They are increasingly becoming a regional Southern party, and even down there resurgent Democrats are threatening big Senate and House gains. Even in Idaho, the third most Republican state in the country, Democrats are threatening to pick up one of the state's two congressional seats. We have the governorship in Wyoming while threatening to take the state's sole House seat, and hold one congressional seat in Blood Red Utah. We are competing everywhere. They aren't.

What's more, with the Bush/Paulson bailout of Wall Street, conservative ideology has failed, and done so miserably. The GOP's experiment in nation building is still a mess (in two countries). Its elected officials are retiring at huge rates -- a trend that will likely accelerate as Republicans fall deeper into the minority and prospects for a quick comeback fade. Depending on the results of this election, their party will have suffered anywhere from a painful drubbing to utter and unambiguous repudiation.

So then what? Without a president to control the RNC, Republicans will be forced to decide among themselves who will run their party. The establishment will put up their safe, comfortable picks like Alec Poitevint, Chuck Yob, Katon Dawson, Jim Greer, Chip Saltsman, and Saul Anuzis. Who? Exactly.

. . . Conservatives laughed when Dean took the DNC's helm and look how that turned out. But our differences with the DLC types was a matter of degree and strategy -- a little more populist, a lot more aggressive. The fundamentals that united us as a party were not ideologically mutually exclusive.

Republicans have a tougher task ahead of them. Generally speaking, the theocons are socially conservative and fiscally progressive (as in, they believe in using government to improve people's lives). The corporate cons are generally fiscally libertarian and couldn't give two craps about gays or abortion or the rest of the conservative Christian social agenda. While there is obviously a great deal of overlap, the distinct camps exist, and resolving those disagreements on fundamental philosophical issues will require a great deal of work. In Kansas, many of the corporate cons became conservative Democrats and left the asylum to the theocon crazies. We'll see how things shape up at the national level.

As Markos says, it will be interesting to watch.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< The Polls - Zogby's Sunday Talk Play | Palin Goes John Birch Society >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Too much wishful thinking (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by abdiel on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:01:27 AM EST
    Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.  The last time the GOP was down this far, the Democrats had Jimmy Carter who promised a new agenda and failed miserably.  Progressives aren't dominating and Congress under Pelosi has a ton of problems that a firmer majority will make worse, not better.

    And shame on anyone who believes this - the GOP itself believed it had a similarly permanent mandate only six years ago, and look where that took them.  The Democrats were in total disarray, then they found a guy named Barack Obama.  Who?  Yeah, exactly.

    Well held the house for 40 years (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Socraticsilence on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 01:40:24 PM EST
    So forgive me if I think Power might corrupt one side a bit more quickly than it does the other.

    Parent
    Jimmy Carter failed because of corruption? (none / 0) (#25)
    by coigue on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 07:47:54 PM EST
    Is that really what you care to say here?

    Parent
    The fact is (5.00 / 5) (#8)
    by kenosharick on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:24:37 AM EST
    that without the recent economic meltdown,we Dems would not be seeing a coming tidalwave. A probable victory, but much closer. Don't forget that in politics things can turn on a dime. This cockiness that I see among many on the left (like markos)is rather ugly.

    It's confidence not cockiness (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by AF on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:45:28 AM EST
    And the left needs more of it not less.

    Parent
    The Left needs a vision. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Fabian on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 11:28:37 AM EST
    I get the feeling of "Yay us!" even though the Left hasn't accomplished a single thing yet.  Power for the sake of power is the status quo.  Power for the sake of principles would be a real Change.

    Parent
    The left's vision (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by AF on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 11:34:31 AM EST
    Is economic fairness and effective government.

    The Republicans realize this -- that's why they're bring back golden oldies "socialist" and "liberal" and "big government."  

    It's not working because the majority agrees with us.

    Hence the ground for confidence.

    Parent

    Um, nothing has actually happened yet. (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Fabian on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 12:55:01 PM EST
    And Pelosi of the FISA bill and "impeachment is off the table" seems to be interested more in political expedience than upholding any progressive principles.

    I remember well which Congress members backed Obama from the start.  They aren't known for being movers and shakers.

    I am more excited about the prospect of an informed, interested and energized individual like Al Franken getting elected than Obama.

    Parent

    Because you feel bad for the Republicans? (1.00 / 1) (#10)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:36:56 AM EST
    The economic Golden Goose is dead. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Fabian on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 11:34:00 AM EST
    The GOP has a lot to do with its demise, but the Democrats are hardly blameless.

    Our manufacturing base?  Fled overseas.
    The doomed building bubble?  Popped.
    The Netcom bubble?  Easy come, easy go.
    The Fossil Fuel economy?  Heading for extinction.

    So what will be the basis of our new economy?
    Diversity.
    Energy conservation.
    Green energy.
    and
    The re-engineered infrastructure the new economy will need.

    And if we don't do those things?
    I'll be sorry I birthed my two children, because their lives will suck.

    Parent

    how do you come up with such (none / 0) (#26)
    by kenosharick on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:46:05 AM EST
    a stupid comment? who the hell feels sorry for repubs? certainly not me. I am a liberal gay man who has been attacked by them my whole adult life. Maybe you should think before you spout off such ignorance.

    Parent
    True (none / 0) (#28)
    by CST on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 01:01:58 PM EST
    But in many ways, "failed republican idealogy" is directly responsible for the recent economic breakdown, and therefore is causing Republicans to fracture.  You can't seperate the two, but it's not as if this happened in a black hole.  The timing of it was lucky for Dems, but it was coming anyway - and bound to hurt republicans.

    Parent
    no question the Republican Party must (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by pluege on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 04:06:39 PM EST
    break in at least two pieces if anything is to recover. The Brooks-Will-Frum serious conservative wing of the republican party have to split with the "white rump" hick wingnut wing of the republican party represented by palin-kristol-dobson-limbaugh, if republicans are ever want to treated seriously again.

    If mccain loses, the retributions and cannibalism after the election will be a sight to see.

    Is Sen. Obama ready for the presidency? (1.00 / 2) (#21)
    by WeroInNM on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 03:54:13 PM EST
    A Personality Profile of Barack Obama's Leadership

    The National Ledger
    By Chuck Norris
    Oct 22, 2008

    Profile and Other Articles Are Contained In The Following Web Sites:
    http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272623354.shtml

    Barack Obama Makes Shocking confession!!:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BnLozS-TnM&feature=related

    Sen. Obama's Ties to Farrakhan?
    "Farrakhan on Obama: 'The Messiah is absolutely speaking'
    'Barack has captured the youth,' will bring about 'universal change'"
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=77539

    The Obama Youth Revolution - Sing for Change:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxP3XbKKDOE&feature=related

    BARACK OBAMA KIDS AND HITLER YOUTH SING FOR THEIR LEADER:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdPSqL9_mfM&feature=related

    Obama Hitler Youth style Brainwashing:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onXd8iH3OVQ&feature=related

    The Following NY Times Article Supports My Concern:

    Barack Obama, Forever Sizing Up

    New York Times
    By JODI KANTOR
    Published: October 25, 2008

    Article Is Contained On The Following Web Site:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/weekinreview/26kantor.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

    The Following Are Quotes From This Article:

    "But in the Oval Office, Mr. Obama would have a new set of deficits. Just 47 years old and only four years into a national political career, he has never run anything larger than his campaign. He began his run for president while he was still getting lost in Washington, a city he does not yet know well. His promises are as vast as his résumé is short, and some of his pledges are competing ones: progressive rule and centrist red-blue fusion; wholesale transformation and down-to-earth pragmatism."

    "Barack Obama's lowest moment as a community organizer in the 1980s came when he brought the executive director of the Chicago Housing Authority to Altgeld Gardens, a decrepit housing project, to hear complaints about asbestos. Seven-hundred residents grew restless waiting for the tardy director. When he finally appeared, the meeting grew so raucous that the director fled after 15 minutes, to chants of "No more rent!"

    "Mr. Obama's message of change can be hard to pin down, and he has spent his entire career searching for the right way to fulfill his desire for broad social renewal. First he became a community organizer, thinking change would flow from citizens upward; then he tried the law, which, as he learned from teaching legal history, was a highly imperfect instrument. Since then he has set his sights on changing government institutions, one higher than the next. Even in the Senate, he told a reporter, it was possible to have a career that was "not particularly useful."

    "Critics have used the Rezko incident to question Mr. Obama's reputation as a reformer, to argue he has few core beliefs. They cite a proposal he made in the Senate for stringent reporting requirements concerning nuclear plant leaks, which he then softened after Republican colleagues and energy executives complained. The bill died in committee. Or the time he joined a bipartisan coalition on immigration reform but backed away when labor groups protested. That legislation collapsed, too."

    "Food For Thought"

    Their best chance is ... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 09:54:36 AM EST
    to follow something like what Huckabee did.  A Republican populism combined with social conservatism.

    My guess is that if Palin runs in '12 this will be her philosophy.

    This is assuming that Obama governs like a bold progressive.  Because if he doesn't, he'll be a one term president regardless of what the Republicans do.

    Solution: Dems had better (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 09:57:05 AM EST
    find a way to fix the economy before 12. It's a tall order.

    BTW, that's the kind of Republicanism that will sell better in the old south than the new south.

    Parent

    There is no "New South" ... (none / 0) (#4)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:04:08 AM EST
    they've been talking about such a thing since before I was born.  It's never materialized.

    The South is the South.

    One election won't change that even if Obama wins VA and NC.

    After Carter swept the South in '76, his pollster said it was a one time thing. And he would have no governing coalition.

    Parent

    Oh, I think there is: (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:05:46 AM EST
    white professionals in the Dallas and Atlanta burbs. They hate taxes--hate them, but I'm not sure they make great culture warriors.

    Parent
    It must be great to be ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:09:49 AM EST
    young and full of optimism.

    ;)

    Parent

    heh (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:12:39 AM EST
    If you've been following me for a while, you'll know that I don't have a great opinion of the south, generally speaking.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#16)
    by zvs888 on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 01:04:06 PM EST
    Most of the demographics changes in the "new south" have happened in the last 10 years.

    The growth of northern Virginia and the tri-city area in NC have been the most dramatic showing of that.

    Sure things could go the other way, but with voter ID being far more important now than in previous elections, it does matter more.

    Carter's election is the worst kind of justification for anything, he didn't win a state west of Texas...; that election was just a random blip on the map.

    Colorado/Virginia/North Carolina's voter trends are not.

    Parent

    To Expound on This (none / 0) (#17)
    by zvs888 on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 01:11:45 PM EST
    The voting populace in Virginia has undergone dramatic changes since just 2004 even, upwards to 10-20% of the voters are entirely new and those heavily lean Democratic by demographics and ideology.

    That simply is not happening in the rest of the south other than in North Carolina somewhat.

    Places like Tennessee (where I currently live) are becoming more red as are other southern states.

    But that trend has largely been completely reversed in Virginia and North Carolina, so they are becoming different from the rest of the south.

    Parent

    There is or was a New South (none / 0) (#20)
    by Socraticsilence on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 01:53:52 PM EST
    Its just that the last 15 years or so have economically reverted much of it (with the shipping overseas of virtually all Southern Manufacturing-- the South was the leading edge of outsourcing), it still exists in pockets: the Research and Banking Triangle of NC, the Government Sector of Northern VA, the Transport Hubs in Atl and Memphis, Florida as a state (though as a born and raised Floridian I would argue and I think BTD would agree that only the Northern 1/4 of our state is Southern-- we do have Jefferson-Jackson days in the Capital though).

    Parent
    I agree (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by Socraticsilence on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 01:49:22 PM EST
    But the money men(and women?) in the GOP really, really, hate economic populism. That's why they jumped on Huckabee with such fervor despite the fact that he was clearly the most gifted politician that ran for their side (and possibly the whole thing-- Obama is the best speechmaker of my lifetime, but Huckabee is at the very least the 2nd best retail pol-- right behind Bill Clinton), the Wall Street types hate Huck.  Honestly, I hope they keep hating Huck, because he's as socially conservative as Palin but sells it 100 times better (also its more palatable to the Christian Left because Huckabee, more than any GOP'r I've ever seen seems to try and follow the totallity of the Gospels: Helping the poor, and the indigent-- to the extent that it hurts him with his base: see his embrace of immigrants), he could have run a Huey Long style campaign and slashed Obama this election (perhaps won)- he play's the anti-elite card a 1000 times more effectively than McCain (seriously, McCain playing as a man of the people doesn't work when you're nearly as much of an aristocrat as Bush-- Son and Grandson of Admirals, etc. yeah not exactly a man of the people).

    Parent
    Republican populism (none / 0) (#9)
    by AF on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:31:22 AM EST
    Is one part racist, one part stupidity.

    See immigration, opposing the bailout then getting cold feet, "eliminating the IRS," Ross Perot, "welfare queens" etc.

    There might be a demand for social conservative/economically liberal policies (eg Catholics) but there is no supply.

    Parent

    Your doom-mongering for the day ... (none / 0) (#23)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 06:35:26 PM EST
    to follow something like what Huckabee did.  A Republican populism combined with social conservatism.
    My guess is that if Palin runs in '12 this will be her philosophy.

    Don't forget to include "Socialist!", "Terrorist!", "Muslim!", and "Kill Him!" in the new Republican populism.  I'm sure Huckabee and Palin won't.  I doubt it's lost on them that a tide of that kind of rage could be ridden to power.

    Obama, assuming he wins (and the Republicans are apparently assuming exactly that), and the Democratic congress are going to have two years - two years - to get results before the midterm elections in 2010.  If they get results, then I believe the frightening rise of the Huckabees and Palins, unrepentant Christo-fascists, can be stopped.  Otherwise ...

    Anyway, never mind me.  Back to the celebration.

    Parent

    Since the raison d'etre of the GOP is (none / 0) (#27)
    by ThatOneVoter on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:51:24 AM EST
    to increase the proportion of wealth of the top
    .001% of the population, I don't really see the party adopting economic populism.

    Parent
    Thanks to Obama going back on a promise (none / 0) (#24)
    by coigue on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 07:44:41 PM EST
    that turns out to be a stupid idea anyhow.