Eric Cantor thinks the GOP problems can be solved via technique: "President Obama is a great communicator. We understand that. He's also been very adept at adopting the technology of today to access the youth vote and the younger population of this country. That's the future, and I believe we've got a lot to learn. The Republican Party can't keep doing things the way it always has in terms of technology."Meghan McCain blows this theory to hell: "Simply embracing technology isn't going to fix our problem. Republicans using Twitter and Facebook isn't going to miraculously make people think we're cool again. Breaking free from obsolete positions and providing real solutions that don't divide our nation further will."
The overwhelming message from the GOP is that America still wants their message. The conservatives say
“X percent of America is conservative and Y percent are moderate,
so X+ Y = the center/right America”.
But that assumes that the moderates agree with the right. They don’t. Moderates went for Obama by more than twenty points. Moderates and liberals agree on homosexuality, on diplomacy, on values, on almost all issues, except the quest for small government – ironically because Republicans showed the danger of big government. But moderates do want effective government.
One poll showed that most voters said the Republicans lost due to excessive conservatism, but the Republicans themselves, by a 17-point margin, thought they weren’t conservative enough.
The gap between the far right and the rest of the country is so wide that McCain was unable to bridge the gap with his VP choice: his staff told him that choosing a moderate – who could have helped him win -- would cause a riot at the convention and among the GOP base. Thus, Sarah Palin.
The Republicans clung to the belief that Obama philosophically is miles away from the center-right country he will govern (in fact both he and the country are centrist).
The main thrust of the Republicans today is that America still embraces their philosophy -- tax cuts for the rich, deregulating Wall Street, holy wars abroad, culture wars at home -- but Bush and McCain betrayed those ideals – the spending, nationalized banks, deficits, the prescription drug plan, the wiretaps. They think their platform will still sell.
It sounds as though the narrative is hardening: GOP principles are good; Bush and McCain strayed from them. This works in a number of ways: they try to stick to the fiscal message which is the only thing they have that might sell, and they steer the blame to two guys nobody likes much anyway. And they don‘t have to admit any mistakes.
Why is this important? Because all American presidential campaigns are won and lost on the same battlefield: the political center. Win the moderates and centrists and go straight to the White House. Obama is staking out the center for himself. If the GOP insists on adhering to its far-right standard, they are simply surrendering that battlefield and ensuring more losses.
Pragmatism has an undeserved bad reputation. To some it betokens betrayal of principle. During the Bush era the notion fell even further into disrepute: blind faith was prized over common sense, with predictable results.
The Republicans don’t want anyone to see that Obama is a centrist who voted with Bush half the time and supports tax cuts, FISA, hunting down bin Laden, free-market economics, merit pay to separate good teachers from bad ones, nuclear power, more faith-based programs, an effort to cut government waste, more troops for Afghanistan, strong support for Israel, possible military action against Iran, the right to bear arms, the death penalty, outreach to evangelicals, and the Patriot Act, which he voted for twice. He is rock solid on family values.
He is determined to govern from the center, and Pelosi, Reid, Emanuel and Hoyer have all publicly backed him on that point. Howard Dean rejected the notion that the election was a mandate for a new New Deal. They drove the point home by seeing to it that Joe Lieberman kept his committee chair.
In setting up his administration Obama relied heavily on Brent Scowcroft, a Republican pragmatist, and Robert Rubin, a centrist money man whom traditional liberals view with suspicion. Likewise his cabinet picks: praised by the right, grumbles from the left.
Emanuel is a millionaire investment banker who pushed a lot of Clinton’s conservative efforts like NAFTA and the crime and welfare bills, and then recruited moderate and conservative candidates for the 2006 elections, angering a lot of liberals. Even Republican Congressman Jim McCrery admitted that Emanuel is a centrist. Geithner, a former Republican, worked for Kissinger and is popular with Wall Street leaders; he is held in suspicion by labor. A former Treasury colleague said “he’s no liberal”. Hillary voted for Bush’s Iraq war. Gates is a Republican.
Obama can stitch the center and left together on environmental law and consumer regulation, health care, energy independence, education, and infrastructure. He could even go after conservatives with bills that moderate Republicans can support or have supported, on things like children’s health care and with executive actions on issues such as greenhouse emissions. There will also be a temptation to get on the neocon scoreboard by blowing things up in a place like Iran or Korea.
“X percent of America is conservative and Y percent are moderate,
so X+ Y = the center/right America”.
But that assumes that the moderates agree with the right. They don’t. Moderates went for Obama by more than twenty points. Moderates and liberals agree on homosexuality, on diplomacy, on values, on almost all issues, except the quest for small government – ironically because Republicans showed the danger of big government. But moderates do want effective government.
One poll showed that most voters said the Republicans lost due to excessive conservatism, but the Republicans themselves, by a 17-point margin, thought they weren’t conservative enough.
The gap between the far right and the rest of the country is so wide that McCain was unable to bridge the gap with his VP choice: his staff told him that choosing a moderate – who could have helped him win -- would cause a riot at the convention and among the GOP base. Thus, Sarah Palin.
The Republicans clung to the belief that Obama philosophically is miles away from the center-right country he will govern (in fact both he and the country are centrist).
The main thrust of the Republicans today is that America still embraces their philosophy -- tax cuts for the rich, deregulating Wall Street, holy wars abroad, culture wars at home -- but Bush and McCain betrayed those ideals – the spending, nationalized banks, deficits, the prescription drug plan, the wiretaps. They think their platform will still sell.
It sounds as though the narrative is hardening: GOP principles are good; Bush and McCain strayed from them. This works in a number of ways: they try to stick to the fiscal message which is the only thing they have that might sell, and they steer the blame to two guys nobody likes much anyway. And they don‘t have to admit any mistakes.
Why is this important? Because all American presidential campaigns are won and lost on the same battlefield: the political center. Win the moderates and centrists and go straight to the White House. Obama is staking out the center for himself. If the GOP insists on adhering to its far-right standard, they are simply surrendering that battlefield and ensuring more losses.
Pragmatism has an undeserved bad reputation. To some it betokens betrayal of principle. During the Bush era the notion fell even further into disrepute: blind faith was prized over common sense, with predictable results.
The Republicans don’t want anyone to see that Obama is a centrist who voted with Bush half the time and supports tax cuts, FISA, hunting down bin Laden, free-market economics, merit pay to separate good teachers from bad ones, nuclear power, more faith-based programs, an effort to cut government waste, more troops for Afghanistan, strong support for Israel, possible military action against Iran, the right to bear arms, the death penalty, outreach to evangelicals, and the Patriot Act, which he voted for twice. He is rock solid on family values.
He is determined to govern from the center, and Pelosi, Reid, Emanuel and Hoyer have all publicly backed him on that point. Howard Dean rejected the notion that the election was a mandate for a new New Deal. They drove the point home by seeing to it that Joe Lieberman kept his committee chair.
In setting up his administration Obama relied heavily on Brent Scowcroft, a Republican pragmatist, and Robert Rubin, a centrist money man whom traditional liberals view with suspicion. Likewise his cabinet picks: praised by the right, grumbles from the left.
Emanuel is a millionaire investment banker who pushed a lot of Clinton’s conservative efforts like NAFTA and the crime and welfare bills, and then recruited moderate and conservative candidates for the 2006 elections, angering a lot of liberals. Even Republican Congressman Jim McCrery admitted that Emanuel is a centrist. Geithner, a former Republican, worked for Kissinger and is popular with Wall Street leaders; he is held in suspicion by labor. A former Treasury colleague said “he’s no liberal”. Hillary voted for Bush’s Iraq war. Gates is a Republican.
Obama can stitch the center and left together on environmental law and consumer regulation, health care, energy independence, education, and infrastructure. He could even go after conservatives with bills that moderate Republicans can support or have supported, on things like children’s health care and with executive actions on issues such as greenhouse emissions. There will also be a temptation to get on the neocon scoreboard by blowing things up in a place like Iran or Korea.
No comments:
Post a Comment