Republican Party, RIP?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AAAintheBeltway, Nov 16, 2006.

  1. The Republicans have controlled the presidency and/or at least one house of congress for most of the past 26 years. They have controlled the House for the past 12 years. For the last six years, they have controlled both houses of congress and the presidency. They have precious little to show for it, other than a lot of rich lobbyists and congressmen, but it is nevertheless an impressive political achievement.

    Let's consider how they have done it. The modern Republican Party has been a combination of five clearly defined core groups:

    --country club/big business republicans. The refined frontmen and financiers of the party

    --Evangelical Christians/family values proponents. The foot soldiers of the republican revolution.

    --low tax/opportunity society/small business voters. Middle america meets the Cato Insitute.

    --traditional paleo-conservatives/national security types. Pat Buchanan, we still love you.

    --neo-cons. Small in number but the big thinkers.

    Unlike the Democrats, whose various interest groups either get along or are at least broadly sympathetic to each other, the Republican coalition has always been an uneasy alliance. They share little, except a desire to wield power. Several of the groups, for example the neo-cons and the paleo-conservatives, despise each other. Country club bluebloods typically loath the Evangelical wing. The low tax crowd resents the family values faction's desire for non-supply side tax cuts, like child care credits. Etc, etc.

    President Bush was in many ways an ideal Republican candidate because he brought so many of these factions together. He was a blueblood, an Evangelical, a tax cutter, a defense hawk and his advisors were all neo-cons. The coalition began to unravel over Iraq. The traditional neo-con/paleo-con battle lines began to form beneath the surface. The big spending congress and the sight of Bush pushing big education and drug benefit programs infuriated the low tax and paleo's. The Dubai ports deal left all but the country clubbers scratching their heads. The Meirs nomination sent the Evangelicals over the edge and off the plantation. Bush's insane backing of amnesty for illegal aliens was the absolute final straw for all the paleo's and for many of the middle america/family values voters.

    Then came the recent election. A tidal wave of scandal, inept campaigning, poor strategy from the national party and of course Iraq doomed the party and left many of its supporters wondering why they were wasting time on a bunch of inept crooks and conmen who couldn't seem to get anything of value passed anyway.

    Now a weakened President has all but surrendered preemptively to the Democrats. His one silver lining? He can now get his immigration amnesty passed by the Democrats. I predict this will be the final straw that dooms the party to permanent minority status. A third party anti-immigration presidential candidate in '08 is inevitable.

    The Evangelicals likely will lose interest in politics. The Democrats may have wised up enough not to push culture war issues that will rile them. Since the Republicans did nothing for them anyway, why waste all that time and effort going door to door for them? Losing even a small number of this group will spell defeat for the party.

    The neo-cons are a spent force. Never large in numbers, the Iraq debacle has cost them any remaining credibility.

    The paleo's have never been fans of the Bush dynasty. They certainy will not rally behind a McCain candidacy. He is pro immigration and has a record of selling out conservatives.

    The country clubbers and low tax forces will likely stick with the Republican candidates, but they will not be enough to carry them to victory. The country club/big business types are eager to get along with whoever is in power, and the low tax advocates face the daunting statistic that half the country doesn't pay taxes anyway.

    Republicans could well be facing decades in the political wilderness, as they did in the 60's and 70's. The next Republican Party to control the congress will by necessity be far different from the current model. They may elect a president when the democrats send up one of their typical loony left candidates, but that will be an aberration.
  2. Think about this AAA, and see if you can sleep well tonight.

    All Hillary would have to do is win all the states Kerry the putz did, and one other state...either Ohio, or Florida which were close in 2000 and 2004 would do the trick...

    Think about Rudy or a middle of the road McCain, or another moderate republican getting the nomination who is pro life, and the pissed off conservatives run a third party candidate...1992 all over again.

    Think about who is producing more children in this country...

  3. I think you mean a moderate republican who is not pro life, but I agree with you. I lived through it all, so I can deal with it. It's not like we conservatives have all that much to show for republican rule.

    Two years is a long time in politics, and the Democrats will have ample opportunity to alienate voters. Hillary is not exactly a warm, likeable campaigner, so anything is possible, but honestly, the Republicans face an uphill battle. They are already out spinning that immigration is not that important an issue with voters. I think that is dead wrong. It was not as important as Iraq, but it is the ultimate hot button issue with a sizeable bloc of Republican voters.
  4. AAA what you're writing makes sense.
  5. "--low tax/opportunity society/small business voters. Middle america meets the Cato Insitute."

    I'll just report what I saw around me without any single explanation because I heard so many - - the above category was where Reps totally blew up.

    Not once did I hear Iraq mentioned as a factor affecting why they turned on Reps. Also, my guess is a huge number of these small biz voters had received tax breaks.

    So I conclude the view was that Republicans had become a disaster for small biz and for the country.
  6. pattersb

    pattersb Guest

    Quite an analysis! You might consider submitting it to the National Review, Weekly Standard, etc ... as good as anything they are producing. Pass it directly to Bill Buckley, maybe he'll come out of retirement and give you some feedback.

    I think you're underestimating the ability of Democrats to outrage people. They'll begin announcing their plans for new government entitlement programs and scare the hell out of people. HIllary will dust of her 40,000 page design document of the new healthcare system, federal daycare centers, amnesty, etc, ... maybe "It Takes A Village" will rise from the dead.

    Hillary vs. McCain? I think McCain wins ... and really, I don't even care as long as there is a balance, (and Hillary loses)
  7. man


    two years is a hell lot time in politics. public opinion gets bored
    quickly and changes overnight. just consider they put out of iraq
    by summer 07. in fall 08 each and every voter will be tired of the
    topic. the 04 election was IMHO determined by the professional
    performed destruction of kerry's personal credibility. conclusion:
    elections are hard to understand and forecasts even three days
    before an election, not to speak of two years, are near to meaningless.
  8. Repubs lose an election and think their party is RIP.

    Drama queens...

  9. man


    just visualising rep drama queens among frisco drag queens ... :)
    #10     Nov 21, 2006