The day after Republicans lost control of Congress, I got an email from a friend. This guy is not politically active, nor is he the kind of guy who strikes you as really politically savvy. Actually, he's a math nerd. His geekiness aside, he made this excellent observation: "[the Republicans have become distracted] from the core issues: lower taxes, smaller government, liberty and personal responsibility."
Amen, brother. Amen.
In the mid and late 90s the Republican party was dominated by a solid, vibrant conservative base. It was defined by core principles--exactly those principles my friend mentioned in his e-mail. Those principles were embodied in the "Contract with America". Clinton politics, along with his personal charisma, forced the GOP to yeild the Contract to a more moderate agenda. (Important sidenote: this was bad, but not all bad. See: Welfare Reform). Nonetheless, the tide was in the GOPs favor through the 2000 election, and the base of the Party was one primarily concerned with the core principles. Dare I say, the principles of Reagan. Let's call those who love and desire these core principles the "Core Base". I might add "strong defense" to this list. So the "core list" would go: lower taxes; smaller government; liberty; security; and personal responsibility.
9/11 changed everything, including the GOP.
After the attacks, security became the dominant theme. Shortly thereafter it was the War. Nation Security. That's the name of the game. '02 and '04 enlarged the Republican stronghold on government. Bucking historical trends, the GOP gained seats in both the Midterm and at re-election in spite of the fact that the man sleeping at 1600 Pennsylvania wore Red. No doubt the furry over gay marriage added a significant voting block to the Core Base in '04, and the Party grew. It was high times for the GOP.
But with size comes weakness.
By the time the beginning of 2005 rolled around the formula looked like this: Core Base + Security Moms + Gay Marriage Moderates= A Party in Firm Control. What had begun to happen in the days after 9/11 had reached a tipping point: of the three groups, the leadership of the party had taken the Core Base for granted and focused on the other two groups. While this is obviously necessary in the short-run to shore up an election victory, in the long-run it is and will be their peril. Drunken-sailor spending. Immigration non-reform. Social Security non-reform. The growth of entitlements. The expansion of government. The continued slow and painful death of personal responsibility. Add to this the lack of empassioned, principled, well-spoken leadership, and what you have is a party ripe for a long-term fall.
The anger over gay marriage waned. Even in the states that had marriage amendments on their ballots in '06, the ire over the audacity of the hard Left had diminished to a dull pain. On the security front, irony set in. The more secure one is, the less one feels the need for security. Ignore the Iraq fiasco for one minute and it becomes painfully clear that the GOP was in trouble even without The War. New formula: Disenchanted Core Base + Not-Very-Angry Gay Marriage Moderates + Moms who Feel Secure Enough= A vulnerable party.
The Red Team may well have developed a large enough base to survive these travails in an alternate, non-Iraq War universe. But there is no non-Iraq world.
I am firmly convinced that the Security Moms and Gay Marriage Moderates would not have joined the GOP cause in '02 or '04 if the rest of the Republican platform were unacceptable to them. The Party needs to return to principled, persistant, persuasive emphasis of the Core Principles. Only then will the base hold, the moderates move Right, security be strengthened, and America be made forever strong.
As for now, the Core Base is a Base without a bride.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Overall: excellent. The only thing that I could add is that the GOP lost not only because they didn't do anything to promote values, they didn't get security measures taken care of and they sat and waited for Iraq to clear up and when it didn't they had no idea on what to do except continue to have their thumbs up their butts. The secutiry measures are what really confuse me. Why is it not a big deal anymore. Security two years ago was the issue that won it all. I guess since the american people can't remember anything and so everyone feels safe. I just don't get it. I feel safe but that is because I live in "no-where-threatening-ville" but in general, for our country, I believe we are less safe. Off hand I can think of two major terrorists threats that were aimed at the U.S. that were stopped. That's all I can think of now, I'm sure there were more, but two in two years is kind of a lot in my mind. All I can say is thank you to the Republicans for having the attitude of bringing the fight to them. Honestly I'm scared for America. Liberals only care about feelings and total acceptance of any practice of any kind the human mind can think of. They just want to sit and have tea with the terrorists thinking that if we are nice to them then maybe they won't want to kill us. Meanwhile they are smiling and drinking with us while they have bombs strapped to their bodies. Doesn't anyone get it? All the jihad nutballs want is us dead at any cost. That is it period. This is the big reason that GOP lost a week ago. The american society is stupid. They don't understand the reality of the danger we face. Now I'm not saying that the government needs to focus ALL of its attention on security but it is a much bigger issue than people realize and we all need to wake up and understand that when are guard is let down people of going to die. I'm all for lower taxes, less government, liberty, etc., but I like living too.
Solid comments, Gern. Yes, Americans have a short-term memory. Yes, Liberals love and live by appeasement. Yes, living is more important that small government and low taxes. You are right on the money.
As far as feeling more secure than we are, you are right that we are still quite vulnerable. "More Secure" is a relative judgement. I ask this question: could someone commit the same exact act today as they did on 9/11? I think the answer is a resounding "no". Have we made it easier to get into the U.S. since then? No. Have we made it easier to ship things into America? No. So are we safeer today than we were before. Absolutely.
Are we safe?
Absolutely not. There is a long way to go toward making us safe from attack. The Red Guys dropped the ball by letting the Democrats claim we are less safe than before 9/11. They also failed by giving the Dems the freedom to yell "we'll implement the recomendations of the 9/11 committee". They should have done that or made a solid case why the recommendations were either not workable or outright wrong.
Joe and Jane American sit home and think, "I see things like the airport have changed since 9/11, and we haven't been attacked since then, and we've stopped some big plots, so we must have all the security we need." That's obviously a dangerous mindset, but I think it is real and it played a part in creating the new Democratic Congresss.
Post a Comment