Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Farther right? Or towards the center? McCain of 2008 made a hard right turn, and then added the even farther right Palin. It didn't work. But I wonder what conservatives will do about it? Do they simply write off 2008 as some strange twist of fate? Or will they reform as a party that is more in line with the majority of voters -- which means moving much more to the center, not playing so hard to the religious right? Your thoughts, please.... (And I'd ask, respectfully, if we can keep this thread on topic, not have it turn into simply bashing the GOP or conservatives or people of faith. Thanks in advance!)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Also, one other option -- wait for public opinion on Barack Obama to shift against him -- in other words, wait for the population to come to the GOP.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt I think the GOP is going to have to abandon the far right if they want to have a viable platform on which to stand in four years. Assuming that Obama is well liked, I just can't see them succeeding any other way. Right now the party seems somewhat out of touch with the gereral electorate.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Which center? The social center? The fiscal center? The defense center? Political viewpoints are laid out in a straight line - they're three dimensional. If the GOP abandons the social conservatives, will they pick up more fiscal consevatives than they'll lose in social conservatives? I doubt it. The GOP needs to be the party of traditional values, smaller government, and a strong national defense, without going to far to the extreme right on any axis and without going to far left on any either.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip They are going to go far right and make themselves totally irrelevant. You've certainly read all of the Republican pundits talking about why McCain lost the election. There are two general areas of thought. 1) The economy went so far south that no Republican could have won. 2) That McCain lost because he was too much of a moderate. The Republicans need to have a candidate committed to traditional Republican values. As scary as it may seem, 69% of Republicans want to see Palin run for President in 2012. Source: <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2012/69_of_gop_voters_say_palin_helped_mccain" target="_blank">http://www.rasmussenreports.co...d_mccain</a> If the Republican Party were a person this would be called committing suicide. I'm not sure what it is called when an organization does it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>If the GOP abandons the social conservatives, will they pick up more fiscal consevatives than they'll lose in social conservatives?<< No one can predict it for certain, but I think they just might. I don't think social conservatives would suddenly run to the Democrats, and I don't think they'd totally exclude themselves from the process. I guess they could form their own party, but the numbers just aren't there. And today's social conservative is yesterday's liberal in a lot of ways. But fiscal responsibility is something that really should be one of those non-political ideals most people agree upon. A founding principle that anyone can agree is wise. It isn't, of course, as both parties are willing to abandon fiscal responsibility for any number of things. The GOP tends to do so in overspending on defense, the Dems do so with social programs. But it's a good question -- could people stomach real fiscal responsibility, realizing that it often means not spending on whatever agenda they favor?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Is there a social issue on which the GOP is farther right now than it was in 1980? I don't see one.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Is there a social issue on which the GOP is farther right now than it was in 1980? I don't see one.>> There are two HUGE ones. 1) Gay marriage was not an issue in 1980. They have not gone further right because it did not exist before. But it is a pretty far right position that did not exist in 1980. 2) The 1980 Republican Platform was more tolerant of those in favor of abortion. The Platform certainly was committed to restricting it, but it recognized that there were many people, even other Republicans, who had differing views. <<Abortion There can be no doubt that the question of abortion, despite the complex nature of its various issues, is ultimately concerned with equality of rights under the law. While we recognize differing views on this question among Americans in general—and in our own Party—we affirm our support of a constitutional amendment to restore protection of the right to life for unborn children. We also support the Congressional efforts to restrict the use of taxpayers' dollars for abortion. >> Source: <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=25844" target="_blank">http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu...id=25844</a>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder And what with all that is wrong with this world, the GOP focuses far too much on issues such as gay marriage and abortion.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think the base of the party has moved farther right on the issue of illegal immigration as well. And it isn't that the GOP in terms of social policy has actually moved farther right. It's that GOP politicians tend to play so visibly to the far right with their rhetoric and stump speeches. Every single one of Sarah Palin's speeches did this, as did most of McCain's. So regardless of party platform, if the take-away visual of a campaign is that of politicians pandering to the far right, that's every bit as important as an actual, drafted policy platform.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>As scary as it may seem, 69% of Republicans want to see Palin run for President in 2012. << Funnily enough, 69% of Democrats also want to see Palin run for President in 2012. ;-)
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder You almost have to feel sorry for those Republicans. Almost.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <So regardless of party platform, if the take-away visual of a campaign is that of politicians pandering to the far right, that's every bit as important as an actual, drafted policy platform.> Bingo. I don't think the GOP needs to "abandon" the social conservatives to pick up more moderates, so much as simply not pander so visibly to them. Their smartest strategy would probably to be to treat them the way the Democrats did black voters for years - pretty much take them for granted and focus on attracting other people. That risks a certain resentment and/or lower turnout, but the political upside is the "who else are they gonna vote for?" thing. Just as most blacks continued to vote Democrat because they liked the alternative even less, most social conservatives would probably stick to the GOP. But if you pander to them too obviously, you DO lose moderates.
Originally Posted By hopemax From the 1980 platform, "Privacy The essence of freedom is the right of law-abiding individuals to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without undue governmental intervention. Yet government in recent years, particularly at the federal level, has overwhelmed citizens with demands for personal information and has accumulated vast amounts of such data through the IRS, the Social Security Administration, the Bureau of the Census, and other agencies. Under certain limited circumstances, such information can serve legitimate societal interests, but there must be protection against abuse." Now the GOP is leading the charge for information gathering in the name of national security. Oppose telecom immunity and your letting the terrorists win.
Originally Posted By ecdc Great topic, 2oony. I know some conservatives see people like me as GOP haters who just wishes the party would go away. The truth is, we're all better off with a healthy, two-party system that offers a clash of ideas and philosophies. One-party rule, although right now our best option, is bad news in the long run, even if it's the party you like. IMO, the GOP went wrong, as others have indicated, with its obsessive embrace of culture war issues for the purpose of winning elections. As they've done this, they've abandoned important principles that set them apart in a positive way - fiscal conservatism and a cautious foreign policy. The economic crisis is the first time in a while that I've felt like conservatives are offering an important perspective to the discussion. We need both sides to tell us the consequences of both action and inaction. When I listen to a back and forth between a conservative and liberal talking head over the economic crisis and its potential solutions and fallouts, I find them both making good points. Conversely, when I listen to a back and forth over, say, gay marriage, I'm embarrassed for the conservative and their transparent attempts to justify the unjustifiable. These social issues have distracted us from real issues. The GOP suddenly became the morality police - we're all the worse off for it. If the GOP continues to embrace the religious right, my guess is there will be a party split someday, just as we've seen before when two wings of a party find themselves increasingly at odds. Sarah Palin seems to be the straw that broke many consevatives' backs. They were rightly insulted at her intellectual shallowness, incuriosity and her clear inability to grasp the issues. Many of them finally stood up and said, "This is no longer good enough for our party. This isn't who we are." It made me feel better about the GOP, that at least they still have people like that in their party.
Originally Posted By DAR <<I think the base of the party has moved farther right on the issue of illegal immigration as well.>> Could you explain that one a little more? I would prefer if people came into this country they went through the proper channels. Though to be fair I don't believe anyone is in favor of illegal immigration.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Could you explain that one a little more?<< It seems to me that some of the rhetoric, especially with groups like the Minute Men Militia and so forth, has ratcheted up in the last few years.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I think the GOP is going to have to abandon the far right if they want to have a viable platform on which to stand in four years. > I hope you're right <They are going to go far right and make themselves totally irrelevant. < And I hope you're wrong Actually I believe the GOP has a distinct chance of a complete schism in he next 4 years - emerging with 2 parties....and out of national election prominence for at least one electioncycle if that does happen.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <But if you pander to them too obviously, you DO lose moderates.< yes you do -- I can attest to that, but as the Democratic party moves further left - lose to whom is the question ? Real moderates will be hard pressed to find either party fits their views --- the 'lesser of 2 evils' scenario likely then exists...which I fear
Originally Posted By mawnck >>as the Democratic party moves further left - lose to whom is the question ?<< Seems to me only the Rushies are accusing the Dems of moving further left at this stage. What happens after Obama takes office remains to be seen, of course.
