What Next for the GOP?

[Louis VI the Fat]

MCain bet his campaign on the extremist block of the Republicans. Maybe he didn't have a choice, but lose he did.

I still wonder what the outcome would've been if McCain had moved to the centre. The 'Clinton Democrats' didn't automatically rush to Obama. Independents and centrists, states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana were up for grabs for a centrist Republican.

I am not a poll God like CountArach, so I am not sure if McCain could've won by moving to the centre like Obama did. But from anecdotal evidence, and even personal preference, I say there were a lot of centrists up for grabs, who were open to a McCain presidency until they were driven away by Palin, by McCain's pandering to the extreme right, by flag waving and 'country first' signs, by a dirty campaign, by McCain ditching his reputiation as an independent Republican.

According to the blog post, we're looking at candidates from four establishments of the GOP: The Populist (either Huck or Palin), the Establishment Conservative (the author suggests Jeb Bush, but that'll never happen in a million years, so it's Romney), the Full-Spectrum Conservative (Jindal), and the National Security Candidate (Gen. Petraeus).

Those are old answers to yesterday's problems. For example, 'National Security' candidates work best when there's a fearmongering president in power.


Besides, it's the economy, stupid! This decides the fate of Democratic candidates.

[Spino]

What's next for the GOP? Self reflection? Soul searching? Re-evaluation of principles? Yes. Maybe. No. More importantly... why bother?

The Democratic party has done nothing to change since its landslide losses to Reagan and its minority years during the GW Bush administration. It learned absolutely nothing from its losses and if anything, has become more stubborn and arrogant and moved further to the left than ever before. One could say that the Democrats are back in power due to nothing more than a cyclical change of events. The Republican party has had enjoyed a great deal of momentum for a very long time now and was due for a fall. Now add GW Bush & the Neo-Conservative movement and boom, fall from grace and we're back to a pre-Reagan Democratic dominated political landscape.

Correction. The Democratic party did learn one thing from those lean years... they learned to move hard to the center/center-right during an election year... only to snap back to the left once elected. Such a strategy worked wonders for Clinton & Obama, no?

Should the Republicans change? Yes, absolutely. Will they? Probably not. Once again I fall on my tired generational argument. The generation currently running the country and dominating both parties possesses neither the will or the ability to engage in true self reflection and re-invent itself. As they saying goes, 'You can't teach an old dog new tricks' and for the controlling generation whose oldest members are in their mid-60s it is a tall order to expect them or their leaders to change their ways. So look for the Republicans to do exactly what the Democrats have done; bide their time until a major factor like the economy, terrorism, etc. takes its toll on the American people thus compelling them to look for new blood and new answers. Once in power it will be more of the same. Wash, rinse, repeat. Same old .

MCain bet his campaign on the extremist block of the Republicans. Maybe he didn't have a choice, but lose he did.

I still wonder what the outcome would've been if McCain had moved to the centre. The 'Clinton Democrats' didn't automatically rush to Obama. Independents and centrists, states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana were up for grabs for a centrist Republican.

I am not a poll God like CountArach, so I am not sure if McCain could've won by moving to the centre like Obama did. But from anecdotal evidence, and even personal preference, I say there were a lot of centrists up for grabs, who were open to a McCain presidency until they were driven away by Palin, by McCain's pandering to the extreme right, by flag waving and 'country first' signs, by a dirty campaign, by McCain ditching his reputiation as an independent Republican.

Those are old answers to yesterday's problems. For example, 'National Security' candidates work best when there's a fearmongering president in power.

Besides, it's the economy, stupid! This decides the fate of Democratic candidates.

Well McCain's history of being a moderate Republican didn't help. He lost but it wasn't a landslide. He had the political misfortune of being associated with a party whose brand had been damaged by an unpopular war, an unpopular president and a massive, global mortgage/credit meltdown that they had very little to do with (and in fairness, did not do enough to stop when they had the chance). I'm pessimistic enough to say that even if McCain had selected a strong running mate like Romney, Giuliani, Thompson or hell, Huckabee, he still would have lost albeit in a much closer race. However you can bet your buttocks that without Sarah Palin the media would have then relegated the VP selection factor to the traditional back burner as it has in the past. Seriously, the media went positively postal on Palin even though she was no better or worse than Quayle or Gorebot ver. 1.0.

Yes, I also wonder how McCain would have fared had the economy been strong and rolling along at a good clip. As the saying goes, 'people vote with their wallets' and clearly most voters were clutching theirs tight when they stepped into the voting booth.

On the other hand Obama's obscenely well funded hype machine kept harping on the 'four more years of George Bush' ad nauseum. Who knows how many sheeple bought into that and jumped on the Obama bandwagon? Sounds snobbish but talk to any successful advertising/marketing executive and they'll show you tangible proof that effective branding does work.

Beyond the issues Obama's past and personal associations would have sunk most candidates but his campaign managed to beat his party's favorite daughter and kept on truckin'. Credit his hype machine, his political savoir-faire and the fact that never before in our history have black folks been hipper or cooler than they are now. If the last 16 years have shown us anything it is that the average American voter is less likely to take into account a candidate's personal character, let alone their real position on the issues than ever before.

Them post-war generation chickens have come home to roost...

[Tribesman]

Well McCain's history of being a moderate Republican didn't help.

That is because he appeared to abandon his history and campaign as if he was Bush III using Bush IIs crew and methods .

[CountArach]

That is because he appeared to abandon his history and campaign as if he was Bush III using Bush IIs crew and methods .

Spot on.

As the campaign wore on the polls showed that more and more people thought he would continue Bush's economic policies.

[gaelic cowboy]

MCain bet his campaign on the extremist block of the Republicans. Maybe he didn't have a choice, but lose he did.

I still wonder what the outcome would've been if McCain had moved to the centre. The 'Clinton Democrats' didn't automatically rush to Obama. Independents and centrists, states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana were up for grabs for a centrist Republican.

Mcain could not move to the centre cos all the party people in the GOP who do all the slog and lick the envelopes and make the phonecalls are right or hard right and think the centre is a dirty word.

As long as the base of the party are these kinds of people it will be a marginal party who requires the other side to mess up instead of offering an alternative.

Since Mcain could not be expected to change the GOP overnight he needed adependable base to work and get out the vote hence Palin was chosen in the end to ensure republicans voted for MCain at least.

All the Demographic change in the US is making these hard right religous types irrelevant and quicker than they ever imagined

[Oleander Ardens]

I too believe that the "conservatives" have won recently because they were able to talk nicely about values and markets but walked unashamingly openly and covertly for the rich and very rich. How most Americans were able to swallow so much bigotry and dishonesty for so long is beyond me, but gives certainly credit to the political cunning of the neoliberals since Reagan.

If Obama has enough political wisdom it might be possible to hammer the Republicans just by success, hoping in the rational sense of the American voters. A hope that might be futile for the Democrats, because George Bush has so deeply ruined the countrly that he might have to spend much political capital for though choices...

Hard to see what the GOP can do anything to counter the pragmatism of the democrats, their ideology was a disaster, but of course they can try to paint themselves as true Americans and the rest as danger. It worked so long, the party has pushed hard to the right, so I really can't image the emergence of a bipartisan, moderate and pragmatic leader on the right anytime soon. Perhaps after a couple of defeats...

[Fragony]

What is this the pax-probama? What is it with this sudden republican need to change anything the basics are a house made of bricks, it's as solid as can be, but it should focus only on economics because republicans just have the right idea.

edit: And what is it with all this 'new future' nonsense, a black man got chosen for president yes, that is exceptional, considering, so at least consider how hard this can slap you in the face. This shouldn't be seen as a revolution of any sorts that is dangerous thinking.

[gaelic cowboy]

What is this the pax-probama? What is it with this sudden republican need to change anything the basics are a house made of bricks, it's as solid as can be, but it should focus only on economics because republicans just have the right idea.

edit: And what is it with all this 'new future' nonsense, a black man got chosen for president yes, that is exceptional, considering, so at least consider how hard this can slap you in the face. This shouldn't be seen as a revolution of any sorts that is dangerous thinking.

Of course your right man its not the new future at all is it unfortunately its actually the new reality.

Republicans must change because their base doesn't care anymore about good sound conservative principles its obsessed with moralism and terror.

The centre is where its at and the centre is where the value of good conservative principle will resonate.

But if they continue to fight about say Darwin or Roe V Wade they will continue to float right and then they will be depending on voters rejecting Obama not accepting the GOP

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Of course your right man its not the new future at all is it unfortunately its actually the new reality.

Republicans must change because their base doesn't care anymore about good sound conservative principles its obsessed with moralism and terror.

The centre is where its at and the centre is where the value of good conservative principle will resonate.

But if they continue to fight about say Darwin or Roe V Wade they will continue to float right and then they will be depending on voters rejecting Obama not accepting the GOP

I disagree. Though the need to re-think and re-focus is obvious given recent results, I believe that most conservatives (and most GOPers) would relish a return to the basic principles of conservative governance.

Smaller Government. Government at the most local possible level. Fiscal responsibility.

[Lemur]

Smaller Government. Government at the most local possible level. Fiscal responsibility.

That reminds me of a convo with the wife. She asked me what Republicans believe in. I explained, using very similar language. "Wow, then why aren't we Republicans?" she asked.

"Because they don't do any of that," I replied.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

That reminds me of a convo with the wife. She asked me what Republicans believe in. I explained, using very similar language. "Wow, then why aren't we Republicans?" she asked.

"Because they don't do any of that," I replied.

[ICantSpellDawg]

That reminds me of a convo with the wife. She asked me what Republicans believe in. I explained, using very similar language. "Wow, then why aren't we Republicans?" she asked.

"Because they don't do any of that," I replied.

So if they did, you'd be on board?