Republicans Lose When They Act Like Democrats
…and vice versa.
The immediate spin after their landslide losses in 2006 from your typical conservative was that the Republicans in Congress were not conservative enough, and that is why they lost. I think that is debatable. They were plenty conservative on a host of issues, and they were also breathtakingly corrupt. But that is an argument for another time. What is true however, is that in an election and in any debate over policy, you must offer a contrast to the voters.
If the choice is between Republican and Republican-lite, they will chose the real thing everytime, the Republican. And the converse is true: if the Republican acts like a Democrat, then the real Democrat is going to win.
The public knows the basic difference between the parties. Republicans are against government regulation and intervention of and into the free market and enterprise. They believe the less government there is, the better, because government is the problem. Democrats believe government can be the solution to problems, depending on the situation. It is not the answer to every question, but in some vital areas, government intervention and regulation is needed to curtail the greed, corruption and malfeasance that always seems to rise up whenever no law is in place.
Now, history, and the public’s mood goes in cycles. Sometimes, we come to a point where the public tires of the government, and like Reagan said, “wants [it] to get off our backs.” And after a while, after the government has not been involved, and after the resulting corruption and greed has endangered the very fabric of society itself, the public swings back to the government as a possible solution to the problem.
We liberals were angered in the early 2000s when the national Democratic Party decided to be Republican lite and not challenge Bush and his minions on anything. And that led to losses to the Republicans and Bush in 2002 and 2004. Only when Democrats started portraying the actual differences between the parties again did they win, in 2006.
In 2008, both John McCain and Bill Lee are trying to blur the distinctions between them and their opponents, because they feel their Republican brand is so damaged and so disfavored by the public that they can win no other way. McCain, with his new $300 billion additional mortgage bailout (which seems redundant, because wasn’t the $700 billion supposed to cover that anyway?); and Bill Lee, with his wanting to split DNREC into two cabinet level agencies.
A Republican wanting to create more government agencies, in fact, two agencies to do the job of one? A Republican wanted to expand DNREC when in the past Delaware Republicans have wanted to eliminate DNREC?
Now Lee’s actual plan may have some merit, if such a split will in fact result in efficiency, a reduction in cost, and more regulation and sanction of polluters. But the Markell-Denn plan is trying to make the one agency we have now, DNREC, more efficient before taking the drastic step of creating more and probably redundant agencies.
This is rich — two agencies, neither with the adequate teeth and resources to sufficiently address their missions. And did you notice how it gets paid for? More fines and efficiencies. Right.
DNREC is currently understaffed for its work (there are a great many open positions in key enforcement departments) and I’d bet (but I don’t know) that there hasn’t been a top to bottom review of the laws and regs on the books to get them into the 21st century. But there are laws to restrict and punish polluters. They need to enforce them and those laws don’t just enforce themselves.
Actually the parks end of things might improve!
DelDem-I appreciate your posting this, and will follow up on this attempt. I am at a loss of how in the world as TNJ reports this will mainstream anything. Perhaps, for a private home-owner/individual, which may be good–but couldn’t their situation be tagged as “fastrack”? Where I’m going w/ this…as a community advocate (school board member for one), we can’t move school building plans fast enough thru ALL the state agencies that MUST by law sign off on them for approval. DNREC being one of the toughest. I doubt a new agency won’t be added to that list. I think we are up to about 11 agencies already that must give their blessing/mandates for this approval to ever see the light of day. Our particular approval list runs the gammit from DelDot to Natural History (oh shoot — brain freeze–what department looks for arrowheads, and fossilized shark’s teeth on your property?) Anyway, my point being..this is troubling and I want, and will have to find out more. Thanks for the direction.
P.S. See that Del Lib –that’s what I’m talking about counting on you!!!
DD
Ignoring the DNREC angle (which bemuses me), I think you have a very valid point–maybe two of them.
One is the cyclical nature of the popular will. I think that a lot more complex factors drive that than simply corruption, etc. etc., but I think you do as well (how much can you say in a blog post, anyway?).
Two is the party identity thing. I think the social conservatives have so damaged the GOP brand that McCain and Lee had no real choice but to run away from it, and you’re absolutely right: GOP lite offends the social con base, so they won’t support it, and GOP lite is insufficient to win over people who tend Democratic. It, like desperate populism, is generally the sign of a losing candidacy.
That’s why I think there is a very real chance that, if the GOP cannot reinvent itself after this disastrous election, we may well see its replacement by another party (obviously, I hope that party is libertarian in nature, but my wishes are distinct from my analysis).
If this happened, what you would see in 2012 is an even weaker GOP and an emerging third opposition party that might take 10-12% of the vote. This would insure a two-term Democratic lock on the White House and Congress, but by 2016 the GOP would be fading out, and–as you point out–the natural cycle would probably be starting to work against the Dems.
Yeah, yeah, I know, long-term fantasizing, but still interesting.
Elizabeth Dole in 2012!
I think that is very possible Steve, especially if it a massive landslide for Obama that brings 60+ Democratic Senators and 30+ more Democratic Representatives. The GOP will be shut out of everything, and will also have no effective tactics to oppose Democratic plans.
And if McConnell is defeated, then there is no natural Republican leader on a national level. Without an unifying leader, the GOP will devolve into civil war, finally, between the disparate factions.
How does it break apart. What will be the third party and what will be the weak GOP remnants?
I see the GOP returning to the 1950’s business model, and ignoring social issues completely. I see the GOP returning to social libertarian roots. Indeed, if the GOP really wishes to recover, it will embrace much of libertarianism.
The third party will be the Whackos. The Social Reich Wing Conservatives who hate gays and equal rights. They are more apt to not be tied to the institutional GOP anyway.
That’s why I think there is a very real chance that, if the GOP cannot reinvent itself after this disastrous election, we may well see its replacement by another party (obviously, I hope that party is libertarian in nature, but my wishes are distinct from my analysis).
And people accuse Democrats of being dreamers.
Face it Steve, your part has been hijacked by people who think the earth is 10,000 years old.
to exanpd my point and take in DD’s comment. The whacko’s are not going anywhere.
They think that they built the modern GOP. They own it, and with “leaders” like McCain bending over backwards to agree that they own it – why should they go anywhere.
Steve’s party (that is to say the party that Steve votes for while holding his nose) is going back to where it belongs. The institutional minority party that gets to carp about everything, but get no real say in any decision making.
At a national level, the GOP (as you note already DD) has responded to defeat by calling for more purity, which is likely why John McCain can’t find himself now. I don’t doubt that if they lose badly on Nov 4, they will respond similarly — a call for more pure conservatives.
What is amusing about that, is that they really want that to be more social conservatives — the fiscal conservationism doesn’t mean much to the folks most interested in power.
Personally, I think that the smartest GOPers are going to be the ones who get back to some rational fiscal conservatism and who leave the God, guns and gays set to create their own party.
jason
For the 90,000,000th time: I don’t vote for the GOP.
Where did you get the idea I did?
I am in favor of gay marriage, abortion rights, a non-interventionist foreign policy….
How the hell could I vote for the GOP?
I want to be part of an emerging Libertarian party, not rebuild the GOP.
At least try to get it straight.
I don’t see a Republican renaissance forming around libertarian ideals.
If libertarians want to advance their cause they are going to have to start voting for Libertarians.
Libertarianism has lately mostly just been a cover for voting Republican, based on the fraudulent belief that Republicans are more libertarian than Democrats.
Lots of L’s will spout off “A plague on both your houses, both parties are the same” and then go vote Republican.
Steve – as a practice, we require 100 Million before we accept assurances from conservatives and libertarians. 🙂
anon
I agree with you; I was unclear in my original comment: I see the original GOP going more whacko as jason says, and potentially (I’d hope) a new party emerging around libertarians who are not GOP lite.
I agree that lots of Libertarians have foolishly voted GOP because of fiscal issues (boy, what a mistake), but as with the Boston Tea Party inside the Libertarian movement, which is roughly analogous to progressives inside the Democratic Party, there is a small but active group of Libertarians trying to build a party that matches up fiscal responsibility with (here, I will hold my nose to use the term) a lot of progressive/liberal/left social values (gay marriage, abortion, etc.).
jason–if I wasn’t clear enough before, when I don’t vote Libertarian, generally the party that I hold my nose and vote for–is yours.
geek
They are printing my 1,000,000 now, even as we speak.
Do you care if the ink is wet?
J….more likely is that the fantasy world you guys have set up for the Obamination will not come to pass….and instead you shall be set upon like chickens in a pit bull pound.
You’re setting your guy up for a huge fall. The corrupt culture of DC will not go away. The ‘pubs got beat down over eight years bit by bit. Same with the D’s in the eight prior. This time you are promising something that has never been delivered, and quite simply, will not be delivered.
The party that will likely unravel from that fallout will be the Ds.