The Bums Rush (a vote) Posted by: Jon Henke
on Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Many rightwing and right-leaning bloggers have been discussing the upcoming Republican leadership races and participating in conference calls with the candidates. It is to the credit of each and every candidate that they are willing to be interviewed by the bloggers. If nothing else, it is at least a sign that Republicans are recognizing the importance of the new media in shaping grassroots opinion and the goals of the Party.
We're not done with the conference calls yet, but I can offer a few general thoughts. The one thing that will remain a problem is the dissolution of the Republican "Brand"
Like McQ, I think the Republicans are making a huge, unnecessary mistake by rushing this vote. Elect in haste, regret at leisure.
Voters have already made it clear that they want to throw the bums out. If the Republican Congressional leaders don't follow suit, I don't believe the voters will be done bum-throwing.
John Boehner may not have been The Problem, but it's not at all clear that he's The Solution, either.
Appearances matter. Image is everything.
Most of the issues over which the Republican Party lost their majority — scandals, Iraq, the 6-year itch — are transitory. The one thing that will remain a problem is the dissolution of the Republican "Brand": "the limited government Daddy Party".
To rebuild that Brand, the GOP must have new leadership that doesn't bear the blame for past transgressions.
The Republican leadership must treat President Bush like the Big Government, nanny-state abomination that he is.
Republicans cannot simply oppose the Democrats — they must offer a positive agenda telling Americans what they would do to limit government (including themselves) should they regain the majority.
The Republican leadership must treat President Bush like the Big Government, nanny-state abomination that he is.
Ed Morrissey recently wrote of a fellow blogger who was "expressing his despondency after the losses in the midterm elections". I have exactly the opposite reaction. If it's true, as I've often written, that...
"Minority Parties are always a little bit libertarian, if only to restrict the power of the majority party; majority Parties are always anti-libertarian, if only because, hey cool, power!"
...then a Republican return to the minority should give them the opportunity to rediscover their anti-State tendencies. I'm never more interested in, and excited about, the Republican Party than when they are the opposition Party. Their challenge, then, will be to figure out how to get around the fact that, while "most Americans favor smaller government in the abstract", it "never translates into support for cutting specific government programs."
That's a problem that the 'limited government' set would do well to answer, and fast.
Meanwhile, I'm never more interested in, and excited about, the Republican Party than when they are the opposition Party. At last, they might be persuaded to actually vote against the State.
Agreed on both points. Party hardliners confuse me with their doublethink... "the government is good, unless this guy is in control" and "the government is bad unless we’re in control" respectively.
I would like to see the disintegration of both parties and the formation of three new ones from their ashes; Libertarian, Socialist, and Conservative. WOuld that not be a more accurate depiction of politics than "Democrats" and "Republicans"? Or am I getting way ahead of myself and this topic?
