What's Next for the Republican Party?

[robertlouis]

UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE

Archconservatives: anger, denial but no acceptance of Obama's victory
By Tom Cohen, CNN

November 21, 2012 -- Updated 0058 GMT (0858 HKT)



Die-hard conservatives blame Mitt Romney, electoral fraud and liberal conspiracies
Few discuss demographic shifts in America
Anti-Obama sentiments abound in conservative post-election commentary
One blogger proposes an Electoral College boycott

Washington (CNN) -- Step by step, die-hard conservatives are confronting their grief over President Barack Obama's re-election.

But judging from blog posts and other public pronouncements, many remain stuck somewhere between denial and anger, very far from acceptance.

So far this week, prolific blogger Judson Phillips on Tea Party Nation has called for boycotting the Electoral College to prevent validating the election result and lamented the triumph of liberalism in destroying national unity and therefore America's greatness.

Over at RedState.com, a more sophisticated political analysis echoes calls by Republican leaders to better communicate conservative principles instead of softening or dropping them.

"There'll be no hand-wringing here and there sure as hell won't be any apologies for fighting for what we believe in," founder and CNN contributor Erick Erickson wrote Tuesday.

"Republicans are not successful when they run campaigns as the rich patrician out to make government more efficient so it can be more helpful," said another Erickson post Tuesday. "Republicans win with conservative populists who run as men who pulled themselves up in life fighting big government and its cronies."

Some acceptance has been necessary. On Tuesday, tea party favorite Rep. Allen West of Florida conceded in his race for re-election after initially alleging electoral fraud.

Little of the discussion focuses on the changing demographics of the country, identified by exit polls and many analysts as a major factor in both Obama's 2008 victory to become the nation's first African-American president and his re-election on November 6.

In particular, Obama received overwhelming support from the nation's fastest-growing demographic -- Hispanic Americans -- to cause some high-profile conservatives including Fox radio and television host Sean Hannity to soften their stance on immigration reform.
Lessons learned from the 2012 vote
Taking stock of tea party after election
LaTourette: Tea Party is not the GOP

Overall, though, hard-core conservatives continue to reject that they are a minority in a country built on the core principle of liberty that they embrace.

Instead, the initial reactions and subsequent attempts to explain what happened sought scapegoats, such as what right-wing critics describe as a deficient Republican challenger in Mitt Romney, electoral theft or a liberal-dominated media industry that is part of a broader Marxist effort dating back decades to undermine the nation.

Study: Fox, MSNBC got more extreme

On November 10, Phillips alleged that more votes than registered voters in several Florida precincts were part of Democratic efforts to "steal the election" against West.

There was no immediate posting Tuesday in response to West's concession.

Six days later, Phillips took aim at Romney, calling the former Massachusetts governor a "flip-flopping liberal who ran a content-free campaign."

In a response to Phillips' post, one writer ranted about what he alleged were "the sexual perversions and drug use of the Obamas," the president's "forged birth certificate" and "voter fraud of biblical proportions."

"Why are we talking secession instead of removing the New York Times and supporting citizens' Grand Jury indicments against this unbelievable treason, felonies and usurpations raining down on us on a daily basis?" said the post attributed to Royce Latham of Penngrove, California.

Timothy Stanley: Don't dismiss secession talk

On Sunday, Phillips proposed an action plan -- getting Electoral College voters in states won by Romney to boycott the validation of the election result by the December 17 deadline.

"The 12th Amendment specifies the quorum or the necessary number of states for the College to act, is 2/3," Phillips wrote. "In other words, if 17 states refuse to participate, the Electoral College does not have a quorum."

Without a quorum to decide the presidency, he continued, the Republican-led U.S. House will decide and presumably choose Romney. Phillips acknowledged such a move would set a "dangerous precedent," but added that "the situation is so grim we really have no other choice."

"Does anyone really believe America can survive four more years of Barack Obama?" he wrote, saying the president will seek to "transform America from that shining city on a hill into a third world shantytown, with massive unemployment and a corrupt government."

What's next for Obama election organization?

The next day, Phillips sounded more resigned, lamenting what he called "the triumph of liberalism in America" that he said was "destroying our national unity and by extension destroying the freedom."

"In America, until now we have always identified ourselves as Americans," he wrote. "The balkanization that has been pushed by the hard left has one goal in mind. That is the end of America as a great nation. They are perilously close to succeeding."

Tuesday brought his attack on a carbon tax being discussed by some on both sides in Congress as a step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions that contributed to climate change.

While challenging "the mythical man-made global warming," Phillips also said a carbon tax would create a "massive new tax stream" for liberals bent on growing government.

U.N.: Greenhouse gases set record in 2011

The focus on a single issue certain to generate legislative and public debate signaled some change in the response to the election.

To Phillips and other conservatives, any increase in revenue goes against their goal of shrinking the federal government by cutting spending.

"It is time for conservative activists to make the case to the American people that we have far more government than we can afford, or than we want, no matter what our politicians may think, or what deals they may be willing to cut with each other to keep spending other people's money until we are all bankrupt," said a Tuesday post on Tea Party Nation by Bruce Donnelly of Fox River Grove, Illinois.

GOP, Dems seek common ground on fiscal cliff

Donnelly called for "organizing voters to rein in the politicians, rather than let them keep playing the game by their rules with our money."

"It's worth your effort to organize voters in your community and apply real political pressure for change, because if we just keep playing the game by their rules, your own financial situation will keep getting worse, rather than better," he continued.

"The politicians keep offering free stuff with other people's money, playing us all for fools. It's time to wake up the voters in every corner of America to the fact that they have been conned by these snake oil salesmen and their well-rehearsed lies and false promises," Donnelly said.

In the end, a reviled Democrat in the White House may mean more followers of conservative websites such as Tea Party Nation and RedState.com. No one seems happy about the better business prospects, at least for now.

[Prospero]

That's a depressing read, RobertLouis. What hope for reconciliation with such noxious and divisive myths being propagated by the right and being believed by the gullible.

[Willie Escalade]

The "United" States of America...

[Stavros]

The post mortems and the whining are of no importance. What matters is how the Republican Party behaves in Congress and how the RNC goes about re-defining its principles and policies, and with which intellectual leadership. I may have been wrong about Petaeus, and believe McChrystal is not interested, but the GOP could conceivably go for a military man, which hasn't happened for some years, and someone who would appeal to a broader range of Americans, though whether they can find someone who is charismatic, articulate and shares whatever brand of conservatism they want I cannot say. Otherwise, it would appear to be down to House representatives, Senators and Governors, as far as leadership goes, although one should not rule out the role played in the back office by gurus like Karl Rove, although I don't know how much influence he has these days. If the party is badly divided, of course, then visible movement is not likely in the near future.

[natina]

Death

[broncofan]

The post mortems and the whining are of no importance. What matters is how the Republican Party behaves in Congress and how the RNC goes about re-defining its principles and policies, and with which intellectual leadership. .

Great post. I particularly like this last part where you ask with which leadership. For their own sake they don't want the people doing the whining to be the same people re-organizing their party. It's not just that the whining has shown a lack of political sense, and a lack of judgment generally, but the people who are whining in many cases represent the social special interests (pro-life, anti-gay, culture war fearmongers). I think any reorganized Republican party is best organized as a sort of pro-corporate, small government, strong military party. The social policies I think are a net loss for them, though I could be wrong. They are best holding on to the social policies but having them be less rhetorically conspicuous on the campaign trail. You want the votes of those who are pro-life, you just don't want them grabbing a megaphone and being the face of the party imo.

[yodajazz]

UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE

Archconservatives: anger, denial but no acceptance of Obama's victory
By Tom Cohen, CNN

November 21, 2012 -- Updated 0058 GMT (0858 HKT)



Die-hard conservatives blame Mitt Romney, electoral fraud and liberal conspiracies
Few discuss demographic shifts in America
Anti-Obama sentiments abound in conservative post-election commentary
One blogger proposes an Electoral College boycott

Washington (CNN) -- Step by step, die-hard conservatives are confronting their grief over President Barack Obama's re-election.

But judging from blog posts and other public pronouncements, many remain stuck somewhere between denial and anger, very far from acceptance.

So far this week, prolific blogger Judson Phillips on Tea Party Nation has called for boycotting the Electoral College to prevent validating the election result and lamented the triumph of liberalism in destroying national unity and therefore America's greatness.

Over at RedState.com, a more sophisticated political analysis echoes calls by Republican leaders to better communicate conservative principles instead of softening or dropping them.

"There'll be no hand-wringing here and there sure as hell won't be any apologies for fighting for what we believe in," founder and CNN contributor Erick Erickson wrote Tuesday.

"Republicans are not successful when they run campaigns as the rich patrician out to make government more efficient so it can be more helpful," said another Erickson post Tuesday. "Republicans win with conservative populists who run as men who pulled themselves up in life fighting big government and its cronies."

Some acceptance has been necessary. On Tuesday, tea party favorite Rep. Allen West of Florida conceded in his race for re-election after initially alleging electoral fraud.

Little of the discussion focuses on the changing demographics of the country, identified by exit polls and many analysts as a major factor in both Obama's 2008 victory to become the nation's first African-American president and his re-election on November 6.

In particular, Obama received overwhelming support from the nation's fastest-growing demographic -- Hispanic Americans -- to cause some high-profile conservatives including Fox radio and television host Sean Hannity to soften their stance on immigration reform.
Lessons learned from the 2012 vote
Taking stock of tea party after election
LaTourette: Tea Party is not the GOP

Overall, though, hard-core conservatives continue to reject that they are a minority in a country built on the core principle of liberty that they embrace.

Instead, the initial reactions and subsequent attempts to explain what happened sought scapegoats, such as what right-wing critics describe as a deficient Republican challenger in Mitt Romney, electoral theft or a liberal-dominated media industry that is part of a broader Marxist effort dating back decades to undermine the nation.

Study: Fox, MSNBC got more extreme

On November 10, Phillips alleged that more votes than registered voters in several Florida precincts were part of Democratic efforts to "steal the election" against West.

There was no immediate posting Tuesday in response to West's concession.

Six days later, Phillips took aim at Romney, calling the former Massachusetts governor a "flip-flopping liberal who ran a content-free campaign."

In a response to Phillips' post, one writer ranted about what he alleged were "the sexual perversions and drug use of the Obamas," the president's "forged birth certificate" and "voter fraud of biblical proportions."

"Why are we talking secession instead of removing the New York Times and supporting citizens' Grand Jury indicments against this unbelievable treason, felonies and usurpations raining down on us on a daily basis?" said the post attributed to Royce Latham of Penngrove, California.

Timothy Stanley: Don't dismiss secession talk

On Sunday, Phillips proposed an action plan -- getting Electoral College voters in states won by Romney to boycott the validation of the election result by the December 17 deadline.

"The 12th Amendment specifies the quorum or the necessary number of states for the College to act, is 2/3," Phillips wrote. "In other words, if 17 states refuse to participate, the Electoral College does not have a quorum."

Without a quorum to decide the presidency, he continued, the Republican-led U.S. House will decide and presumably choose Romney. Phillips acknowledged such a move would set a "dangerous precedent," but added that "the situation is so grim we really have no other choice."

"Does anyone really believe America can survive four more years of Barack Obama?" he wrote, saying the president will seek to "transform America from that shining city on a hill into a third world shantytown, with massive unemployment and a corrupt government."

What's next for Obama election organization?

The next day, Phillips sounded more resigned, lamenting what he called "the triumph of liberalism in America" that he said was "destroying our national unity and by extension destroying the freedom."

"In America, until now we have always identified ourselves as Americans," he wrote. "The balkanization that has been pushed by the hard left has one goal in mind. That is the end of America as a great nation. They are perilously close to succeeding."

Tuesday brought his attack on a carbon tax being discussed by some on both sides in Congress as a step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions that contributed to climate change.

While challenging "the mythical man-made global warming," Phillips also said a carbon tax would create a "massive new tax stream" for liberals bent on growing government.

U.N.: Greenhouse gases set record in 2011

The focus on a single issue certain to generate legislative and public debate signaled some change in the response to the election.

To Phillips and other conservatives, any increase in revenue goes against their goal of shrinking the federal government by cutting spending.

"It is time for conservative activists to make the case to the American people that we have far more government than we can afford, or than we want, no matter what our politicians may think, or what deals they may be willing to cut with each other to keep spending other people's money until we are all bankrupt," said a Tuesday post on Tea Party Nation by Bruce Donnelly of Fox River Grove, Illinois.

GOP, Dems seek common ground on fiscal cliff

Donnelly called for "organizing voters to rein in the politicians, rather than let them keep playing the game by their rules with our money."

"It's worth your effort to organize voters in your community and apply real political pressure for change, because if we just keep playing the game by their rules, your own financial situation will keep getting worse, rather than better," he continued.

"The politicians keep offering free stuff with other people's money, playing us all for fools. It's time to wake up the voters in every corner of America to the fact that they have been conned by these snake oil salesmen and their well-rehearsed lies and false promises," Donnelly said.

In the end, a reviled Democrat in the White House may mean more followers of conservative websites such as Tea Party Nation and RedState.com. No one seems happy about the better business prospects, at least for now.

There are lots of crazy assertions here by conservatives. But the most ridiculous here to me, is the one saying, 'liberalism is destroying the national unity.' Now people of which political view are talking about succession? Romney just happened to get caught with his "47%" remark, but many, many people knew that this type of thinking was prevalent in conservative circles. I saw this type of comments numerous times in news article comments on Yahoo News, for example. I think lots of those types of ideas are perpetrated by entertainers, such as Rush Limbaugh. It's really a form of hate. The core of liberalism is believing in the positive potential of all people. Yet it talked about in disease like terms. That's a form of hate.

Some conservatives say that those who feel that tax rates for the top bracket, should be the same as they were in 2000, when the US had a budget surplus, as class warfare. No, if 8 million jobs are lost in for years, or a million home foreclosures, or seniors lose their life assets to medical bills, shouldn't we as a nation feel some compassion by those in crisis? And what about the wars, we have fought and thousands of people gave their lives for? I really feel the conservative movement is devoid of human compassion, except for the unborn. And they dont seem to have that much compassion for the woman carrying the fetus, either. Saying that people are poor, because they are lazy or untalented, denies the reality of life. What about people that have strokes, are car accidents, etc? For conservatives it seems to me to mostly about money. An average person has to spend time fighting large corporations, as the make new rules, or charge new fees at their whim. Yet all the conservatives talk about is small government, denying the reality that the pursuit of profits, can even justify slavery. I recommend that they drop the hating, and respect all human life, once they are born.

[Stavros]

Broncofan, YodaJazz:
You are both right, but there is sometimes a tendency for the bitterness of defeat to accentuate the extremes in a party, so that in the early phase of defeat it appears to turn inwards, rather than expand out to the constituency is has failed to win to its arguments.

This happened to the Labour Party following its defeat in 1979 when it adopted policies which were deemed too extreme by the British public; although it did not happen to the Conservatives when they lost power in 1997, they appeared to be in disarray over issues such as membership of the European Union, and to some extent have not really been able to re-brand themselves with a sufficiently distinct set of policies, which is why they failed to gain the majority of seats in the Commons at the last election.

This is but an hypothesis, but if the Republicans in Congress return to the tactics that they used in the last session, and thereby alienate the voters, the prospects for them in the mid-term elections (2014?) could present Obama with a Democrat majority in both houses -if the economy has picked up by then this will also be a plus factor and Obama could spend his last two years able to do what he wants, more or less. The alternative scenario is that the Republicans speak with a different voice, reaching out to those communities and indidivuals they have alienated, and improve their rehabilitation in the mid-term on the back of a disappointing economic record.

However, I don't think it is that easy for a major political party to change in a short space of time, and the prominence of religion in US Politics -as it is perceived to be- may now be the weakest element of Republican Party politics, even if people like Todd Akin are extreme even by their standards (and a gift to the Democrats for that reason).
People don't like extremes of anything, and the strident tones of some Republicans suggests that they also need better PR.
News today is that Jeb Bush may be in the frame for 2016, but then who else is there whose names were not mentioned before?

[broncofan]

It will be interesting to see what happens if they do have another setback in 2014 mid-term elections. If by then they have continued to assume that their failures are the result of not being conservative enough, will they then take a step back? Will they do it before then?

I think you're right that religion has a major place in U.S politics and even if they are careful with how they present the social/cultural issues, they won't be able to mute it entirely. In my lifetime, neither party has ever really gained total supremacy. It is sort of strange that not only do we have a virtual two party system but the two parties have had nearly equal support, though varying greatly by region, for some time now. I have not been politically conscious though for that many years so maybe you can provide some historical perspective on that Stavros.

But what we seem to have here is a Republican party that when defeated narrowly is pursuing what I think is a failing strategy. I don't know if we have a trend, but if we do, it will be very interesting to see what happens if they become a clear underdog in national elections. What would it be like in this country to have a two-party system where one party is the perpetual minority? I am not saying we are there or even close to there, but since our government is set up to provide checks and balances between the branches, such a break for either party would be an interesting dynamic. I also wonder how shrill either party would get if they consistently lost presidential and congressional elections.

I know, premature at best, but I think an interesting hypothetical. Part of the problem the Republicans are having is speaking with one voice. They have a lot of options. Often when someone wants to make the right choice so badly they vacillate between equally good options and fail to choose one. They need a vision and to stick with that vision.

[broncofan]

You mentioned Jeb Bush Stavros. I don't know too much about him except that he is the smarter of that Bush generation. But it raises the interesting point that we cannot underestimate the power of a charismatic politician to change the public image of a party. Barack Obama did that for liberals, who were coming across as stale, weak-willed, even pathetic during the Bush years. He was an intelligent self-made man from a minority background who stepped onto the stage and presented himself as balanced and sensible. An enlightened but not elitist (despite the claims) alternative to what the Republicans were offering.

The Republicans could use someone like this to help their brand. Not a copy, but someone who is serious, is not vulnerable to attacks for having a history of making controversial comments. I still love the General idea for them. Generals have to hold their political opinions close to the vest and so there is not much history to criticize. They also can present a sort of duty bound, no nonsense air to their candidacy. I guess we cannot ignore the possibility that Republicans find someone fresh and better than the current candidates in the coming years.