GOP Heading To Fringe Party Status
One of the GOP's no-name, no-heft US Senators keeps up the intra-party, post-election sniping by blaming John McCain's loss on a failure to adhere to party principles - - something of an oxymoron as George W. Bush follows The New American Socialism and other Big Guvmint programs that are out-McCaining McCain.
If Sen. DeMint thinks the way for the GOP to win a national election is to run farther to the Right, great. That will push the Republican Party towards minority, fringe status - - strong in portions of the west and south, and among Evangelical Christians, but far from the mainstream.
Obama's was a victory based on inclusion and pragmatism. He ran away from ideology, basically as a centrist, especially on foreign policy, and followed a political patth to the White House similar to the moderate road taken by Bill Clinton.
Of course, the Obama campaign was organized far differently, so the internal dynamics and strategies were separate, perhaps unique.
But Obama proved that it is in the middle that election margins are identified and expanded, and this seems to be a lesson that DeMint is missing.
Fine with me.
3 comments:
Chapter 11 is the only way to go with this problem. Get rid of the union goons and let Detroit compete.
"Obama's victory was based on pragmatism..."
Not exactly. It was based on a disgust with GB II and the Republican Party that enabled him. That and smoke and mirrors. If one listened carefully and critically to Obama, it was easy to poke holes in his arguments. As McCain has no principles, it was not credible for him to make a principled argument. It is likely that having chosen in McCain one of the worst possible candidates, Republicans sealed their fate. Even with a poor candidate, Republicans were not that far behind. Obama's "landslide" would have been reversed if but one in 33 voters had flipped sides. (46-52%)
I remember in times past a requiem for the Democrat party, and yet they lived on. Probable that the same will happen with the Republican Party, even if they do not deserve it. Just wait until the Democrat policies fail. Oh, we do not have to, as GB II followed largely Democrat policies as he increased domestic, non- homeland security, non-defense spending at a faster rate than any president ever. (See Cato report on this.)
Obama's "pragmatism" is belied by his voting record. I believe a CREDIBLE candidate could and would have beat him.
Ken Van Doren
To Ken: After Obama's win in Iowa, I said that he was going to win the nomination because he was a phenom. I have seen this in elections: a tipping point is reached early and no amount of strategy is going to change that.
I believe this carried over into the general election.
Certainly the economic collapse helped. As did the McCain candidacy - - disorganized, unfocused.
And this was my point about pragmatism. The Obama campaign had it. The public assessed Obama by his campaign, which as a nearly-two-year process, was actually a useful lens through which to see an Obama presidency.
What will happen now? Too soon to know.
Post a Comment