The NRCCC, Tom Cole, decides not to be Baghdad Bob:
Following the victory by Democrat Travis Childers in tonight’s special election, National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Cole (Okla.) issued what can only be called a declaration of surrender. …
This whole statement is an admission by Cole that he does not now how House Republicans can win in November as a group, so each member better protect himself or herself. To his credit, Cole has been warning his members that they need to run as outsiders this fall, but beyond that general admonition, the Oklahoma Republican can’t show them a path to victory. It’s an extraordinary statement by the head of a national campaign committee, but it is not one that’s going to inspire any warm feelings from his GOP colleagues.
“Scatter! Save yourselves!” [via Ben Smith]
Or, in other language:
We Are Totally Frakked [Mark Krikorian]
If the GOP can’t hold on to a House seat in the Deep South that Bush won by 25 points, it’s going to be 1974 all over again.
Yeah. I’m thinking this is the right metaphor for the fall.
But hey, this too will pass.
Update: More thoughts at ABC.
Update again: Huh.
One House leadership aide told Politics Nation: “To lose two Southern seats in two weeks, I mean, oh my God.”
Yeah.
Update the third: 1974 & 1976 were terrible. 1978 saw the return of measures from the bottom-up — property tax revolts, primary challenges, etc. 1980 saw a resurgence.
It can be done.
But before that, trouble is coming, whether the presidency is saved or not.
5 responses so far ↓
Greg // May 14, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Nothing is permanent. I do think that Goldwater Republicanism is passing though, at least for the time being. It had a good 40 year run, but I think people are sick of it (just as they were sick of the previous 30 years of New Dealism). These things run in cycles. Look at the bright side Ben, you are young enough to be in on the ground floor of the new conservative wave. ;)
Ben // May 14, 2008 at 3:55 pm
It’s something I’ve seen coming for years. The Bush/Rove strategy was one of squeezing one last majority victory out of a coalition whose time was passing.
In a sense, it’s a victim of its own successes (Goldwaterism, Reaganism, or whatever you want to call it) — inflation is low, we’ve had relatively steady economic growth for twenty-five years, the Cold War ended, free trade became political orthodoxy. And crime is a much less urgent/difficult problem than it was three decades ago.
The most popular parts were enacted and have become (relatively) entrenched. [Even people with leftist inclinations like Obama and Clinton wouldn't dream of bringing back 70% (let alone 94%) top marginal tax rates, however much they might have wanted to twenty-five years ago.]
Parties run out of steam and move away from what drove their rise. A Republican Party that begins to use the levers of government to perpetuate its own power, that creates new programs and new bureaucracies — that’s one that isn’t doing what it was elected to do, and therefore one that is ripe for defeat.
That’s not to say it will be — things can change between now and November, so the unexpected shouldn’t be unexpected, especially this year — but it would be in the natural order of things for it to happen.
***
If Obama wins in the fall, we’ll see whether he’ll be a transitional or a transformational figure.
[I actually see him more as the former than the latter -- a sort of second Jimmy Carter, with a similar national mood leading to his rise -- but we've been surprised before. The lefties didn't think Reagan had it in him, I'm sure, and so I could be wrong about BHO.]
***
Fortunately, the American political system isn’t designed in such a way that ideas need political sponsorship to enter the system. The ballot initiatives, the direct democracy provisions — these ensure that if popular support is there, they can punch through, state by state.
So even if the party is sick, the ideas will do just fine.
ramesh // May 14, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I think the party is sick because people are tired of the ideas. I mean, there are a significant number of Republicans who think they lost in 2006 because of spending. These people are delusional.
Only when they get their Bill Clinton/DLC, really reach back to the center, will the GOP get back on track. McCain could’ve been that guy, but it’s too early, Schwarznegger would be ideal if he were natural-born… anyway, it’s a two party system, I’m sure it will happen, the question is if it happens in ‘08, ‘10, ‘12, or later.
Homin Lee // May 14, 2008 at 8:39 pm
My college friends will attest to this, but I made the guarantee in early 2003 (and bet wines for that, too) that GOP will be bitchslapped in 2006 and lose the presidency in 2008.
I based that entirely on voter fatigue and the astonishing administrative incompetence I had witnessed from Bush and his government. Dems may not win the presidency this year, but I am pretty sure I read the historical currents correctly as you did.
I think many neo-con types (most of them orthodox jews and business majors) who laughed at me back then are probably having second thoughts right now. My biggest schadenfreude comes from the fact that some of them were so passionate about their party that they went on to work for GOP bigwigs in the Congress after college. As a result, most of them will lose their jobs in DC after this year. Now that’s wasted youth.
For me, 2003 was comparable to a year in Weimar Republic. It really sucked. I am very glad that those times have passed.
So there. My little personal vindication.
Boris // May 14, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Ben, Obama has already revolutionized American politics with the way he has run his campaign. Even you have been blogging about this. He is not Jimmy Carter, and it is very funny that this is the comparison you repeatedly push. Under Obama, the Democratic Party is in position to solidify its institutional strength for the next 20 years, by which time the demographics of the country will start to tell with the rise of the Hispanic vote. Also, the social issues that keep the Republicans afloat will inevitably lose resonance as time goes on. That is where the future lies.
By the nature of the two-party system, the Republican Party will move in a way that maintains an equilibrium, but I have a hard time believing that this will be a move to the right. I think the Cameron example is a good illustration for where the future of the Republican Party lies.
Leave a Comment