What magical, mystical neorepublican indica bud are you smoking? I mean - Christine Todd Whitman? As I started reading your hypothesis I found myself saying "Nikki Haley?" and if you're trying to remember the name of that pretty snake with shitty policies over there somewhere, you aren't really presaging success. Thing of it is, anybody running against anybody in 2020 exists right now. They have some form of political presence. And they're either part of the Clusterfuck 2016 GOP Klown Kar or they're fucking hiding in a spider hole somewhere. Which means they have to pop up some point in the next 28 months and try to out-Clinton Clinton, who, by your own words, was married to the guy who "co-opted all the moderate Republican programs, renamed them, spun the story around, and knocked the R's off their balance. It took them until Mitt Romney to find their feet again." I mean, Jindal's dead. The Bush legacy is done. Meanwhile, Mitch McConnell is trying to get the tame crazies to come out for gun rights on the thinnest fragment of an excuse so that the feral crazies don't drag the party any closer to Ted Nugent than it already is. The Republicans, if they're lucky, get to run Bloomberg in 2020. If they're LUCKY. You think the Tea Party Brownshirts are going to rally behind a centrist New York Jew billionaire? Meanwhile you've got Trump's off-leash crazies hating on Fox News. I had a boss who pointed out that the Democrats of 2004 were a lot closer to the Republicans of 1964 than they were the Democrats of 1964, who were closer to the Green Party of 2004. I think the thing that everybody is saying but not really taking seriously is that the Democrats are the Republicans and the Republicans are the Know Nothings. The Republicans are headed for schism. I don't see a real way around it. And a party in schism doesn't win elections.
And that's my point. The Republican party, as it exists today, will not exist in 12 months. The Tea Party fragmentation was nothing like what they are gonna see when they lose to Hillary. The rats are already leaving the sinking ship, but they get to either run into the arms of David Duke, or... umm... Clinton? She's the most centrist Republican out there nowadays. The Tea Party is a joke, even amongst the Tea Partiers that got elected! That's over, and an embarrassing past that they will soon forget. (And shit.... I'm old. Christine Whitman was my go-to "reasonable Republican" mannequin because of that amazing response she gave to the State of the Union speech... in, um... lemme check... oh fuck... 1995!! Ok. Point taken. Gotta retract that example and find another rational, reasonable, old school small-c conservative Republican to trot out...) But, more to the point, in 2020 the remainder of the Republican party that can still manage to put its pants on, and not slobber too badly down the front of their power ties, will win against Hillary because her presidency is going to be a fucking disaster. Because she doesn't actually believe in anything. She just follows whatever the latest talking point is. And that's not leadership. That's the Secretary of State role, not the President. So. She fails spectacularly to do anything of any substance at all. So the Republicans prop up any ole idiot in 2020, and clear her out of office. And then, that's when the dissolution of the Republican party starts to congeal around a truly, classically-defined "conservative" viewpoint. They get out of people's bedrooms. They get out of funding overseas crusades. They focus on infrastructure. They tell the religious right to go fuck themselves. They create comprehensive programs to help TWO GENERATIONS of veterans injured in the Middle East, and make them feel welcome and prosperous in their own country again. THAT's the "conservatism" that could come out of the total dissolution of the Republican party that's coming in about 50 weeks.
Here's the problem - the fiscally-conservative, socially-liberal Republicans that Liked Ike can't afford to be Republicans anymore. You've got the rich, who want their taxes reduced, and you've got the poor, who want someone to protect them from ISIS and/or Caitlin Jenner. Back when the middle class was growing, you could stitch together a platform that might appeal to both of them but for the past 20 years or so the rich have had to trick the poor into voting against their interests through demagoguery. They've been so successful at it, though, that they can't grab any more money... and they're uncomfortable giving more social crazyness. So who's voting for Nikki Haley? And why aren't they voting for Hillary Clinton? Because I'll say it again - she almost passed Hillarycare while Rush Limbaugh was actively accusing her of murder. Maybe she doesn't believe in anything. Fine by me - the '90s kinda worked out, yo. Really - Hillary Clinton is the nicest Republican you could vote for. That she's been a Democrat since 1968 definitely speaks to your point but I will take Little Finger over Ned Stark any day. This magical Republican Party you envision, my friend, is the Democratic Party.
I think we are saying the same thing, just shouting at each other from two mountaintops next to each other. Actual real life Republicans (like my Mom) are disgusted by what the Republican Party has become. It no longer reflects their conservative beliefs. I remember R friends just being astounded that the GOP cared about what people were doing in their bedrooms. I mean, totally flabbergasted. They were like, "Who cares? That ain't the governments' place to be." But ever since George Jr, things have continued to get more histrionic and loony for the GOP. They've gone so far right they are coming around the other side again. It's been FOUR Presidential terms since my Republican friends have openly called themselves "Republican", without immediately following that with a paragraph of caveats that sound like a Lipitor ad. And I truly believe there is a huge majority of American Republicans that find the GOP repugnant, but won't vote for a Democrat. Ever. NOBODY out there represents them. And they are being painted with the same brush as the Bundy idiots, Cruz, Trump, and every other repugnant fuck that says they are a Republican. All those people are gonna go SOMEWHERE, and it sure isn't over to the Donkeys, and they've already written off the GOP. They aren't going to go for Rand Paul, or LaRouche, or any of those nutballs, either. But I tell ya, if at the Republican National Convention John McCain stands up holding hands with Nikki Haley... even I'm gonna vote Republican. It'll be a landslide. Republicans needs someone with classic republican values. Nowadays, with the data and analytical tools we have available to us, a truly classically "conservative" party would not only win, they would have a tremendous positive effect on all the issues people really care about on a day-to-day basis.
We're not, not entirely. I'm saying "actual real life republicans (like your mom)" have either bailed or are in denial. Robert Bork was '87, yo. When Bob Packwood says he is "convinced that Judge Bork . . . will do everything possible to cut and trim the liberties that the right of privacy protects" your "mainstream" Republicans are minority anachronisms. Before Nancy Reagan came out in favor of stem cell research, her husband embargoed that shit for 8 years. Then he proposed a constitutional amendment allowing prayer in schools. The Republicans - like your mom - that are still hiding in their foxholes praying for a return to Buckley-era conservative thought are mostly in denial that the Democrats appropriated their platform long ago. The denial runs so deep that you're talking about voting for a member of the Keating Five. Meanwhile out in the world I've had to have the "death panel" discussion with people I like who still think Obama is a secret Muslim. The people you're talking about are those so set in their ways they don't want to face the fact that their tribe hasn't given a fuck about them since the Iran hostage crisis. And that's where we disagree: nobody in the machine is going to wake up tomorrow and think "shit, we never should have listened to Grover Norquist!" It's all Taliban, all the time, and the people who know Barry Goldwater from something other than a history book are just the tail that the crazies know will vote for their cause until they die out of pure naked nostalgia. The Koch brothers? Not Republicans. Libertarians. David fuckin ran for VP in 1980. Those caveats? Those are the party. Effectively, your mom's generation are saying "The one thing I'm not is a Democrat."
But. This is it. "Bailed to where?" and "With how many others?" The histrionics and theater of the last 12 months only account for a tiny fraction of the people in the US that call themselves "Republicans", and the number of disenfranchised Republicans continues to grow every time Trump opens his big dumb mouth. Ironically, Trump supporters have started to wave signs that say "Silent Majority", without apparent ironic intent. They miss that when a firebrand political fringe last self-applied that moniker, it was a spectacular failure. The media bought their story hook, line, and sinker, and then when they called for "100,000 Moral Majority members" to come out to the Capital Mall in protest, I think 2500 people showed up. The "Moral Majority" moniker became a huge liability, and they couldn't even pay for airtime after that. So. Today, a bunch of asshats are dancing around like lunatics in the town square, claiming they have an army outside the city gates. But as soon as they open the gates, like Munchausen, they are gonna find the fields empty. Or, more likely, populated with a few radical nutballs dressed like walls, who the Republicans wouldn't even let inside their gated communities, much less sit down to caucus with. So what happens to all the disenfranchised Republicans? Are you saying they just man up and become Hillary Democrats? I'm saying "actual real life republicans (like your mom)" have either bailed or are in denial.
"Bailed to the Democrats" and "With everyone else willing to swallow their tribalisms." Going back to your mom & posse - the "Actual real-life Republicans" - I think it's fair to say that the following describes a disaffected voter: But ever since George Jr, things have continued to get more histrionic and loony for the GOP. They've gone so far right they are coming around the other side again. It's been FOUR Presidential terms since my Republican friends have openly called themselves "Republican", without immediately following that with a paragraph of caveats that sound like a Lipitor ad. You're reaching back to '81 to find examples of that "tiny fraction" failing to find traction. Ted Cruz was in 4th grade. Hell, Gorbachev had just hit the Politburo. There's so much history between then and now that it's barely worth mentioning. But you're using this example to prove that there are lessons to be learned by the modern Republican Party, as if the lunatic asshats hadn't been in place for generations. The ARLRs have either been Democrats since 2008 or they haven't been paying attention. The barbarians have been inside the gates for decades. If Trump's what it takes for them to realize it, maybe he actually has done some good.Actual real life Republicans (like my Mom) are disgusted by what the Republican Party has become. It no longer reflects their conservative beliefs. I remember R friends just being astounded that the GOP cared about what people were doing in their bedrooms. I mean, totally flabbergasted. They were like, "Who cares? That ain't the governments' place to be."
Worked for Reagan, and Clinton probably actually understands the current talking point. Leadership is overrated. Give me executives that just keep the trains running and let the thinking happen further down the hierarchy any day.Because she doesn't actually believe in anything. She just follows whatever the latest talking point is. And that's not leadership. That's the Secretary of State role, not the President.
True. But if Reagan actually had empathetic human beings pulling his strings, rather than sociopaths, he might have had a positive effect. He was a charismatic leader. A good figurehead. He just needed better policies. Hillary is neither charismatic, nor a leader. And I have little faith that she'd choose anybody for her cabinet that had not held an executive position at Goldman Sachs.
The hierarchy the President is on top of is the executive branch. These guys. They all have all the problems that come with being a large organization, plus patronage positions and, in the case of regulators, having to hire from the industry they're regulating because that's where the knowledge is, but for the most part they all know what they're doing and do it as well as they can within the constraints of being large organizations. They do not benefit from more leadership; like all large organizations, they could do with far fewer leaders.
My first thought on reading this comment was "heading for?", but on reflection this could just be them having the same problem the Democrats have had since the 60s, being a coalition without much to unify it stuck together because its various subsets' goals either don't conflict with each others' or conflict less than they do with the other party, and it's a two-party system. The Republicans managed to create a sort of unity by being excellent propagandists, but they can't manage it anymore. Yet the gun nuts, religious loonies, and market loonies all have more in common with each other than that the Democratic party taken as a whole. As much as I'd love to see it, I don't think they're going to have a schism so much as Republicans are going to be pulled in as many different directions as Democrats are, losing the advantage of coherence but still there.The Republicans are headed for schism. I don't see a real way around it. And a party in schism doesn't win elections.
I agree that the Republican party is definitely headed towards a schism, but I'm just curious what that looks like? Being 21 I don't have all the knowledge historically on where Republicans have been. Do you see it being a reversion to older principles of the Republican party or something different?
My first "Obama moment" was Ross Perot. He was a rich guy that got fed up with politics as usual, and decided to run completely unaffiliated. His big thing was energy policy, and getting us off foreign oil. This was back in 1992, before you were born. But, it turns out he was an indignant little dick, who couldn't take criticism. He got all huffy and just scooped up all his marbles and went home suddenly. It was the first time - before Obama - that I felt there was actually hope for the Government. That it might get wrested from the grasp of the corporations that use Government as the hand-crank on their own personal money printing machines. There were brief glimpses of happiness when Bill Clinton co-opted a couple of interesting Republican programs, and then got them passed. That led to the big dotcom boom. Then there was excitement and hope that Obama would lead us to a new kind of government. But - as is always the case - people vote for Democratic Presidents, and Republican Legislators and Senators. Because when it comes right down to it, we all want to believe in a bigger, more fluffy and embracing American Dream kind of world, so we vote Democrats into the White House. But then when it comes to raising taxes to pay for the roads and the infrastructure and transit systems, we balk at adding $26/year to our house taxes, and vote for Republicans locally, who promise not to raise our taxes. So we, being voters, are stupid, basically.
I think it looks like this. I think it looks like this. I think it looks like this. I think it looks like this. I think in the modern American political system, it looks like someone spoiling over sour grapes and the aftermath being a coalescing of that 3rd party's values in one or the other party. If we're taking bets, my bet is that the Republicans run Bloomberg in 2020, despite the fact that he doesn't speak dog-whistle. This will upset what's left of the open-carry get-a-job-morans tea party brownshirts, who might just turn Trump into their Lyndon LaRouche. This is why we were extraordinarily lucky that Bernie Sanders ran on the Democratic ticket to shape the mainstream narrative, rather than running on a 3rd party ticket to draw voters away from the democratic ticket. I'd love to live in a non-2-party system, but I don't think we'll get there by fracturing. Yet every party needs to try it on for size about every twelve years. We're well overdue.