« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

GOP Autopsy: Change the Politicians Not the Policies

Amidst the soul-searching being conducted by party leaders in pursuit of the solution to the GOP’s electoral problems, everyone is missing the obvious culprit.  Whenever a private entity goes through a period of lethargic growth and management failures, it seeks new leadership.  Yet, immediately following the election, Republicans reelected Mitch McConnell and John Boehner to be the face of the GOP in Washington.  Talk about stuck on stupid.

In their “autopsy” report, the RNC notes the following: “The GOP today is a tale of two parties. One of them, the gubernatorial wing, is growing and successful. The other, the federal wing, is increasingly marginalizing itself, and unless changes are made, it will be increasingly difficult for Republicans to win another presidential election in the near future.”

Hmmm…maybe that has something to do with the fact that there are some new dynamic leaders on the state level.  Where are they on the federal level?  Nobody can look you in the eye – even supporters of Boehner and McConnell – and declare with a straight face that these two leaders are eloquent voices for our party’s principles and have a dynamic appeal to a broad populace.  Likewise, even those who don’t necessarily share the principles of the Tea Party can easily agree that figures like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio evince a stronger, more persuasive image to voters than the current group of banal bulls.

Yesterday, The Hill published a poll asking respondents which method they preferred in order to balance the budget: slashing spending with no tax increases or a mix of both.  A clear majority supported the conservative position.  But when the pollster designated the two positions with party identifications, a plurality supported the Democrat approach, even though it was the same path that was soundly rejected without the party label.  This is a very vivid example of the need to give the Republican politicians a facelift, not the policies.

In fact, it is the lack of passion and consistency to fight for these policies when it really counts that has gotten us into trouble.  Republicans won the 2010 elections in a landslide, primarily with the mandate to get rid of Obamacare.  There was no ambiguity about the results of that election.  It had nothing to do with ground game, technology, immigration, gay marriage, minorities, etc.  It was purely based on ideology of limited government, most notably, disquiet against Obamacare.  The Democrats got crushed.  Republicans should have taken the first opportunity to defund Obamacare in the CR or debt ceiling when the righteous indignation was still palpable.  They failed to do it, opting instead to cut a backroom deal.  They failed to inspire anyone.  The voters saw through the fakery.

How much longer are the Republicans going to allow John Boehner to be the inarticulate public face of the GOP and Mitch McConnell the private dealmaker with Democrats?  Isn’t it time for new leadership?  Yet, McConnell wouldn’t even allow one of those fresh faces, Senator Ron Johnson, to serve in the number 5 position in leadership, opting to recruit Roy Blunt to run against him last year.

Instead of retiring with dignity, McConnell is engaging in an election-year foxhole conversion – during the spare time he is not busy feeding opposition research talking points about a potential primary challenger to reporters.  Why not step aside and try to recruit another young leader instead of risking another $21 million close-call reelection bid in a state where Obama lost 117 of 120 counties?  Seriously, when our conference leader has mediocre ratings in his own red state, isn’t it time for someone new as GOP Leader?

In addition, we have a whole list of red state statists who will stand for reelection over the next few years – members who are increasingly voting with the Democrats: Lamar Alexander, Thad Cochran, Lindsey Graham, etc..  Why do we keep running candidates who ultimately support Democrat policies, albeit with a sour face?  What exactly are these people doing in the Senate aside for warming the benches and scoring points for the other team?

At the core of conservative values is a belief in the effectiveness of choice and competition in perfecting outcomes.  Yet our party has been run like a country club devoid of any real competition for important leadership and committee positions.  You don’t need an autopsy to figure out that the majority of voters see no virtue in Republican leaders, and that we are in desperate need of fresh faces on the federal level.  How many of the committee chairmen in both the House and the Senate (ranking members) are inspiring and forceful advocates for conservative policies in their spheres of influence?

Instead of ticking off a litany of policy positions we must abrogate – from social issues and immigration enforcement to tax cuts and welfare cuts, Republicans would be wise to comb through their roster of federally elected officials, particularly those in leadership, and kindly ask them to retire, opening up those seats to a fresh generation of bold and sincere conservatives.

COMMENTS

  • spinoneone

    Whomever we find to run for 2014, remember, it isn’t the “clown questions” that seem to sink the ship. It is the “clown answers.” Power corrupts and prestige is an addictive drug, and both are enjoyed too much by those that have/exercise each in equal measure.

  • kodachrome

    Do you really believe “fresh and bold” new leadership will change the generational split on gay marriage? On abortion and birth control? Win over minorities? Deal with the image of the party as one beholden to the wealthy? Cause that’s what the report found is killing the party nationally.

    The RNC’s focus groups made clear the same thing countless others have- there’s an entire generation, and virtually all the minorities in this country, who reject our party and it’s fiscal policies out of hand because of these social issues and the party’s image.

    As you mentioned, even on things they agree on like dealing with the deficit. Seriously, go read that poll you just cited again. Right there in the first paragraph: “The discrepancy would appear to be rooted in the GOP’s image problem…” That image problem isn’t related to party leadership. It’s related to party policy. The people voting against us aren’t willing to listen to us on fiscal issues because of other issues.

    I deal with this every single day. You talk money, you talk taxes, you talk debt, you talk getting screwed out of things economically, and other young(ish) people agree… and then they say some variation on “Yeah, but…” Over and over and over again.

    None of the people you cited have shown any ability to change public perceptions of the party. None of them. They may be younger, they may be ‘fresher’ , they may be your brand new favorite guys, but they’re not successfully doing what you say- they’re not changing minds.

  • cheesycon

    could they have picked a worse word than “autopsy” ???

  • cheesycon

    correct! the big thing lacking is persuasion. We need to be willing to use elections as a podium to explain our beliefs and persuade, not just to win at all costs. Imagine if Romney had used the election to forcefully defend and explain conservative values – social issues, not just fiscal. If we lose the election but create more conservatives then we have won, not lost. This is what Walker does in Wisconsin.

  • grumpyKoz

    According to R. Pribus, the only problem the GOP has is communication. They need to rethink their advertising. They are not speaking clearly enough for the common Republican to understand. It is all about BRANDING, messages, and taking points.
    In his mind, there is NO problem with the people or the politics.

  • Bill S

    In the next 12 years, those that are 30 will have become 42 and actually developed neurons that can differentiate right from wrong.

  • kodachrome

    Support for gay marriage is rising in all generations, not just the young. It’s up almost 20 points the last decade with people from the ‘silent’ generation (those preceding the boomers).

  • http://www.bohnetlaw.com rightappeal

    I agree to this to a point, but by far the biggest factor in a party’s identity is it’s presidential nominee. In 2012 the GOP brand suffered mightily from association with Mitt Romney, who was very easy to caricature as a rich, out of touch, greedy capitalist with weird and strict religious beliefs. Plus his moderate background made it difficult for local candidates to make their own case for conservatism, particularly with regards to health care. That image is going to linger until it is replaced by something else, probably during the 2014 campaigns. And I expect that image makeover will depend more on the prominent candidates than the Washington leadership.

    Fortunately, our 2016 field looks like it will be a huge upgrade over it’s recent predecessors. I see all of the potential nominees as being major improvements over Romney, McCain or Dole; and most as improvements over George W. Bush.

  • Jack_Savage

    Maybe you could articulate your principles for us so we can make a judgment about whether they are compatible with conservatism.

    And the thing about conservative principles? They’re timeless. So long after I am dead and gone, and you are wondering why you can’t get an appointment to see anyone about your bedsores because ObamaCare was supposed to be SO INCREDIBLY COMPASSIONATE and what happened, conservative principles will still be there.

    Like it or not.

  • naraht

    I’ve yet to meet *anyone* who has actually moved from the position of “Gays should be able to get married” to “no recognition at all” and *one* person whose moved from “Gays should be able to get married” to “Gays should only be able to get Civil Unions” and that person converted to being Latter Day Saint during the same time period.

  • Jim_Riggs

    Doubling down is a by-product of the all-or-nothing mentality.

    We wanted spending cuts. The sequester provides spending cuts. Obama wanted tax cuts to expire on those above $250K. We got $450K. We take what we can get when we can get it and we keep fighting for more.

    As opposed to committing Harikari because we didn’t get everything we wanted immediately.

  • littlehouse18

    Except that judges keep overturning state laws to protect freedom because they conflict with federal law. States are merely becoming federal agencies because of this. No one will challenge the overreach.

  • littlehouse18

    The Hill study states the opposite of what you are asserting.

  • littlehouse18

    Check out the Manhattan Declaration to understand what is wrong about gay marriage. For one thing, it demolishes the barriers to almost any kind of ‘marriage.’ Once there is gay ‘marriage,’ there is no logical way to oppose polygamy, incest, and more. Society falls to ruin.
    Marriage by definition is between a man and a woman. Civil unions deal with all legal ramifications, so there are really no ‘rights’ being denied gays. They just want to change reality for society to make them feel better about themselves. And the reason so many young people support it is because they have been very, very heavily indoctrinated about this, and their parents have been cowed by charges of bigotry into submission to not instill values in their children.
    Why are they a bit less indoctrinated on fiscal issues? Because it affects what they themselves can eat, or buy for themselves. That makes these issues more personal and natural self-interest applies.

  • littlehouse18

    That’s because Republican politicians don’t stand on principle. Also, frankly, people are scared to call themselves Republican because of the demonization in the media.

  • citizenkn

    This is the bulk of the issue – we could easily get the backing of the public on economic issues, but the party is so far behind the popular curve on many of the biggest social issues that it hurts our ability to effectively lead on the fiscal front. Gays want to get married, hispanics want immigration reform, single women (who outnumber married women) want politicians to spend time on women’s health and equal pay issues. If our party wants votes from any of these vital groups, we’re going to have to come up with solutions that actually appeal to them. If you’re one of those people that thinks the current Republican voter base is enough to win elections – “if only we can get them angry enough at Democratic policies to get them to vote” – get ready for a very long and disappointing election road.

  • plumely

    Then I guess next time we will really fight for limited government and really stick to them right? I think not. The Squishes will always see a need to compromise with the Dems. They of course will claim it’s because they are outnumbered.

  • plumely

    Here’s an idea. Let’s just all call ourselves Democrats run against our opponents on the plank that we are just as Liberal as they are. *sarcasm* All our acceptance of Gay Marriage will do is cause the libs to take even more extreme positions and they will still tar us as intolerant. To me it seems our embracing of their issues is purely defensive. We should only do so if we really believe in them.

  • uselogic

    Yup. Doesn’t matter if he’s the nicest, smartest guy…. you change the coach when he’s got a 2 &10 record.

  • plumely

    our answer to the Gay marriage question should be “it’s the economy stupid.” I am against Gay marriage but we need to turn that issue over to the states. the RNC doesn’t need to have a position on that right now, We have bigger problems.

  • bs61

    And yet, my daily tweets to them haven’t been working – they are not with us. :)

  • bs61

    Sounds a lot like Obama, that it he really believed it was a messaging problem about Ocare, not the policy. Something weird in the DC water!

  • Bill S

    No one I know voted for Obama either.

  • hobarticus

    Abortion and gay marriage are vastly different issues. Conservative ideas on abortion are actually quite popular. Pro-lifers outnumbered pro-choicers as recently as last year, and the numbers have stabilized over the last decade. At worst, it’s a neutral issue, vote-wise. Gay marriage? That’s another matter…

  • curtmilr

    Sorry-ass Disqus would not load comments ALL DAY on my T-1 line at the office! Grrr!!

    No, I didn’t read the report, I didn’t need to. Since I’m a Libertarian/Conservative having to support the GOP to hold back the Dems, it makes no difference.
    Most kids don’t want abortion to be easy or paid for with tax Dollars, they just don’t want it outlawed. I’m OK with that, as I don’t believe life begins at conception, but rather at first breath. Consciousness denotes life to me, the rest is biologic reflex motility. Others may hold a different view, but that is a religious view, not a legal one unless an Amendment is passed defining life.

    Most kids don’t want high taxes. I’m solid with that.
    Most kids either have no problem with constitutional governance, or are strongly behind it. I’m in the latter group (though not a kid).
    Most kids want to see drugs decriminalized. I’m solid with that too.
    Most kids absolutely hate lying politicians, but especially the weak ones. The Dems lie, but move the ball down the field trying to score. The GOP lies, plays “prevent defense” and gives up uncontested yardage. Now, who’s the weak side?
    The Principles I see as inviolable are the constitutional ones and the God-given natural rights which were endowed. Liberty is the freedom to make mistakes, not to have certain “elites” dictating what and what not is acceptable.

  • edburke

    I have to disagree. Abortion involves killing a human being (which word is wrong?) It has been illegal in every state and every nation prior to a very vigorous political effort to change it. It is the position of the Catholic Church and various other churches that it is badly wrong. A number of secular intellectuals such as Nat Hentoff and – believe it or not – Margaret Sanger have denounced it. A society that can regulate smoking can certainly regulate abortion. Immigrant groups are MORE likely to agree with conservative positions on social issues. It is the affluent ‘soccer moms’ who are eager to embrace the new morality.
    Apart from that, the notion that the social issues are the turnoff to a country that is naturally attracted to the policy of slashing government benefits while spending trillions on pointless wars against small middle-eastern countries just doesn’t ring true. The GOP loses because it is not so much a party as a pressure release valve. The GOP has never tried the rather obvious formula or social conservatism and economic centrism. It has never tried this formula because the liberal elite within the party is terrified that it would succeed.

  • edburke

    No party can represent all people – obviously. It may well be that 40 years of liberal domination of the media have produced an electorate that has rejected every traditional Christian value and cares about nothing but material self-interest and being free to smoke pot and have sex with every living creature. Whether these goals are well-served by Republican economic and military policy is another question. But which party will represent the people who still believe in God, Mom and Apple Pie? There are still a lot of us out there and we have rather foolishly placed our hopes in the GOP.
    I make the following suggestion to my fellow social conservatives: The posts above underscore that we must choose which of our values are most important to us. The GOP must go one way or the other. The interests of social and economic conservatives are now so far apart that we social conservatives must either seize control of the agenda or leave. In favor of trying to seize control of the agenda is the following: A GOP that is socially conservative and economically moderate — militarily cautious, open to people of color, and willing to provide the traditional safety net function to the genuinely desperate — will have greater appeal than a party of dry-as-dust free market economics, militarism abroad, uncritical worship of Wall Street, and philistine contempt for the religious and moral values that our forefathers (and grandmothers) took for granted. But time grows short. If it is not already too late, the time is now.

  • edburke

    George Bush did a great job of job creation, didn’t he?