The election campaign is still not over but the use of the popular word "rebranding" of the Republican Party is becoming as recurrent as the word "Obama" in my private discussions with conservatives. Conservative leader and fundraiser Richard Viguerie is holding a well known "secret" meeting of Beltway conservative organizations next Thursday to assess the results of the election and what must be done to make the GOP a dominant force again. One of my prominent conservative clients is holding his own set of meetings before and after the election. In a conversation I had yesterday with a New York City-based lawyer/GOP activist, the major point of the discussion was, "I don’t see how Duncan can stay on as the Chairman of the Party." There is a palpable tendency this weekend among the people I talk with to not look at what is going to happen on Tuesday, but beyond.
To be honest, we have been here before. I took a quick look through my files this morning and found a copy of the Orange County Register’s "Orange County Voices," published on Sunday, March 14, 1993, a full page treatment of opinions under the topic "GOP Must Define Its Basic Essence, Offer a Clear Vision of the Future." The idea of the page was to ask some local politicos the question, "What’s next for the Republican Party." In the first weeks of the Clinton Administration, after 12 years of Reagan/Bush, many of us expressed our view of what the GOP needed to do to regain its legs and win future elections.
I wrote in 1993 that the "GOP should emulate Reagan’s philosophy of less government" citing that the Reagan tax cuts had resulted in 19 million new jobs and 72 continuous months of economic growth. I said the "read my lips" statement of President Bush, and his abandonment of the "no new tax pledge," "constituted one of the biggest political blunders of a lifetime" and the subsequent tax increase contributed to the recession at that time. I said Republicans must stick to a core philosophy to show voters they can be relied on to believe in a firm set of ideals, and that we Republicans should "draw a line in the sand and say no to Clinton’s new taxes."
Future Red County OC Blog editor Matt Cunningham also shared his views on the page. Matt’s point was that "conservatism" and the "prolife stance" of the GOP didn’t cost it the White House in 1992. Matt wrote "[w]e must have the courage of our conservative convictions…..if we stand by them, Clinton’s house of cards will fall in short order, and the GOP will be there to pick up the pieces."
In fact, by the 1994 election, the Democrats had indeed imploded. They imploded, because Newt Gingrich and House Republicans took charge and advanced a bold agenda known as the "Contract with America." The "Contract" mirrored Matt’s and my thinking in our articles in the Register. What victory in 1994 took, therefore, was a resolute renewal of conservative principles by GOP leaders, and "letting the Democrats be Democrats."
There will be a lot more said about the remaking and rebranding process for the GOP in the coming weeks. But the fundamental path to future victory remains the same now as it was after Clinton was elected: "let the Democrats be Democrats," and let Republicans define themselves as they always should have: as true conservatives.
In the same 1993 set of articles, respected liberal commentator Mark Petracca offered his opinions as well, and they contrast sharply from Matt’s and mine. Petracca writes that the party system was broken and that "Brian Bennett and Bob Nelson [(for younger readers these guys are social libertarians)] are members of the same party in name only, as are Bill Clinton and Mario Cuomo." He writes "[t]here is no civic republican virtue in partisanship." He argues Republican moderates "should not have to surrender strong beliefs for the purposes of party unity, which for Bennett means the intra-party triumph of conservatives." In the upcoming debate, the media and liberals will again attempt to advance this type of thinking as part of a "rebranding" of the party.
But Petracca’s 1993 column presents a huge opportunity to point out how wrong his observations on rebuilding the GOP became in short order. Bennett’s and Nelson’s departure from active involvement in the Republican party, and the more liberal thinking they symbolize nationally, and the GOP’s full embracement after 1992 of social conservatism, did not stop the GOP from being successful, in fact, the era became one of the most successful for the GOP in history, winning both houses of Congress in 1994, the Presidency in 2000 and 2008, and maintaining a conservative Supreme Court. Had the Republican party moderated itself in 1993 as Petracca suggested (and as the liberals and the media will soon suggest in 2009), would those victories still have occurred?
Here is the fact: Petracca’s advice proved IRRELEVANT to the ultimate outcome, which were a series of victories based on a conservative agenda, the "Contract with Amerca," and nothing less. Only when the Republican party became a party of big government, and sadly, some corruption, did we falter. Yes, the GOP needs a renewal. But not a liberal renewal. We need to look to the success of conservative principles, the "Contract with America," and regain voters trust as a party that stands strongly for core ideas and high integrity. And as history proves, we don’t need the liberal media’s, or Mark Petracca’s advice to learn how to win again in future.
November 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
“Professional Republicans” and others who have squandered the gains that Reagan brought had better be on notice.
November 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
Here are my solutions:
Adapt the 50 state strategy, we need to contest seats that Democrats would not expect us to contest, look at CA-46, Debbie Cook is making the race a tossup against Rorabacher.
How about CA-39? or CA-47? I suggested this a few years back, and people thought I was crazy for the Republican party to consider this.
We need to do better outreach in areas that do not ordinarily elect Republicans. Democrats are big players now in Montana, how about us being players in Glendale or Fontana as an example, by emphasizing California cities as an example.
Yes, Republicans lost big by acting like Democrats, spending like Democrats and having no principles in the federal level. However, in California the strategy should be varied.
The advice by James is pretty good, it should be used in the federal level, but California is its own divergent creature. If we continue to adapt the same strategies in California, Democrats will eat our state like Massachusetts. Voters do not want an emaciated state government, they value stuff like rest and meal break regulations. However we need balance, because if Democrats run the candy store, it will just turn into chaos.
November 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
his year is the perfect storm for the left. Due to the very anti-GOP sentiments of the people, they are willing to elect ANYONE who is an alternative. The left knows this is their best chance to elect a very far left president AND have a filibuster proof Dem Senate majority.
The GOP is in dissaray and is reviled. they are considered by most to be corrupt and the party of incompetent big government. Conservatism has been dragged through the mud and most people see conservatism as either “big government for fat cats” due to the GOP or as simply a hollow excuse used by the GOP to gain power. Face it, it took the people SEVENTY years before they elected the GOP to both the Presidency AND the Congress in a lasting way (excluding the one term GOP majorities in ’52). Things went wrong and it’ll be a long time before the people trust the GOP again.
How bad will it be? Think the worst of Woodrow Wilson’s “Progressivism” in the mid 1910’s and FDR’s New Deal and you will get an idea of what we are up against.
Many saw this coming. Many also saw that the GOP wasn’t going to do anything about it.
Remember, the fight does not end on Nov. 4th. It beging Nov. 5th.
In order to take back the party and the country, we must do the following:
1. Admit that the GOP went very, very wrong.
2. Acknowledge that the leaders of the GOP WERE NOT conservatives and actually embraced big government (yes, this inlcudes Bush)
3. Kick those leaders out of their leadership positions
4. Explain and convince people that conservatism is not to blame and that the GOP is no longer under the control of the big government old guard
5. Go after the left like a rabid wolveriene and point out every little thing they do
6. Be unified in our narrative: Dependance and control by the state vs. FREEDOM
7. Convince people that the GOP can be trusted with contol
Until we do this, the GOP will be out of power…and the Dem socialists will prevail.
November 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
Bush always was a “big-government” guy. The GOP abandoned their limited government principles in order to unify behind Bush on Iraq. Because of this, they lost their way and substituted principle for “unity” behind Bush — dissenters were pushed out. This has left the GOP with no viable alternative, which leaves the “leadership” clinging to what little they have.
The GOP needs the “vision thing.” We need to present a unified vision that will appeal to libertarians, traditional conservatives, blue collar folk, and people worried about another attack on America.
This IS possible, but it needs leaders who people know have principles AND will follow them.
I would suggest:
Trade: coupling free trade with reforms on regulations and taxes that would allow America to become competitive — and thus not loose jobs.
War and peace: Friendly relations with free nations; limited relations with the unfree; the willingness to, by carrot or stick, neutralize those who machinate against us. Also, we must realize that our foreign policy must be one of jujitsu, not bar fighting. We must also have a unified policy that can win over those not-as-insane Dems (e.g. Truman types in foreign policy).
Taxes: low taxes, but we must present tax-cut plans that are clearly seen as benefiting the little guy — particularly small businessmen.
Regulations: we need to reform regulations that are choking businesses AND restricting our freedom. This doesn’t mean immediately repealing everything, but focusing on eliminating clearly crazy rules while making what remains clear and transparent — rules that ANYONE can easily follow without hiring a brigade of lawyers.
Healthcare: McCain’s taqx credit idea is a good one. It will ensure that the GOP won’t be seen as letting poor kids die in the street, while both reducing taxes AND government programs and thus power.
Environment: A property rights based pro-environmental policy is necessary. We must show how property and personal rights and liberties are consistent with a clean and good environment. And regulations that limit pollutants should do just that — and give businesses the freedom to find innovative solutions, not government mandated lunacies.
Federalism: We need to hammer that far away bureaucrats CAN NOT run people’s lived better then they can run their own. This command and control elitism is the core of the Democratic party — and we need to make that clear.
Personal freedom: We must tie in regulatory reform and tax measures with freedom — right now the Dems are saying that being taken care of with socialism “grants” freedom — we must show them that they are wrong and how.
Immigration: Illegal bad — legal good. We really need to focus in on how LEGAL immigration by people who wish to become Americans and embrace this country helps renew our sacred principles.
Social Issues: libertarians and social conservatives can and must work together. The freedom to choose and the virtue to choose wisely is what makes this country work and what makes freedom truly possible. This is not something the government ought to or even can grant. Stopping the government from having power to enforce mores and morality will mean the leftists won’t be able to impose their vision on the social conservative. Freedom and virtue go hand in hand.
Energy: Give people the freedom to inovate. Let businesses the freedom to develope alternatives — don’t make them just implement the ideas of the Federally approved few; Allow people to purchase energy from whatever energy plant in the U.S. they want, much like people can choose their own phone company for land lines — let people have the power to choose alternative fuels for themselves.
Thus, we must present a FREEDOM agenda. And we need to show people that not only is it good, but we are capable and principled enough to do it.