I Consider . . . Becoming a Republican??
By amba | Related entries in Elections, General PoliticsFor the first time in my life. My family and my oldest, best friends would probably disown me.
Am I serious? Probably not. I’m a deep-dyed independent and anti-partisan. But I’ve been affected by Alan Stewart Carl’s rueful, truth-telling rant that at this political moment, at least, there is no viable, vital center, or at least no robust institutions there — it’s a vacant lot with a lot of vague plans to build something, someday — so if you’re a centrist you should get involved in one of the parties and try to steer it towards the center.
More than that, though, I’ve been nauseated by the totalitarian mindset on shameless display in lefty blog comments, selected here and here. My only real reason to become a Republican would be to get as far away from those people as possible. I know, Pelosi and Rangel have both had the elementary good sense to denounce Hugo Chavez’s grandstanding at the U.N. And I know that the Republican party drags around its own extremist albatross in the End Times crowd. Maybe looking too closely at the disgusting underbelly of either party would drive me towards the other. But there’s a comment M. Takhallus made that sticks in my mind — I can’t find it — to the effect that it’s also disgusting to try to fight a war without getting your hands dirty.
Icepick, who has good reasons for not liking McCain, which he enumerated in an e-mail, suggested I hop aboard and vote and work for my old mayor, Rudy, who’s going to have a hell of a time getting past the moral guardians of the base in the primaries. I think he’d be a good president. Hillary looks all but inevitable and I won’t vote for her.
Is this shortsighted despair? Will there be an effective centrist rebellion as we approach 2008?
This entry was posted on Friday, September 22nd, 2006 and is filed under Elections, General Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
September 22nd, 2006 at 11:11 am
My advice would be to become a Republican. You can effect more change when you are part of an organization than if you are not. That is one reason why I choose to be a Democrat. I will never agree 100% with the Dems but I feel like I have a place to voice my concerns and most of the time my voice gets heard.
September 22nd, 2006 at 11:31 am
as the elections approach the progressive money will get siphoned into the center – there is no reason to believe that the hillary bill dyad will let the deaneacs from taking over
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:18 pm
Funny, I have been so repulsed by the detainees bill, that I am feeling very ejected toward the centre, theoretically at least, seeing as I’m not American. I’ve been disgusted by the same things as you, Amba, but I’ve also been truly frightened by by what I can only see as a frontal attack on the fundamental principles of justice represented by that bill, even in its compromise form.
Has America completely lost its moral compass? Both right and left seem to be indulging in insanity right now.
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:36 pm
I don’t really understand why you want to get away from liberals so badly. I read what you thought was so terrible, and to me it just looks like people who are really angry that we have a terrible president, and are tired of the fact that other countries hate us so much because of him. The fact that much of the Republican party supports him makes them guilty by association. I used to be a Republican but because of the nonsense that has occurred over the last 6 years, I can safely say that I will never go back and have learned that I am a Socialist Democrat.
I am AMAZED that after everything that has happened with Bush in charge that people aren’t demanding that he be impeached. He is the worst president in the history of this country. Republican politicians (those that support him) – are very distasteful to me, especially since they have demonstrated that they care so little for the majority of the people in our own country. They use us just as badly as Ahmedinijad uses the people of his country.
September 22nd, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Disclosure: I am a Democrat and will remain so. I am nonpartisan by preference.
No one ever stormed the barricades under the banner of moderation or common sense.
September 22nd, 2006 at 3:04 pm
Meredith Hugo Chavez. It has a nice ring. ;)
September 22nd, 2006 at 3:49 pm
It doesn’t really matter whether you register as a Republican or a Democrat . . . as long as you register as one of them. Someday a viable third party may come along. Until then, the best thing we moderates can do for our country is pick a party (either party) and work to steer them back towards the center.
And when your liberal friends react with horror to you being a Republican, or your conservative friends react with horror to you being a democrat, just tell them you are working to redeem the party from the extremists. From personal experience, I can say that most of them will understand the concept — even though they may be too emotional on the subject to be willing to consider doing that hard work themselves.
September 22nd, 2006 at 4:32 pm
“totalitarian mindset on shameless display in lefty blog comments”
Yes, Democrats love demonizing their opponents. How dare those terrorist sympathizing, pinko commie Democrats call Bush and Bush supporters dirty words like fascist or Nazi. Democrats should all be shot. They, not the terrorists, are the real threat to liberty and freedom in America.
We Republicans merely want to stop the terrorist threat, by any reasonable means up to and including the act of turning the Middle East into a nuclear waste land. The sadistic, totalitarian Democrats instead want to torture our enemies and listen in on private conversations. All the while taking every last dollar of every single person’s hard earned money and giving it to all the poor people.
Pathetic!
September 22nd, 2006 at 4:43 pm
I’ve been a registered Republican ever since I’ve been able to vote. Originally, it was because I actually was a Republican… I no longer talk or think like a Republican, but I’m still registered as one. I’ve always felt that being able to vote in the Republican primaries would have the most beneficial effect on the ultimate outcome.
September 22nd, 2006 at 5:34 pm
They use us just as badly as Ahmedinijad uses the people of his country.
??
Not snark: I’m actually baffled by that. Republicans–individually and collectively, all of them–”use us just as badly as Ahmedinijad uses the people of his country.”
Just for context, please note, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a registered Republican. Unlike Amba (with whom I do share some significant common ground in a number of areas), I’m not even tempted to join the Republican party formally.
September 22nd, 2006 at 6:14 pm
Same thing with regard to the Democratic party.
September 22nd, 2006 at 6:43 pm
Would you join a centrist party?
What would you want from the party?
Who would you like to in its ranks?
September 22nd, 2006 at 8:40 pm
Meredith you must be young. If you lived through the Jimmy Carter years like I did, you wouldn’t be claiming that Bush is the worst prez ever.
I have always been registered as an independent. The message I want to send to both parties is that you have to earn my vote. I try (as best as possible) to vote for intelligent free thinkers. It always seems those types are sprinkled fairly evenly between both parties.
The democratic nutroots are acting like rude immature kids who think they are so smart, clever and most importantly, so cool. The two shrewd dictators became instantly cool in the nutroot eyes by cleverly affirming, in the same rude immature style, everything they like to believe. Bush hating, not substance or intelligent thought, is all that counts.
I sure don’t want to help a party come into power that gives any credibility whatsoever to the naive world view and immature rude behavior of the nutroots.
September 22nd, 2006 at 9:05 pm
One thing I miss about living in Massachusetts is that if you’re registered as unaffiliated, you can register with one party or the other for the day of the primaries, vote in that party, and then immediately reregister as unaffiliated. It was great – if most of the guys I liked were on the Democratic side, I could vote in the Democratic primary. If most were Republicans, I’d vote in the Republican primary.
Here in Maryland, you must be registered with one party or the other to have a meaningful vote on primary day. If you’re registered independant, you have no voice in the primaries (except for the Board of Education, which is non-partisan). So I’m registered Republican.
September 23rd, 2006 at 1:54 am
Amba,
How about you give Unity 08 a proper shot before you register with one party or another? Personally I see neither party moving in the right direction at current and I’m willing to take a gamble on an alternative at this pint in time.
September 23rd, 2006 at 6:00 am
Lewis I am certainly old enough to remember Carter, and Bush is BY FAR a worse pres. than Carter. I voted for Ford and was disappointed, but looking back I can see that what I thought was good and bad at the time was nothing compared to train wreck that is GWB.
September 23rd, 2006 at 9:28 am
Hillary is a centrist. For God’s sake ignore the conventional wisdom on her and investigate her stand on issues, and her political history too. You will find a person who was once a Goldwatter Gal, did her stint in the left side of the Dem party, and has moved to the center and been there for years. She saw both sides of the extreme wings of the parties and moved to the center. Hasnt she already done what you profess that you might have to do? Why people hate her is completely beyond me. They say she is a chameleon. Prove it please because I dont believe it. They say she just takes positions to win votes. I suppose that explains her wildly popular vote on Iraq. Bill was accused of this same crud when he was President. He only followed polls, which explains his wildly popular war in Kosovo. He was too liberal, which explains welfare reform. He is accused of not taking on Bin Laden but everytime he did the Repubs accused him of diverting attention from the stained dress. Maybe we dont deserve a centrist president at this point in our history. Maybe the hawks wont be satisfied until we engage in a massive bloodletting akin to the wars of the 20th Century. Beats me what people think.
September 23rd, 2006 at 9:29 am
Whoops the blockquote was supposed to end after the actual quote “so cool.”
September 23rd, 2006 at 11:12 am
What Jammer said.
Hillary Clinton is about as centrist as you can get – so centrist, in fact, that I suspect you really dislike her because she’s dull (that’s why I dislike her). That’s fine, but it has nothing to do with centrism. She’s Joe Lieberman, plus some soapy backstory, and minus the willingness to take dumb risks.
Rudy won’t have a hard time getting past the puritan guardians, because he’ll just give them whatever they want. They have a long history of taking bribes, anyway. McCain, on the other hand, might; because he’s gone out of his way to agitate them, and because libertarians like Icepick aren’t his allies either.
September 23rd, 2006 at 2:03 pm
I have to say, I’m considering voting for Clinton, and I’m a strong war on terror supporter (I hate that phrase, WOT, but we appear stuck with it). I think she’s cautious about a lot of things, but I don’t see that as a negative right now. Her vote on Iraq, incidentally, looked like the smart move at the time, so it could still have been political expediency.
I voted for her husband (twice), his vice president, and George Bush, and I joined the military after the invasion of Iraq, so I think my vote can fairly be described as up for grabs. All of which is just to say, Amba, that you shouldnt say you “won’t” vote for Hillary until you see who the alternative is.
September 23rd, 2006 at 3:44 pm
“Bush hating, not substance or intelligent thought, is all that counts.”
I think some Democrats lack a certain eloquence and sophistication when expressing their objections about Bush because where do we begin? I admit it’s easier (and feels better) to foam at the mouth and rage. But, such outbursts do not give ‘moderates’, ‘centrists’, ‘libertarians’, and ‘reasonable conservatives’ an excuse to close their eyes and ignore Bush’s behavior. Some of the issues? Breaking the law (torture and eavesdropping), ignoring due process (extraordinary rendition and military tribunals without basic criminal rights like seeing the evidence), becoming involved in private lives (Terri Schiavo), record deficits, a war in Iraq completely unrelated to the WOT, and corporate welfare (Medicare Drug Benefit give away to drug companies and no-bid contracts to “rebuild” Iraq).
“I sure don’t want to help a party come into power that gives any credibility whatsoever to the naive world view and immature rude behavior of the nutroots.”
Naïve world view? “There is good, and there is evil.” “You are either for us or for the terrorists.” “Saddam (oops – the terrorists) are evil.” “We are so righteous and pure in our actions that nobody can have any legitimate grievance against us.”
Nutroots? At least the Democrats have the decency to hide their crazies on the internet in comment sections and blogs. Republicans parade them around and give them national air time every week. Please see Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, and others.
Finally (everybody is probably cheering and saying about time),
“More than that, though, I’ve been nauseated by the totalitarian mindset on shameless display in lefty blog comments..”
So, a self-described “reasonable” centrist is thinking about becoming a Republican because of the totalitarian tendencies he sees amongst Democrats (a narrow subset as you describe it)? Are you being disingenuous or naïve?
September 23rd, 2006 at 4:17 pm
At this point Doug Stanhope absolutely has my vote.
http://www.stanhope08.com/
September 23rd, 2006 at 5:45 pm
Vote for either Republicans or Democrats. But for God’s sake, don’t make a decision based on blog comments. I’ve seen comments on right wing blogs saying liberal professors should be killed and their skins nailed to a barn. You can find comments advocating almost anything if you look hard enough. And the more polemical the site, the more outraged the comments.
It’s only natural that the party out of power is going to attract the more outraged commenters. Why should the people who run everything be angry? I think you’re forgetting some of the things Republicans were saying when Clinton was in power.
September 24th, 2006 at 2:33 am
I generally lean democrat when it comes to social issues, particularly on things I believe should be personal decisions, and issues from which I think religion should be kept out of. That said, for the last few years I’ve found myself moving more toward the republican party, not because I agree with them, but rather because the dems have failed to articulate a foreign policy that I can stand behind and defend. The most I’ve heard is the knee jerk reaction of the “hate anything Bush” crowd, and the “now war at any cost, for any reason, let’s leave and abandon imperialist aims” crowd. I understand the anger against the administration, and yes I agree that they have done some stuff that was pig-headed, short-sided and that made us fit the imperialist mold that bin Laden crafted for us, however I disagree with their emotional outbursts and think that a better approach is to argue based on the facts and with convincing policies and strategies that address the problems the administration has created. Sometimes, I feel alone, because the loudest voices in the democratic party are the far left ones and those that see America as evil no matter what. Meanwhile, in the republican party the only voices I hear are those who call anyone who disagrees with the administration “fascist loving, commie pinkos” and worst or those who criticize and talk about Ahmadinejad and the “theocracy” in Iran while at the same time promoting a political agenda based on fundamentalist christianity here at home. I’m frankly tired of both…sometimes, I feel like changing party affiliation and becoming a republican so that I can participate in primaries and vote for those moderate republicans who don’t use faith to gain political advantage, but I fear leaving the democratic party to the far left. In short, we moderates do have a decision to make, regardless of which of the two parties one joins, it is better than standing on the sidelines and watching them both embrace the radicals on both sides of the political spectrum. As for me, I will remain a democrat if only to place my vote with moderates such as Biden (at least as far as Foreign Relations are concerned) and prevent the radicals from taking over completely over the party.
Okay, enough with this rant…now I’m depressed.
September 24th, 2006 at 10:31 am
Everyone should vote their conscience, which is one problem I have with Hillary. I believe she votes the polling numbers and focus group results rather than her conscience.
I also believe that nominating Hillary as the Democratic candidate for President in 2008 would not only guarantee a ground swell of conservative voters, but woudl be more likely to make an uber-conservative their choice.
http://dontbealemming.com/2006/09/24/jerry-falwell-says-hillary-clinton-will-mobilize-gop-base.aspx
Posted by the Lemming Herder from Don’t Be A Lemming!
September 24th, 2006 at 11:32 am
The “here” and “here” links don’t link to actual comments, so there’s no way to discern what you might mean by a “totalitarian mindset.”
So, assuming that this is not an oversight, I’d say, sure, become a Republican: Forceful assertions backed by no evidence have been a potent tool for them.
September 24th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
“Why should the people who run everything be angry?”
Umm, actually the Republicans run everything and are still angry – some type of majority minority syndrome.
September 24th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
“That said, for the last few years I’ve found myself moving more toward the republican party, not because I agree with them, but rather because the dems have failed to articulate a foreign policy that I can stand behind and defend.”
“I disagree with their [democrats] emotional outbursts and think that a better approach is to argue based on the facts and with convincing policies and strategies that address the problems the administration has created.”
So, you would rather stand behind, defend and support disastrously failed and failing foreign policy in the hands of Republicans? Your friend is drunk and drives your car off the road into a ditch. Do you let him keep driving? Personally, I would take the keys away.
I would rather have NO FOREIGN POLICY than a Neocon foreign policy. Their farcical War on Terror in Iraq destabilized the region, increased the likelihood of additional terror acts on our soil, and increased Iran’s power and prestige in the region (an opposite effect the Neocons were actually going for). Republican knee jerk foreign policy is “stay the course” (even when it is not working). Neocons knee jerk foreign policy is a second (Iran) and maybe third (Syria) invasion to stimulate regime change. (Oh, that will solve the problem. More war. Look! A raging forest fire! Let’s douse it with thousands of gallons of gasoline. BRILLIANT!)
Pre-emptive strike and regime change are horrible foreign policies. Democracy does not magically appear after the US removes a totalitarian regime. All our regime change does it to create a power vacuum that will likely be filled by a different baddie.
Democracy is like a muscle and must be exercised. A society with no democratic experience will have troubles and friction. Democracy can get you to a better place but it takes time (e.g. South Africa and the oppression of the majority by the politically powerful minority, or an earlier time in our history, when the majority failed to recognize even the humanity of certain members of our society…slaves). What we really want is liberty for everyone. Liberty comes from tolerance and acceptance and respect for rule of law. These always take time to develop, especially if you’ve only known bigotry, distrust, and corruption.
September 24th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
DosPeros: No, I think it’s Meredith C. Sheehan.
September 24th, 2006 at 4:10 pm
Tom: I wish more states had open primaries. The nominating process is so skewed towards the wings.
I just learned that my liberal-independent mother (a kick-ass 82) registered as a Republican because she wanted to vote in a particular primary race. Thus demonstrating that it is possible to register as a Republican without becoming — identifying as — a Republican. Since I viscerally dislike partisanship, that’s probably as far as I’ll go.
September 24th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
Amba: Go as far as you think necessary. My personal situation is that I live on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, so if I’m not a registered Democrat, I have no meaningful vote. If you’re living somewhere that has actual meaningful elections, good on ya. Good luck choosing the least worst option. If you’re the sort of person who thinks too much, I feel for you. Our (intellectual) ancestors died so that we could make these sorts of choices. Man, oh man.
September 25th, 2006 at 12:13 am
better dead than red, all i can say is: You are good.
It is beyond me how anyone who really thinks about what is going on in the world can honestly say that Republicans, embodied as they are by the current administration, are representative of any but a small group of fundamentalist Christians who earnestly hope for the end of the world. Having the perspective of past membership in the latter group, all i can say is Be Afraid. These are not people guided by what is best for anyone other than themselves, and they think they’re going to be airlifted out of here sooner rather than later, so what happens to the planet or humanity is an afterthought.
Republicans, less this influence are basically bog standard humans just like Democrats and Sunnis and Zoroastrians and Socialists. The differences between Republicans and Democrats are not as pronounced as demagogues on either side would have anyone believe.
I can’t rule out paranoia, but my feeling is that the greatest danger to the Republican party, and by extension the world since they are in power, is the influence of fundamentalist Christianity. There is no difference between fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Muslims. Christians and Muslims do not present a danger, it’s fundamentalism. Zealotry, not straightforward ideology or religious belief is the root of the problem, though I have my own issues with religious belief.
Amba correctly points out that our political system appeals to and encourages extremism. Should we then zealously overthrow our system to encourage moderation? Um, prolly not. Moderation in politics is a pain in the ass. Extremism is easy. It requires no thought beyond the primary colors, and provides immediate release of frustration. Or, at least easily self-defined objects of one’s frustration. Moderate politial thought is boring and requires work, which is why it has a limited appeal.
It’s possible that some changes need to be made to the way politicians are elected, but I’m always suspicious of anyone who makes such suggestions. This system has worked quite well for a long time, though it’s difficult for me to escape the thought that that’s because the de-marginalization of large swaths of people here is a relatively recent phenomenon. Having said that: Measure twice and cut once.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:20 am
other than fundamentalist Muslims are a little more well versed in
hatred and killing in the name of god.
When was the last time a christian flew an airplane full of people into
a crowded building?
September 25th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
Amba, back in July I argued that moderates need to do exactly what you’re contemplating: join a party and work to put centrists in positions of power and get centrists nominated as candidates. Don’t worry too much about the label on the door; your loyalty should be to your principles and the party you want to create, not the hackneyed, corrupt platform you’re trying to do away with.
Good luck!
September 25th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
What nykrindc said.
September 25th, 2006 at 4:59 pm
Lambert Strether,
You evidently didn’t look past Line 1 when you went to the links. Each is a gathering of quoted comments, one on Bush, Chavez and Ahmadinejad at the UN, the a group of feminists saying “let’s get” Ann Althouse (as if she was Leon Trotsky or something).
ADHD?
September 25th, 2006 at 5:06 pm
Moderate politi[c]al thought is boring and requires work, which is why it has a limited appeal.
Infantrie, you just said a mouthful. LOL.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:39 am
Amba,
I don’t see how the lefty blog comments sampled at the two links even support the notion of totalitarian tendencies. A more alarming totalitarian tendency is accusing one’s enemies of being a traitor of wrapping oneself in the flag and accusing those who don’t support you of being unpatriotic. Some Republican Congressmen called people who did not support the war traitors. Others in the right wing community (not necessarily part of the end times crowd either) want to shoot all traitors. The level of reactionary emotional vindictiveness seems to be as high or higher in the right wing community than anything the Democrats can muster.
I object to those claiming to have a moderate political ideology and then for one emotional reason or another (“those Democrats are just mean-spirited!”) prefer Republicans. Such justification is as emotional and petty as the tendencies of which you accuse the Democratic wingers. To even vote for moderate Republicans is to approve of Republican stewardship for the last 6 years (“here are the keys back.”). The moderate Republican junior senator from where ever is not going to be able to change the face of the Republican party for quite some time. Continued endorsement of the Republican party is to approve of their domestic and foreign policies, to be ok with illegal wiretapping, to be ok with torture, and to be ok with Congress (a Republican Congress) passing legislation that retroactively legalizes all of the Bush lawlessness.
These are the facts which should be given sober and careful consideration.