Republicans Shift Strategy Back To Ideas?
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in RepublicansIf the following is true, it would be refreshing. Mostly because it’ll hopefully bring about good ideas instead of tired rhetoric.
Still, the plan is fraught with peril, mostly because Republicans lost power because of their ideology. Some say it’s because they didn’t adhere to that ideology closely enough, but how many conservatives do you know fully supported the war and the spending that went into it? Yes, exactly.
I just got off the phone with a very plugged-in Republican strategist who told me that Republican reaction to President Obama’s speech, which the party will roll out in the next few days, will mark the beginning of a new GOP approach to opposing the president’s initiatives. (No, Bobby Jindal’s ineffective response was not part of that new approach — everyone seems a little embarrassed about that.) The Republican leadership in the House has concluded that in the stimulus debate, the GOP succeeded in dominating a number of news cycles but failed to score any points on actual policy. That, the leaders believe, has got to change.“You’re seeing a major doctrinal shift in how Republicans are going to focus all these debates,” the strategist told me. “The key is to focus on winning the issue as opposed to winning the political moment. If you win the issue, people will think you are ready to govern.”
I asked him to elaborate a little. “With the political moment, it’s how can you find the one thing that gives you the momentary upper hand in terms of the coverage for the next six hours — as opposed to engaging the electorate in creating a structural change in their opinion on which party is better able to handle an issue.”
During the stimulus debate, the strategist argued, Republicans had an actual alternative but were unable to direct much attention to it — in part because they were focusing so much of their rhetoric on the massive and unnecessary spending in the bill. The debate became a question of an up-or-down decision on the Obama/Democratic plan — not a choice between the Obama/Democratic plan and a Republican plan. “The coverage of the stimulus bill focused on the difference between the House and Senate versions,” the strategist told me, “which were basically two sides of the same coin.” The Republican role was limited to a) saying no to the Obama/Democratic bill, and b) having three moderates in the Senate approve of the bill as long as it offered a little less than what Democrats proposed. The idea that Republicans, mostly in the House, had an actual full-scale alternative, was lost. “On the Sunday talk shows, right after it passed, find me one person who mentioned the Republican alternative,” the strategist said.
So, basically, it’s not enough to keep pushing your ideas if they’re tired and Americans have lost faith in them. You have to reinvigorate the electorate somehow with a truly unique philosophy and until that happens I think conservatives will find themselves frustrated and see their power slipping further away.
Your thoughts?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 25th, 2009 and is filed under Republicans. 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.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
As I recall the only idea the Republicans had was to overwhelm every other program with tax cuts. Not one new idea in sight.
February 26th, 2009 at 6:11 am
Well, I think the point of the unnamed strategist was their was a GOP plan–it just wasn’t promoted. During the whole brouhaha, I tried to cut through the noise and see if there was a plan, but from all I could see it was simply a variation of the Democratic one–in other words, it was a matter of degrees of emphasis rather than substantial difference.
For example, there was talk of a $500 billion plan at one point that had additional infrastructure spending, but less of the spending the GOP didn’t consider stimulus (there was also another Democratic Party plan like this), as well as some plan to allow home owners to refinance their home mortgages at a low interest rate. Then there was some caveat requiring spending reductions.
How these last two would be done was never clear.
The problem is/was that the GOP leadership is so entrenched in its “Democrats bad, GOP=America” spin (an idea carried forward by Jindal in the GOP response), that the entire Republican party was marginalized in the debate.
This is why the GOP leadership as it stands needs to be destroyed even if it means single party rule for a while. The GOP leadership is bankrupt of ideas and integrity; nothing will bring about change faster than its total defeat so a new group can step forward.
As I’ve said many times–I am not anti-Republican, I am opposed to people who have taken control of the party since Reagan.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:14 am
You guys are funny. Whenever I hear about “new” ideas coming from government I’m reminded of a chef looking down at three ingredients saying, “We have to find a new recipe!!” Gosh, if we take these two, flip-it-around, re-name it, cook-it a little shorter — it will look different & smell different. It doesn’t matter what how you arrange it, name it, or cook it. There is no getting-rid of the shit-tasting inefficiencies and waste of government. So you can tell me that we are getting caviar all day long — ultimately the elements will break down to the same old shit-sandwich we are use to from the federal government.
The “new idea” concept of government is not only “tired”, but deceitful fodder for big government liberals. I haven’t seen a new idea come out of the Obama administration — all I’ve seen is an orgy of spending wrapped in a pretty little bow of Obama rhetoric.
The Republicans do not have to worry. We know what is going to happen and it will. The porkapolooza is a gift to Republicans that will keep on giving for decades to come.
February 26th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Harden is a perfect example of what’s wrong with the typical Republican true believer. Government evil, government bad, government incompetent. Corporation good, corporation wise, corporation brilliant. Tax cuts good. That’s pretty much the limits of their comprehension not necessarily because they’re stupid but because this is the faith they’ve chosen to live by.
February 27th, 2009 at 10:09 am
You should not wade too far into the “comprehesion” or “stupid” name-calling waters there Jim. But in the spirit of bipartinsanship that has gripped the country since Obama’s ascension to power — I hope that you and Obama are right! Perhaps the razor that we are using to slit our own wrists is Occam’s and we have discovered the infallable and blunt truth to overcoming all economic downturns we find ourselves, to wit: We borrow/create/tax to spend by the federal government. The easiest answer is usually the correct one. I for one am preparing for the salad day pay-off of this policy.
My love affair is not with corporations per se. It is with free enterprise, entrepreneurialism, creative destruction, competition, innovation & hard work.
I know very much the limits of my comprehension Jim. You’re friends is D.C. do not unfortunately — and they fervently believe that they have greater comprehension in all fields than the private sector, even though they are significantly removed from the real-time, ground-level business for which they want to control.
Jim S. — so as to remain morally superior I will not claim that you are perfect example of a big government lemming that really doesn’t have the foggiest clue about how wealth is created and believes that all financially successful people achieved said wealth by exploiting the proletariat. In short, I won’t call you a communist.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Jim S –
You can make the same exact argument about people who have faith in government solutions, faith in restricting enterprise, etc. How do you make your argument and not see this?