A friend of mine who is a Republican political operative in Pennsylvania sent me this e-mail today. I thought it offered an interesting view from the ground:
No more TV ad, radio ads, campaign mailers, or pre-recorded phone calls! I was too tired to do this yesterday, so you are getting it a day late.
The financial panic (by definition, people don’t act rationally in a panic) was the decisive factor that drove this race out of reach for McCain, but that doesn’t take away from the stellar campaign Obama’s team ran. Their campaign was extremely organized and well managed. If anyone dedicated a significant amount of time to the effort, especially those who volunteered without pay, they are deserving of congratulations. I know how much hard work goes into a campaign, and those who gave of themselves to help Obama win should be allowed to enjoy their moment.
Obviously, I disagree with the choice that was made on Tuesday. However, there is nothing I can do about it until the new administration is formed and gets to work with the Congress. The country has survived terrible Presidents before. We can only continue to oppose ideas that we believe are wrong for the country and work to inform others about the implications of bad public policy decisions.
Always an optimist, I will point out a few bright spots from this election:
· – Republicans can’t be blamed for anything while the Democrats are in power. The trouble in the financial markets has barely begun to hit the real economy, and the onset of major economic pain will coincide with the first few months of an Obama administration. It should not be too difficult to drive the message that Obama made things worse.
· – Expectations for this guy are too high for him to possibly meet them. When Obama confronts the realities of governing, his most passionate supporters will be the most disappointed.
· – We don’t have to carry the water for the Bush administration any longer. Bush did a number of things that are contrary to core Republican values (he governed like a Democrat-light), and most Republicans can readily rattle off a list of issues they disagree with Bush on. This will be especially liberating for the many economic conservatives who believe in small government and fiscal responsibility.
· – An opposition party does not have to trouble itself with facts. The Democrats certainly didn’t, and we won’t have to either.
· – The Democrats have hit their high water mark, and 2010 should be a decent year for Republicans. Many Democrat House and Senate members elected in 2006 and 2008 are rather conservative. Enacting a liberal agenda will endanger these members. Indeed, most presidents lose seats in Congress for their party in midterm elections. Bush was the exception to this rule in 2002, winning majorities from a nation hungry for the effective conservative governance that was ultimately never delivered.
· – Attorney General Tom Corbett was reelected with over 52% of the vote (that’s 9 point ahead of McCain in the state). He could potentially be a strong candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania in 2010.
· – Ed Rendell could be nominated to Obama’s cabinet, leaving a senile old lady with major health problems in charge of a state that will almost definitely have to raise taxes next year to close some big budget gaps. If that doesn’t help the PA GOP get a Governor elected, I don’t know what will.
· – The religious right believes Obama is the antichrist. With the social conservative wing of the GOP focused how much they hate Obama, as opposed to getting rid of supposedly apostate Republicans like Arlen Specter, we should be able to promote more electable candidates in the next few years.
In closing, it’s important to remember that conservative ideas were not rejected in the election, only Republican management. We deserved the drubbing we got, but we still live in a center-right country. Many voters I talked to (I was at the edge of the Philly exurbs – a huge swing area- all day on Tuesday) were not so much voting for Obama, as much they were trying to teach Republicans a lesson. I hope our party’s leaders learn it. Obama and the Democrats have the power to enact their agenda, but they don’t have a huge mandate like FDR or Reagan did. They’ll overreach. When they do, we need be ready to come out of the wilderness loaded for bear.
P.S. By the way, our 2012 candidate should under no circumstances be Sarah Palin. Choosing her was an interesting tactic at first, because it made hypocrites out of the Obama people who criticized her for not being qualified enough. Ultimately though, she didn’t pan out as a good candidate, because she never got up to speed (Obama had almost 2 years to polish himself on the campaign trail – he was as bad as Palin in his early primary debates and interviews). She’s not the reason McCain lost, and she’s had a good start in Alaska, but folksy populism is not the right path for the future of the party.
Personally, I thought Huckabee was, and would have been, a good candidate. He has that populist Clinton-esque way of connecting with blue-collar voters, and I think he might have held on to more of the working class vote than did McCain, and certainly would have been more successful in NC, VA, MO, OH, and IN. I also thought that Palin was marginally effective, at least insofar as she energized the base. She did not, however, attract women; at least not where I live in Virginia, nor in the Philly Exurbs that decide that state.
I supported McCain in the primary, but back then the economy was relatively good and it was all about Iraq. In the end, the race took a turn down a road where McCain just didn’t have the ability to articulate the conservative economic message, which was a ‘must’ given the economic crisis. In the debates, he failed to point out Obama’s catastrophic economic plan – especially with respect to energy and taxes. By the time he made an issue out of taxes, voters had already watched the debates and decided that Obama was OK. McCain also failed during the debates to correct Obama’s lies and distortions about his economic plan, and he was equally dismal at communicating how conservative policies are better for people at all ends of the income scale. The fact is, with voters placing (undeserved) blame for the economic crisis on Republicans, I don’t think any Republican could have won this race. But, much as I love and admire John McCain, he did not get the job done, and he was right to assume the blame in his concession speech.
As to the future, I’m inclined to agree with my friend from Pennsylvania. Republican candidates in 2010 and 2012 need to get back to the basic messages of fiscal responsibilty and effective, efficient government.
I would add that I think two other shifts have taken place in this election cycle. First, voters have truly disconnected with the NeoCon view of U.S. foreign policy. Their recent 7 year tutorial in that philosophy may have a great deal to do with it. Although we will certainly have to continue to pursue terrorism, it may be time to do so more conservatively, and it may be time to resume a more traditionally conservative foreign policy message on other issues.
Second, while I believe that our social conservative wing has much to offer and the best of intentions, we may wish to adopt a less abrasive tone than President Bush established on the issues that our social conservative brethern place so much emphasis. Times, they are a-changin’.
As a final thought, I believe that the immigration issue will take a front and center stance in the 2010 election. Obama and the congressional liberals will surely try to “reform” immigration law to legalize the roughly 15 million illegals in the U.S. They will also surely fail to put up a border wall to stop a new generation of illegals from inundating the U.S. With a slow economy, I can’t think of a better economic wedge issue with which to bludgeon Democrat candidates for the next four years.
May the next four years be better for the country than we expect. As Sean Hannity puts it so well: if Obama fails, he fails all of us.
November 6th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Some great points!
The very dynamic that made it a “Democratic Year”, lousy economy, troubling national issues, etc. is the same dynamic that will make it a “Republican Year” in 2012. We are in troubled times, and they don’t look to soften much.
November 6th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
I know everyone’s looking to the 2012 Presidential election, but I’m wondering what’s going to happen to people who have been in the limelight during the past 8 years or during this election cycle that may be doomed to go unnoticed forever (and shouldn’t). Specifically, I’m wondering what the future holds for people like Condoleezza Rice, Carly Fiorina, and Meg Whitman… all moderate GOP women with strong ties to the GOP, high favorables, etc., who I feel should all have a future in electoral politics. I care more about their brand of Republicanism than, say, Mike Huckabee’s or Sarah Palin’s. Anyone have any thoughts?
November 6th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Oh, and I think Republicans need to stop assuming that their position on the immigration issue is so amazing or something… Bush and McCain (and even Sam Brownback!) had it figured out that comprehensive immigration reform is a way better way to grow the party than xenophobia, and I can’t understand why Republicans would cling to such a ridiculous position (get rid of them Mexicans!) when they’re down…
November 6th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
McCain’s flaw is he was a foreign policy candidate poorly equipped for domestic issues in a time of unexpected economic crisis. He wasn’t particularly elegant or good at articulating himself facing an extremely charismatic and well spoken opponent. Combined with his opposition to going negative on his opponent (or at least starting the attacks way too late after Obama has defined himself) and there was no way he was going to win.
Palin had 2 purposes- rally and energize the base, and reach out to independent women and Hillary supporters. She greatly succeeded at the former, and failed miserably at the latter. Ultimately if she lost McCain support, it was on the margins and the result wouldn’t have been different otherwise. I think her best course is to go back to Alaska, win another term as Governor, quietly build some D.C. allies and study up on national issues, and come back not in 4 years (too soon, her image is too tarnished) but in 8 or 12 depending on when the next opening is. She’s still so young, that she can come back as an older, wiser, reinvented candidate. Similar to Nixon after he left the spotlight. They won’t have Sarah Palin to kick around anymore. Running for Senate is an interesting idea too in terms of getting her thrown into national debate right away, but if the problem is she’s not ready yet, that might just provide her more opportunities to trip up in the spotlight and really what she needs is time and space to re-emerge.
I agree with everything in the post except for the last point. We can’t play the anti-immigrant card too hard. Hispanics are a growing force in the populace and if we turn them off say goodbye to Texas and the rest of the southwest, and goodbye to ever winning a national election again. Quite frankly, the perfect candidate for us would be an Hispanic Catholic social/fiscal conservative from a big state like California. Do any exist? This is a problem.
November 6th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
I know that Huckabee is typically thought of as inadequate for the office of President of the United States, but I do take exception to the notion that ‘NO’ Republican could have won the race this year.
Huckabee would have had solid ideas that would have been well communicated to a nation worried over an economic crisis. Mitt Romney would have been brilliant on the issue of the economy so long as he didn’t do what he did to try to woo Michigan voters during the primary, namely, offering government handouts. For as brilliant an economic mind as Romney is, he was extremely ineffective in relating complicated economic ideas to people whose only indicator of the economy’s strength or weakness is the stock market, which is a marginal indicator at best.
I would say that Palin’s main shortcoming was that fact that her pick came way to fast and furious and was done more out of desperation than careful planning. As can be seen from so many of McCain’s moves during the campaign, Palin’s pick was a knee-jerk reaction and not a carefully thought out strategy. That being said, had yesterday and today been the START of the stock market’s troubles, McCain would be the President.
I think one other item that hasn’t been mentioned that ought to be: Just how amazing is Karl Rove? If McCain’s campaign was run by a great deal of the same people who worked on Bush’s campaign, why was it so frenetic? The glaring difference for me is the absence of Karl Rove. He’s truly a mastermind.
November 6th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
I believe that anti-illegal immigration and border security could be one of our top issues in 2010 and 2012. Palin would be smart to distance herself quickly from McCain’s comprehensive immigration support.
November 6th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
I am not sure what exactly a “neocon” is, or what the 7 year tutorial allegedly taught us, or how one pursues terrorism more conservatively?
The key variable is eliminating state sponsorship of terror. But how does one go about that task more conservatively and less neocon-ly? How long do we put up with state sponsors without taking action? A decade? A century? Until there is a domestic revolution?
I am sorry Michael, but I think your comments on the war on terror are off the mark… by a wide margin.
November 6th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
I agree that immigration will be an issue in the midterm elections, but I don’t think it will be the most important issue. The economy will continue to be the most important issue. It’s not getting better any time soon. We haven’t had conservative governance since the 90’s when the Republicans ran Congress and had principles.
The Republicans need to embrace sound economic policies while also not throwing out social conservatism. Social conservatism is a winning issue since there are more social conservatives in the country than social liberals. We absolutely have to have economic conservatism as well, and Bush has been a disaster on this, with the exception of tax cuts. The Republicans lack branding identity. We need to establish the Republican Party as the conservative party and the Democratic Party as the liberal party once again in order to win. Right now most people think of Republicans as the party of government, corruption, and incompetence, and they think of the Democrats as something different so they must be better. They’re really a blank slate, like Obama. We can establish the Republican brand by taking principled stands against Obama’s bad policies like we did against Clinton’s bad policies in the early 90’s. The formula is there right before us. That’s how we win.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
The economy will turn around before 2012, maybe even by 2010. No recession lasts 4 years. So President Obama will be running for reelection on a revitalized economy. It is also likely that he will have brought the troops home from Iraq. The only real question is what big initiative will he pursue. He says energy. If that succeeds I doubt there is any republican who will beat him.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Recessions turn around when they’re not artificially tinkered with such as what Hoover did…hmmm…now that I think about it, isn’t that the kind of ‘tinkering’ that Obama plans on doing???
November 6th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
#3: That’s an awfuly simplistic view of everyone who disagreed with the Bush approach.
There were two types of amnesty oppnents: those who favored any amnesty of any kind, and those who said no amnesty UNTIL we secure the border. Plenty of conservatives/ Republicans signed on to that approach (Giuliani, Larry Elder, McCain from June 2007 on). And even among blanket amnesty opponents I haven’t heard anyone say “lets kick the Mexicans out” so cut the hyperbole, OK?
And it may interest you to know that in California, most hispanic citizens ** support ** restrictions on illegal immigration, provided they believe the restrictions are reasonable and are assured that the action is not targeted towards an entire ethnic group. Everyone remembers how much hispanics soured over Wilson’s support of Prop 187 in California, but what people forget was that until Prop 187 supporters started to run the infamous “they keep coming” ads, Prop 187 was actually FAVORED by a bare majority of hispanics. And in the 2003 recall hispanics almost split between Cruz Bustamante (a Mexican-American and an advocate of drivers licenses for illegal aliens) and Schwarzeneggar (who opposed the drivers license bill).
November 6th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
#11 latino Americans are actually socially conservative.. its the “us vs them” philosophy (or at least that how its perceived) that scares them into the Dem’s waiting arms.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
I agree with The Other Seth, SJM and Sean P: The immigration issue needs to be entirely rethought — which is my summary/conflation of their positions.
The issue is a law-and-order issue, but it is one that the GOP should approach from a forward-looking perspective. The worst approach would be to rewarm the grandstanding of Rush in his grumpier moments or the anti-CIR activists when McCain promoted that measure.
Consider that one in eight people in the country were born abroad. It would be a shameful mistake for the GOP to ignore them, or even worse, insult and scare them. Folks, that’ll never work.
Local and state candidates who can point out the overlap between their (mostly) conservative views, law-and-order governance, and conservative social values would get a serious hearing. Potential congressional candidates need to be true “uniters and not dividers” on these shared issues. And all of these candidates should remind everyone that this and the issue of economic are why the newcomers and our forefathers came to this country.
None of them came here for hand-outs. They made an arduous trek for their children to gain the right to vote, participate, and live better lives than the original immigrants.
The Lou Dobbs types and Mark Krikorian types are dying off. It is suicide for the party to reject the newcomers. Our country must put its hope in them for the future.
The worst thing we need in 2012 is a repeat of the primary shouting match about who hated Latino immigrants most. Yes, I know that’s hyperbole and not what was said. But put yourself in the minds of newer citizens with shallow roots in this country: For better or worse, that’s what you hear from the GOP debate of the past primary: “Who can beat on you and your parents the hardest?”
November 6th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
#11, if you really haven’t heard *anyone* say “Let’s kick out all the Mexicans” then you clearly weren’t listening to Tom Tancredo, who was treated as a more serious candidate than Ron Paul. And even though a lot of party leadership hasn’t espoused those views, I’ve heard a lot of views like that expressed on conservative talk-radio and from internet pundits. Even this very post is saying that the 15 million immigrants already here shouldn’t be included under any reforms and that we should build a wall like we’re medieval China or East Germany or something. That’s not a winning position for Republicans.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
And while we’re on the subject of immigration reform, does anyone else think that naturalized citizens should be eligible to run for the Presidency? Not just any naturalized citizen ten days after gaining citizenship or something, but ones who have met *some* sort of time requirement that would make them eligible to run like any other citizen. I mention this because I think it’s a shame that someone like Arnold Schwarzenegger, who clearly loves this country, is an effective political leader, and has lived here since before one 2012 contender was even born (Jindal), doesn’t have the opportunity to run. I’m not even saying that I would support the man if he did win… but really our population is going to increasingly consist of non-native-born citizens who have earned as much right to full participation in our government as anyone who was born here.
And it wouldn’t hurt if the first party to feature such a candidate was the Republican Party…
November 6th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
And it would get rid of all of the “But Barack Obama hasn’t REALLY shown us his birth-certificate!” and “But John McCain was born in PANAMA!” bull.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Not me. There’s no obvious reason to keep altering the original constitution. I don’t see any candidate on the horizon who’s from outside the country and is needed to explain who we are to us. It’s really a solution in the search for a problem.
It would take a constitutional amendment, which takes several years or decades, and has no urgency that I can see.
In fact, it’s sad to think that people with roots in this country who have (hopefully) lived its culture for all their lives would be necessary to run our government. The rules that exist, which permit the foreign born to join Congress, suffice.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
*edit: would be unnecessary to run our government.
November 6th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
[...] Cardinal Seán wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptA friend of mine who is a Republican political operative in Pennsylvania sent me this e-mail today. I thought it offered an interesting view from the ground: No more TV ad, radio ads, campaign mailers, or pre-recorded phone calls! I was too tired to do this yesterday, so you are getting it a day late. The financial panic (by definition, people don’t act rationally in a panic) was the decisive factor that drove this race out of reach for McCain, but that doesn’t take away from the stellar campaign Obama’s team ran. Their campaign was extremely organized and well managed. If anyone dedicated a significant amount of time to the effort, especially those who volunteered without pay, they are deserving of congratulations. I know how much hard work goes into a campaign, and those who gave of themselves to help Obama win should be allowed to […] [...]
November 6th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
You really want to know why McCain lost and the repubs this year? As I thought about more and more, it was not for the reasons that I stated the economy sure that hurt, but why weren’t the Repubs and McCain people would run to in an economic crisis? If voters felt that way, they would have run to McCain in spit of bush.
I am going to be kind but real on here. Maybe I have not been as kind but that was because of the flack I took years ago and still may.
Rush Limbaugh- some of you on here may really like this guy, but to me he is a guy of hate. Sure have your politics don’t vote for a democrat or Obama if you don’t like him. Although, honestly this guy knows nothing about race relations of America and to comment and to act like you are a zar is stupid. Alot of moderate and independents do not like people like this. that is why independents broke for Obama along with 20% of Repub. Palin like her or not, negs really went down when the tone of her rhetoric became somewhat hateful.
That would insight hateful talk at rallies. Some would argue there was hateful stuff said at Obama rallies not reported, I won’t argue with you there, but if you get caught on camera and you know it, then it’s your responsibility to condone it on TV. McCain did that at a town hall and that was exemplary. Some say McCain lost because he should have been meaner and alot more hateful. Listen to what you are saying. If you’re partisan then you will give a partisan response, but if you’re not partisan, you may think about that.
McCain Rallies- Have you ever looked at the McCain rallies? When I saw the republican convention, it really was not diverse at all. Some may say we do have diversity of people in our party. Okay sure you may have a small percentage of 2-5% who are diverse.
However, the question is Why is this party not attracting people of all nationalities, incomes, etc etc on A WHOLE. Another big part of why McCain lost is because other diverse groups did not support him in big numbers. Years ago when these groups were smaller the white sector bigger were attracting more to the Republicans thus supported them. They say by the year 2035 or 2040 the white pop of American will be less than half and it will be a mixture of different nationalities.
For some that scares them, why because it an attempt to hold on to a main race of America. If different groups of people do not feel welcome at a party forget a political party for a minute I mean a party party, then why would they go do it. McCain lost here because at his rallies and convention it was a very non-diverse group of people. Yes, I know some of you on here are diverse, and a few pictures on here are diverse of different senators, gov etc. I am talking about as a whole.
Hate: Why is the Republican Party called the party of Hate. Why do some view them as that? There are different parts to the party. The religious right, the reactionaries, the conservative republicans, the moderate republicans, and the liberal republicans. People can have moral beliefs and try to vote for people they feel is the best person to represent their beliefs I understand that too.
However, how is calling people names or hate going to persuade them or win their over to your side? If your not that is fine, but if they Republicans do that enough they will alienate more people than they draw in
Look at what Regan did morning in America. Was that Hate? No it was not personally I did not care for Regan’s politics, but overall give or take flashes of it, he did not use hate when he was presenting his message. Yes, he spoke of the differences and contrast but Limbaugh type hate just causes problems. People talking about, something is going to happen to Obama. Something almost happen to Bush, Regan, and Ford but when Bush first got elected if I had said something might happen to Bush back then, I would have been chastised even more.
The bottom line is this party needs to reach out to more people by first presenting a message that is clear, positive like REGAN and going into communities and areas where people not like themselves OVERALL on the whole to listen to the problems they face, not trying to solve their problems but listening and trying to relate or being honest that you can not. This is not the Party of Lincoln. African-Americans how ironic that a Republican is what help free them from slavery during the civil war but it was also the Rep party in the 1960’s that wanted to keep segregation legal. African Americans have not forgotten that and if they do not feel welcome to a party AGAIN OVERALL AND AS A WHOLE why would you come, the same is true of other groups.
If different groups of people feel welcome to a party, they will come. McCain won the white vote by 6 points but lost all the other groups. Still many whites went for Obama as all the groups share equal parts of the electorate in the future then people will go where they feel welcome and around others who are diverse.
If you say we don’t want other groups of people, then that is the problem. Sure you may not all agree at times, However agree on just enough with a positive message to work together that is why McCain and a lot of Rep really lost this time.
This is food for thought folks
November 7th, 2008 at 8:20 am
#14, OK, I’ll give you that Tancredo is a “kick out the Mexicans guy”, but I frankly WASN’T listening to him and, once all the dust settled, it was pretty clear that there weren’t very many other Republicans listening to him either.
I still say you were painting with way too broad a brush, and that an “enforcement first” approach to immigration is the best position from a public policy standpoint AND will not alienate hispanic Americans (aside from those who wouldn never consider voting Republican anyway).
November 7th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Enforcement first, yes, I can agree with… but without a multi-billion dollar wall, and make it possible for those already here not to have to “go to the back of the line” for the right to stay here.
November 9th, 2008 at 7:55 am
lol, Im a Black man, and it dont matter which house nuccka u bring out, the people aint buying it, lol Steel, fake azz nukka, Jundal, lol cant wait to see him in western pa, lol or W. VA. See the Gop problem is that ur a bunch of racist, or atleaste u let palin paint that pic. U thought women were gonna come over cause of palin, and u think blacks will come for steel, thats your problem, U think u can trick peolple, but they know who u really are, its all over youtube, and will b4ever exposed, lol u guys dont have a chance. The only red meat your crowds luv is race hating! Like that old ladie, Obamas an Arab, wat a dumb bitch, all of ur missinformation and hate has contamanted ur own wells, lol drink up fools. The Gop Is Corny, kids aint gonna get down with some racist old white guy from the south, lol u dont have a chance. 95% of Blacks, 70% of spanish, 50% white, do the math u turkeys, thought yall went to yale, cant u do math, aint knowone left, lol. Thats what u get for treating mexicans like blacks. See Blacks been Woke up, now the Mexicans are too. The other half of whites that voted for Mc DickHead Are a bunch of race hatting, neo nazi, un educated, bible loving, gun buying rednecks, who are broke, and need a tax cut, lol joe the dumb ass plumer, lol. The Real GOP, are Elites, who look down to the rest of the scum in there party. Imagine Those Elites, who finished HIGHSCHOOL, lol chillin with joe the DickHead, lol never, not in a million years. Its Over, This is wat it is, all the old racist are DYING off, they were young in the 70’s but its 2008, fool, thats allot of dead Turkeys, Hell Mc Loser is bout to take his last flight also, then whose left Palin the Shopper, lol. Im lovin this, Rome Run By a black man, The most powerfull man in the World is a black man, lol Im Shure the KKK, is Just Lovin this, AWWWWW u suckers, lol have to eat Obama for breakfast Lunch & Dinner for the next 4 years, I hope 8! Im lovin this, fox news is on Obamas Dick now, lol I thought he was a terroist, Socialist, lol assholes, while Bush was robbin yall blind, ur hate and anger mad u idots look at nothing but a game of three card monte, with ur life under the shells, lol. Wat A bunch of Turkeys, lol. This one was for all the Black Slaves, All the Indians, the Whole world, that white people have tuched and destroyed, all the cultures stolen, all the diamonds & Gold, all the Mummies from Eygpt, that u stole, All the Knowledge stolen from Africa, all the bad things you have done Under Gods name,all the South Americans who died after u brought Christ to there shores, all the Crap u have put everyone in this world through since u left the shores of Europe, and landed on the shores of the world, like rats who brought Death, u now have been put in a trap, lol ur own trap.