"If There's a Bustle in Your Hedgerow, Don't Be Alarmed Now..."
"Why don't you take a good look at yourself and describe what you see, and baby, baby, baby, do you like it?" In addition to being a great Led Zeppelin lyric, it is also a question that John McCain and congressional Republicans have to be asking themselves tonight.
Obama must be congratulated for running a well-disciplined and historic campaign. Nevertheless, the Republicans, miraculously, despite much that was stacked against them (largely of their own doing), could still have won this election. Why didn't they? For one, they set their principles aside and played on the Democrats' field for much of the past several years, and they were exceptionally inept at effectively expressing their vision.
Republicans have always been about small government, a strong national defense, and values. It's no secret they dropped the small government ball during Bush's two terms. In many ways, I believe they felt compelled to do so because of Bush's stark inability to articulate a vision and describe why Republican core ideals, particularly the economic ones, are good for the entire country, not just the privileged class. Without a deft, communicative, persuasive leader, the Republicans, seeking some traction, gravitated toward traditional Democrat play book maneuvers—money and programs for all in hopes it would curry favor and pay dividends at the ballot box. As should have been anticipated, the results were disastrous. The base became disillusioned, and Democrats successfully demagogued Republican actions as still not enough. A classic no win situation.
What now? The situation is dire, but perhaps not as bad as many perceive it. Most importantly, Republicans need to recognize that they don't have to abandon their core principles. They do, however, have to invest considerable energy into figuring out how to explain/communicate why those principles matter—particularly to younger voters.
The Democrats have an enormous and growing voter registration advantage. By one estimate, the margin is 86 million to 55 million. That is a colossal hurdle to overcome every 2, 4, and 6 years. The Republicans cannot continue to cede a large percentage of young voters to the Democrats. They've got to recognize that their brand is stale. It has to be updated such that young people understand why they have a stake in what the Republicans are promulgating. It needs to be seen as less ideological and more tolerant. It needs to recapture the "party of big ideas" high ground. Again, it doesn't mean core beliefs require altering; it does, though, mean a dramatic change in the messaging.
On the bright side, younger, more educated voters, should be the most amenable to a well-constructed, logical argument. They do, after all, have the most vested interest in the future. Younger voters can be educated on the history and perils of government excess, and its impact on deficits, and ultimately on our nation's prosperity. Young voter idealism ought not be squelched, but helped to recognize that the less fortunate cannot be lifted up if the country is not on sound fiscal footing. And, sound fiscal footing is the direct byproduct of controlling the size of government.
Tonight was rough for the Republican party, but it should also be a wake-up call and a new beginning. A plurality of the nation supports a great deal of what Republicans have traditionally stood for. The voters simply have to be reinvigorated by fresh, charismatic, skillful leadership that is equipped with an updated message—one that is particularly compelling to younger voters.
Good luck to Barak Obama and his administration. The country is resilient and can rapidly address its numerous issues if there is reasonable cooperation from all sides—and strong leadership from the top.
Obama must be congratulated for running a well-disciplined and historic campaign. Nevertheless, the Republicans, miraculously, despite much that was stacked against them (largely of their own doing), could still have won this election. Why didn't they? For one, they set their principles aside and played on the Democrats' field for much of the past several years, and they were exceptionally inept at effectively expressing their vision.
Republicans have always been about small government, a strong national defense, and values. It's no secret they dropped the small government ball during Bush's two terms. In many ways, I believe they felt compelled to do so because of Bush's stark inability to articulate a vision and describe why Republican core ideals, particularly the economic ones, are good for the entire country, not just the privileged class. Without a deft, communicative, persuasive leader, the Republicans, seeking some traction, gravitated toward traditional Democrat play book maneuvers—money and programs for all in hopes it would curry favor and pay dividends at the ballot box. As should have been anticipated, the results were disastrous. The base became disillusioned, and Democrats successfully demagogued Republican actions as still not enough. A classic no win situation.
What now? The situation is dire, but perhaps not as bad as many perceive it. Most importantly, Republicans need to recognize that they don't have to abandon their core principles. They do, however, have to invest considerable energy into figuring out how to explain/communicate why those principles matter—particularly to younger voters.
The Democrats have an enormous and growing voter registration advantage. By one estimate, the margin is 86 million to 55 million. That is a colossal hurdle to overcome every 2, 4, and 6 years. The Republicans cannot continue to cede a large percentage of young voters to the Democrats. They've got to recognize that their brand is stale. It has to be updated such that young people understand why they have a stake in what the Republicans are promulgating. It needs to be seen as less ideological and more tolerant. It needs to recapture the "party of big ideas" high ground. Again, it doesn't mean core beliefs require altering; it does, though, mean a dramatic change in the messaging.
On the bright side, younger, more educated voters, should be the most amenable to a well-constructed, logical argument. They do, after all, have the most vested interest in the future. Younger voters can be educated on the history and perils of government excess, and its impact on deficits, and ultimately on our nation's prosperity. Young voter idealism ought not be squelched, but helped to recognize that the less fortunate cannot be lifted up if the country is not on sound fiscal footing. And, sound fiscal footing is the direct byproduct of controlling the size of government.
Tonight was rough for the Republican party, but it should also be a wake-up call and a new beginning. A plurality of the nation supports a great deal of what Republicans have traditionally stood for. The voters simply have to be reinvigorated by fresh, charismatic, skillful leadership that is equipped with an updated message—one that is particularly compelling to younger voters.
Good luck to Barak Obama and his administration. The country is resilient and can rapidly address its numerous issues if there is reasonable cooperation from all sides—and strong leadership from the top.
I think you outlined the issue and hit the nail square on the head. I would like to hear your observations about what needs to be done. Unfortunately, the current establishment of the Republican party, especially in PA, does not want to move in that direction. Try and get involved in the party and I can tell you it is almost impossible. That being the case I don´t see much hope in changing the party`s future if they are not willing to permit new entrants to enlist. I would still like to hear your thoughts.
Reply to this
As I've posted in the past, the one lesson the Republicans should have taken away from the past eight years is that communication and vision are essential. The GOP has to once again become the party of "Big Ideas", but it has to have credible, articulate, persuasive spokespeople to get the message out. If I were part of the Republican establishment, I'd strongly consider Newt Gingrich as head of the RNC. He clearly has baggage with the liberal media, but nobody in the GOP couples big, innovative, progressive thinking with persuasive articulation like Gingrich. His academic background might also gain him some credibility with younger voters. If he doesn't have his sights set on the Presidency, I'd sign him up for the RNC.
Reply to this