How the GOP Lost the Culture War
- Thread starter Mr. Deez
- Start date
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Great article -- thanks for posting it, Deez.
What this guy doesn't say is that, but for these three issues, the Republicans would be dominating the national political scene.
What this guy doesn't say is that, but for these three issues, the Republicans would be dominating the national political scene.
Larry T. Spider
1,000+ Posts
This is a really broad topic to try to cover in one post, but here goes. The republican party, for reasons too numerous to name, have become the party of the rural and southern. To a certain extent the western US can be lumped in as well. A politicians number one job is to get reelected with everything else being secondary. Running against a democrat meant trying to win the middle and both sides were forced somewhat to the center. Increased competition in the primaries has forced republicans to the far right. This is especially true in the rural and/or southern areas that are where republicans come from these days. What republican primary voters want to hear on social issues is not what the center-right or independents want to hear AT ALL. Republican primary debates have become Jesus competitions with the promotion of teaching creationism in school, denying that the Earth is more than 6000 years old, anti-contraception stances, and arguing that there shouldn't be abortions for women who were raped or who might die from the pregnancy. Which brings us to:
1. Republicans stopped being savvy on abortion.
This issue can be a winner for republicans if they play it smart and understand the long game. Face the facts that the majority of people think a woman should be able to have an abortion if she was raped or might die. Then, focus on the science, not the religious aspects. Stop telling people that arent religious all the religious reasons for being anti-abortion. They dont care. You CAN make a SCIENTIFIC argument against it. That argument will only get better with time because of the rapid rate prenatal care is improving. Amazing things are happening and kids are surviving even when born very early on in pregnancy. Its pretty easy to make the case that a fetus that age should not be aborted. AND you dont have to bring up Jesus to make your point.
2. Republicans got weird about birth control.
If you are going to be the party that thinks abortion is terrible, then try not to be the party thats against the thing most likely to prevent abortions. If we are going to be anti-contraception, just give up now.
3. Republicans bet wrong on gay marriage.
This is a great point from the article: "Republicans never launched an organized push for civil unions as a way to compete for gay voters without alienating religious conservatives who wanted to cordon off marriage for heterosexuals."
Through work, I "get" to spend time with undergrads and high schoolers. The faster republicans abandon the gay issue, the better. Its going to cost them an entire generation. Many of these kids are actually much more conservative than you would think but cant grasp why the GOP is anti-gay (and they are). They have gay friends, coworkers, teachers, family members. The world changed really quickly on this one. The race debate has played out over more than 150 years. The gay debate was won and lost in about 20 years. Failing to realize that will be devastating to the GOP and it will take decades to recover.
The author's final point:
"Republicans lost the culture war because they have been held captive by an increasingly out-of-touch religious right. These examples complicate that narrative. Social conservatives might hinder Republican flexibility on cultural issues to an extent. Yet it was not long ago when Republicans were capable of pursuing incremental abortion restrictions and accepting birth control as part of mainstream society."
Lets go back to my initial point about what forced the republicans so far to the right. Primary competition and attempts to get the vote of the religious right to even have a chance against a dem. They are absolutely being held hostage and the issue is not more complicated than that in many cases. Its easy for the author to look too deep at each issue while missing the bigger picture. Its a great article but I think he misses the reason behind a lot of these seemingly stupid political moves. The leaders werent trying to impress the country, they were fending off competition in a rural (insert southern/western state) primary so they could keep their job. They were able to use incrementalism and accept birth control because the primary voters werent going to go for the nut job. Now they are. Enjoy Dan Patrick.
1. Republicans stopped being savvy on abortion.
This issue can be a winner for republicans if they play it smart and understand the long game. Face the facts that the majority of people think a woman should be able to have an abortion if she was raped or might die. Then, focus on the science, not the religious aspects. Stop telling people that arent religious all the religious reasons for being anti-abortion. They dont care. You CAN make a SCIENTIFIC argument against it. That argument will only get better with time because of the rapid rate prenatal care is improving. Amazing things are happening and kids are surviving even when born very early on in pregnancy. Its pretty easy to make the case that a fetus that age should not be aborted. AND you dont have to bring up Jesus to make your point.
2. Republicans got weird about birth control.
If you are going to be the party that thinks abortion is terrible, then try not to be the party thats against the thing most likely to prevent abortions. If we are going to be anti-contraception, just give up now.
3. Republicans bet wrong on gay marriage.
This is a great point from the article: "Republicans never launched an organized push for civil unions as a way to compete for gay voters without alienating religious conservatives who wanted to cordon off marriage for heterosexuals."
Through work, I "get" to spend time with undergrads and high schoolers. The faster republicans abandon the gay issue, the better. Its going to cost them an entire generation. Many of these kids are actually much more conservative than you would think but cant grasp why the GOP is anti-gay (and they are). They have gay friends, coworkers, teachers, family members. The world changed really quickly on this one. The race debate has played out over more than 150 years. The gay debate was won and lost in about 20 years. Failing to realize that will be devastating to the GOP and it will take decades to recover.
The author's final point:
"Republicans lost the culture war because they have been held captive by an increasingly out-of-touch religious right. These examples complicate that narrative. Social conservatives might hinder Republican flexibility on cultural issues to an extent. Yet it was not long ago when Republicans were capable of pursuing incremental abortion restrictions and accepting birth control as part of mainstream society."
Lets go back to my initial point about what forced the republicans so far to the right. Primary competition and attempts to get the vote of the religious right to even have a chance against a dem. They are absolutely being held hostage and the issue is not more complicated than that in many cases. Its easy for the author to look too deep at each issue while missing the bigger picture. Its a great article but I think he misses the reason behind a lot of these seemingly stupid political moves. The leaders werent trying to impress the country, they were fending off competition in a rural (insert southern/western state) primary so they could keep their job. They were able to use incrementalism and accept birth control because the primary voters werent going to go for the nut job. Now they are. Enjoy Dan Patrick.
Horns11
10,000+ Posts
Even if the voting public and moderate GOP candidates realized all of that tomorrow, it would still take too many election cycles to even it out. You'd have to let the Tea Party win lots of House and Senate seats, prove that they're out of touch, and then beat them a second time around. Most candidates don't have that much time and/or money to devote to that problem.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Larry T. Spider
1,000+ Posts
texas_ex2000
2,500+ Posts
Larry T. Spider
1,000+ Posts
Larry T. Spider
1,000+ Posts
Larry, I think your comments are spot-on. With abortion, the problem for the GOP Is polarization, which is what I think the public truly gets nervous about.
The GOP has been pro-life for decades, but back in the '90s and early 2000s, the party pushed for reasonable restrictions on abortion that were hard to oppose - cracking down on late term abortions, parental notification requirements, etc. This polarized the issue for Democrats and put them on the defensive. If you opposed the GOP's abortion agenda, then you were so extreme on the issue, that you were OK with what was, as a practical matter, infanticide and were ok with minors having abortions without their parents knowing even though they can't get an aspirin at school without their parents knowing. That's just really hard to defend, and it was pretty easy to label such people as not only morally ****** up but also stupid. As a result, the GOP was pretty successful at pushing those limitations on abortion
The GOP could have celebrated those victories while letting the public gradually come their way on the issue as a whole. After all, abortion-on-demand becomes harder to defend every day as medical science improves. You don't need emotion or even religion to win the argument in the long term. However, instead of doing that, they allowed the opposition to reverse the polarization by pushing for "personhood" initiatives, which opened up the door to discussing contraception and became hostile to those who supported abortion rights in cases of rape. Instead of the pro-aborts being on the defensive where they normally should be, the pro-lifers are on the defensive haggling over narrow, extreme situations that implicate abortion. It is a massive PR and political ****-up.
I've long assumed if the pro-life leadership consists of people who are just so strongly impassioned by the issue that they can't in good conscience accept even short-term compromise. However, the older and more cynical I become, the more I wonder if they are the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the Religious Right - meaning that they don't want the issue to be resolved even if it's in their favor because they'd lose their relevance and have to go hustle real jobs.
The GOP has been pro-life for decades, but back in the '90s and early 2000s, the party pushed for reasonable restrictions on abortion that were hard to oppose - cracking down on late term abortions, parental notification requirements, etc. This polarized the issue for Democrats and put them on the defensive. If you opposed the GOP's abortion agenda, then you were so extreme on the issue, that you were OK with what was, as a practical matter, infanticide and were ok with minors having abortions without their parents knowing even though they can't get an aspirin at school without their parents knowing. That's just really hard to defend, and it was pretty easy to label such people as not only morally ****** up but also stupid. As a result, the GOP was pretty successful at pushing those limitations on abortion
The GOP could have celebrated those victories while letting the public gradually come their way on the issue as a whole. After all, abortion-on-demand becomes harder to defend every day as medical science improves. You don't need emotion or even religion to win the argument in the long term. However, instead of doing that, they allowed the opposition to reverse the polarization by pushing for "personhood" initiatives, which opened up the door to discussing contraception and became hostile to those who supported abortion rights in cases of rape. Instead of the pro-aborts being on the defensive where they normally should be, the pro-lifers are on the defensive haggling over narrow, extreme situations that implicate abortion. It is a massive PR and political ****-up.
I've long assumed if the pro-life leadership consists of people who are just so strongly impassioned by the issue that they can't in good conscience accept even short-term compromise. However, the older and more cynical I become, the more I wonder if they are the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the Religious Right - meaning that they don't want the issue to be resolved even if it's in their favor because they'd lose their relevance and have to go hustle real jobs.
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
A panel participant today (I know her just can't think of her name right now, no wasn't Kirsten Powers) on Fox News Hour at 5pm Central, the one sandwiched between George Will and Charles K. said of Davis run for governor... .. said
.... she's behind in this race the magnitude of the curvature of the earth!!
I thought old George was going to split his britches laughing.
For me... when Abbott in a wheel chair can run you in the ground in double-digits and you can't even run a campaign on what you stand for... like, she ain't said a word all summer, just come out with a month to go with a handful of ads on "Gawd, will you look at that" and rail at her opponent.
Oh, my. The GOP really should just talk economic platform, stay off social matters, keep America working and let Demos beat themselves. No need to help when the other party is willing to do it for you. Like, just shut up and let them do the talking! (like can you just go no comment?)
Anybody know what Reid is going to do if he loses the Senate leadership? In the whole of my life, no one ever beat him in nothingness when it comes to that body of the Legislature. The guy belongs in the movies. Type cast. As himself.
Tropic Thunder II
Reid on a trip to a combat zone to check things out, maybe spot a leader to put into power. After a few weeks there, and while in transit moving around, he gets caught down in a terrain with Jack Black, Downey, Baruchel and Stiller. Black finds a booty of drugs and has a relapse. The storyline goes in a direction of Reid having a 'Come to Jesus' revelation ala Tony Stark and the role of weapons. I'll have to figure out where it goes from there...
.... she's behind in this race the magnitude of the curvature of the earth!!
I thought old George was going to split his britches laughing.
For me... when Abbott in a wheel chair can run you in the ground in double-digits and you can't even run a campaign on what you stand for... like, she ain't said a word all summer, just come out with a month to go with a handful of ads on "Gawd, will you look at that" and rail at her opponent.
Oh, my. The GOP really should just talk economic platform, stay off social matters, keep America working and let Demos beat themselves. No need to help when the other party is willing to do it for you. Like, just shut up and let them do the talking! (like can you just go no comment?)
Anybody know what Reid is going to do if he loses the Senate leadership? In the whole of my life, no one ever beat him in nothingness when it comes to that body of the Legislature. The guy belongs in the movies. Type cast. As himself.
Tropic Thunder II
Reid on a trip to a combat zone to check things out, maybe spot a leader to put into power. After a few weeks there, and while in transit moving around, he gets caught down in a terrain with Jack Black, Downey, Baruchel and Stiller. Black finds a booty of drugs and has a relapse. The storyline goes in a direction of Reid having a 'Come to Jesus' revelation ala Tony Stark and the role of weapons. I'll have to figure out where it goes from there...
zork
2,500+ Posts
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
Did anyone ever go door to door in the country handing out matchbooks and pencils, for a State Representative candidate? I did that once. You greet and hand the item and just say, 'preciate your vote and support.' Did that with the brother of the candidate, which then won.
Years later I dropped out of UT for a spring and worked full time as a Committee Clerk in the Texas House. Fun experience. Connections then landed me a summer job with the Highway Dept, working traffic surveys in Houston, D/FW, SA and Austin.
For several decades I never had a negative thought about politics. Either I then became more mature, or something got in the drinking water during the 80s, because since that time I view politics as pure sleeze and a waste of the American tax payer's time and attention.
Into the 90s, working in the Bay Area at the time in Silicon Valley, I worked as a volunteer in support of Ross Perot. My last stand against the two parties. Ross said he would stop at red lights. Wanted no part of the privileges that come with the Crown. Then he got blasted for having made his billion with government contracts. His candidacy got almost 20% of the vote and handed the election to Clinton.
Who, as I recall, got, what, 38% of the vote?
Bush Sr did not get a second term, but the scales flipped back when GW got in on the Florida vote. Some days I wish Gore had won that election, if it would have put different personalities at the top of the Democratic party.
Years later I dropped out of UT for a spring and worked full time as a Committee Clerk in the Texas House. Fun experience. Connections then landed me a summer job with the Highway Dept, working traffic surveys in Houston, D/FW, SA and Austin.
For several decades I never had a negative thought about politics. Either I then became more mature, or something got in the drinking water during the 80s, because since that time I view politics as pure sleeze and a waste of the American tax payer's time and attention.
Into the 90s, working in the Bay Area at the time in Silicon Valley, I worked as a volunteer in support of Ross Perot. My last stand against the two parties. Ross said he would stop at red lights. Wanted no part of the privileges that come with the Crown. Then he got blasted for having made his billion with government contracts. His candidacy got almost 20% of the vote and handed the election to Clinton.
Who, as I recall, got, what, 38% of the vote?
Bush Sr did not get a second term, but the scales flipped back when GW got in on the Florida vote. Some days I wish Gore had won that election, if it would have put different personalities at the top of the Democratic party.
Larry T. Spider
1,000+ Posts
In my response, I was only really talking about the national GOP. All politics are local and that is certainly true in Texas. We have a very hard right in this state that is more anti-liberal
than anything else. Other than that, the state is a mess to figure out.
You have:
A large group of far right social conservatives.
Libertarian conservatives that vote GOP
Business republicans that use the religious conservatives.
A small leftists/democrat base.
More than a few moderates that would vote republican if the party wasnt so far right.
A mixed bag of Mexicans (thats a new thread in itself)
Young people that dont vote but would be confused if they tried. Pretty conservative but not socially and especially on the gays.
People that just moved here. A lot of arguments about how they will vote fueled by right wing hysteria that they are all a bunch of low life dems that will ruin texas.
Take all of that and try to figure out where Texas will be politically in 10-15 years. My only prediction is that we will not follow national trends and will make our own path.
than anything else. Other than that, the state is a mess to figure out.
You have:
A large group of far right social conservatives.
Libertarian conservatives that vote GOP
Business republicans that use the religious conservatives.
A small leftists/democrat base.
More than a few moderates that would vote republican if the party wasnt so far right.
A mixed bag of Mexicans (thats a new thread in itself)
Young people that dont vote but would be confused if they tried. Pretty conservative but not socially and especially on the gays.
People that just moved here. A lot of arguments about how they will vote fueled by right wing hysteria that they are all a bunch of low life dems that will ruin texas.
Take all of that and try to figure out where Texas will be politically in 10-15 years. My only prediction is that we will not follow national trends and will make our own path.
Larry, at the state level I think most of the moderates are voting GOP. They aren't thrilled with the party, but I think they're generally right-leaning on fiscal and economic issues, and Texas Democrats haven't given them a viable alternative.
Texas Republicans appeal to the hard right social conservatives you speak of, but how much of that do you hear after the primary when most moderates actually start paying attention? Not much. Do you hear The Wheelchair hyping up an extreme position on abortion or gay-bashing? No. Why not? He doesn't have to. The hard Right will turn out, because they want to "vote against Obama" like zork illustrates, and Democrats don't have a coherent policy agenda for them to compete against. That just leaves them as the party with the Obama Albatross around its neck, which makes it easy for the GOP. Just don't be a colossal *******, and you win if you have the R by your name. You can even be a big (just short of colossal) ******* like Dan Patrick, and you still win.
When you think about it, Texas Democrats haven't had a remotely coherent agenda in 20 years, and I think that hampers them with moderates. We know they support throwing more money at public schools, expanding the ability of women to sue for pay discrimination (while offering few specifics), expanding Medicaid, protecting abortion rights, and being "cool" with the gays. That just isn't a very broad agenda for your average person. What would Democrats do with property taxes? What would they do with transportation? Other than just indiscriminately throwing money around, what would they do to improve education? Your average moderate voter hears next to nothing about those issues from Democrats. They don't hear a lot from Republicans on those issues either, but they know that Republicans have set the policy on them for a long time, so they presume the GOP represents the status quo, which they think is generally a good thing. They accept hideous traffic as unavoidable and are OK with taxes as they are, so long as the economy stays strong.
Texas Republicans appeal to the hard right social conservatives you speak of, but how much of that do you hear after the primary when most moderates actually start paying attention? Not much. Do you hear The Wheelchair hyping up an extreme position on abortion or gay-bashing? No. Why not? He doesn't have to. The hard Right will turn out, because they want to "vote against Obama" like zork illustrates, and Democrats don't have a coherent policy agenda for them to compete against. That just leaves them as the party with the Obama Albatross around its neck, which makes it easy for the GOP. Just don't be a colossal *******, and you win if you have the R by your name. You can even be a big (just short of colossal) ******* like Dan Patrick, and you still win.
When you think about it, Texas Democrats haven't had a remotely coherent agenda in 20 years, and I think that hampers them with moderates. We know they support throwing more money at public schools, expanding the ability of women to sue for pay discrimination (while offering few specifics), expanding Medicaid, protecting abortion rights, and being "cool" with the gays. That just isn't a very broad agenda for your average person. What would Democrats do with property taxes? What would they do with transportation? Other than just indiscriminately throwing money around, what would they do to improve education? Your average moderate voter hears next to nothing about those issues from Democrats. They don't hear a lot from Republicans on those issues either, but they know that Republicans have set the policy on them for a long time, so they presume the GOP represents the status quo, which they think is generally a good thing. They accept hideous traffic as unavoidable and are OK with taxes as they are, so long as the economy stays strong.
majorwhiteapples
5,000+ Posts
20 years ago the Democrats didn't have a clear agenda, the only reason that Ann Richards won, was because Clayton Williams was the biggest boob of all time, there was no agenda!!!
majorwhiteapples
5,000+ Posts
Ok, I will give that to you, but for you that is a pretty weak point!
I am not sure if you said or someone else, but one of the biggest changing Demographics is the Suburban counties that are bleeding RED. They are getting Redder and Redder as people are leaving the Houston, Dallas, Austin, SA, El Paso tax oceans, moving to Denton, Collin, Williamson, Hayes, Guadalupe counties. I believe that exodus is going to keep Texas Red for a lot longer than people think. In addition the Hispanic and African American vote in those counties are red as in local or state elections. Not to mention the quality of the schools go up ten fold, at a lot less expense.
It is almost as if when you are in your late 20's you live in the city and vote blue, then you get old, married and have children moving to the burbs and voting red........history repeats itself over and over again......
I am not sure if you said or someone else, but one of the biggest changing Demographics is the Suburban counties that are bleeding RED. They are getting Redder and Redder as people are leaving the Houston, Dallas, Austin, SA, El Paso tax oceans, moving to Denton, Collin, Williamson, Hayes, Guadalupe counties. I believe that exodus is going to keep Texas Red for a lot longer than people think. In addition the Hispanic and African American vote in those counties are red as in local or state elections. Not to mention the quality of the schools go up ten fold, at a lot less expense.
It is almost as if when you are in your late 20's you live in the city and vote blue, then you get old, married and have children moving to the burbs and voting red........history repeats itself over and over again......
The biggest problem I see for dems is that they cannot have a coherent policy agenda because the interests of their natural constituency, the lower economic orders, do not coincide with the interests of those who pay for the campaigns, which is the banks, pharmaceutical companies and free traders.
Elections cost so much given current campaign techniques and costs that the zombies need a steady supply of green blood and it does not come from anybody who has the interests of the traditional dem core anywhere near their hearts.
Look at Obama and the Clinton scumi-------where do they get their money? What would it take to actually represent the interests of these people which is not inconsistent with the interests of the traditional core voters of the dem party?
This is why the dems are so hot for social issues-----LBTGQ whatevers and ethnics who vote on skin color and those who dislike evangelicals and their demands may make up a majority in some places but in Texas? I think not.
Elections cost so much given current campaign techniques and costs that the zombies need a steady supply of green blood and it does not come from anybody who has the interests of the traditional dem core anywhere near their hearts.
Look at Obama and the Clinton scumi-------where do they get their money? What would it take to actually represent the interests of these people which is not inconsistent with the interests of the traditional core voters of the dem party?
This is why the dems are so hot for social issues-----LBTGQ whatevers and ethnics who vote on skin color and those who dislike evangelicals and their demands may make up a majority in some places but in Texas? I think not.
Larry T. Spider
1,000+ Posts
majorwhiteapples
5,000+ Posts
Larry, I think you are spot on. The issue is an economic one.......Texas is growing, jobs are plentiful, slowly but surely the Texas economy has been diversifying, still heavy energy but it is changing slowly, taxes are low in comparison, and except in Austin you can buy a huge house for little money.
Conservatives in Texas don't really care about Abortion or Gay Marriage.
As long as my kid is in a good school district and there is little crime around my house, good to go!!!! Let's keep riding this gravy train!!!
Conservatives in Texas don't really care about Abortion or Gay Marriage.
As long as my kid is in a good school district and there is little crime around my house, good to go!!!! Let's keep riding this gravy train!!!
majorwhiteapples
5,000+ Posts
Another reason that it will take awhile to turn Texas from Red to any other color is the lack of any strong unions!!!! I forgot about that......That is probably the biggest factor amongst the Dem's just being a step above the Three Stooges!!!
majorwhiteapples
5,000+ Posts
The Democratic leadership in Texas is a joke, you have John Wiley Price still fooling them in Dallas, what's her name in Houston, and that Mayor is just redonkaliss. Not even sure who their leader is in the Austin area....The guy in SA is/was strong but it is SA.......I don't know anybody out West or down in the Valley.......
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time
- Started by iatrogenic
- Replies: 1K
- West Mall
-
New Jaguar TV Commercial!?
- Started by WorsterMan
- Replies: 3
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
