The Fracturing of a Party...

[BVS]

It seems we're at a very interesting time for the Republican party, yesterday turned out to be a very telling day.

The Republican party seems to be slowly fracturing...

We have those that are supporting Ron Paul, and to be honest if it was someone else, someone who wasn't such a quack but running on a similar platform I dare say this portion of the party would be much bigger. For there are many who do not support this war, and do not like the big spending mentality that this party has taken on.

We have the evangelicals, a portion of the party that even those within the Republican party can't stand but feel they will lose without their vote. This is a portion that doesn't like to be ignored, if they don't get pandered to they will whine, maybe even stay home.

The party is very much divided on spending and size. You have one group calling themselves conservatives keep using catch phrases of the past like small government and fiscal conservative, but are defecit spending like it's going out of style and embracing big brother faster than any liberal.

Immigration also a big dividing point amongst the party right now, you have those that want to build the great wall of America equipped with lazers and heat seaking missles, and you also have those true economic conservatives that are scared of losing labor.

And one of the biggest signs of this party's downfall is the talking heads are actually bashing the frontrunner and say they will vote democrat if McCain is the nominee.

This morning I was listening to a very conservative talk radio show on the Texas Public Radio and the host was talking about this very thing, which got me thinking about starting a thread.

His theory was that if enough conservatives are divided they'll stay home and the Republicans will lose this election. If the Republicans lose this election and the Democrats take over the White House and especially if they take it over for 8 years, then we can definately see the Republican party split into at least two parties.

So what do you think?

 

[martha]

Maybe that will take us closer to a real multiparty system.

 

[anitram]

The problem is, if they split into two main factions (fiscal conservatives ie. moderates v. social conservatives ie. far right), neither party will be viable in an election. They will essentially be conceding to the Democrats over and over again. Which means they'll just have to consolidate into one party down the road (as they did in Canada). At which point the question becomes, which wing of the party will take over? And then you're back at square one.

Aside from getting one bad guy on the Supreme Court (Roberts) and one complete fool (Alito), Bush really hasn't done anything for the "base." I have often wondered about how stupid they are and how long it would take for them to recognize that their platform isn't going anywhere. Apparently they are awaking from their slumber finally.

The feeling I got back in 2004 is that a good part of the Democratic establishment (lead by the Clinton wing) had no real interest in seeing Kerry win. And I get that same sense today about factions within the GOP....that they may just be willing to quietly and passively concede 2008. They have a candidate they hate, who stands for a number of things they can't stand, and the math may tell them to bide their time.

We'll see how it shakes down!

 

[U2isthebest]

That's a great analysis, and I would agree. I know I've already mentioned it, but since I've been reading Tom Brokaw's latest book "Boom!: Voices of the Sixties", I'm fascinated and intrigued by the similarites in the 68 election and the 08 one. There's actually a chapter I just read, interestingly called 'The Fracture of 1968', that talks about how the Democratic party began to come apart that year. Brokaw says, "Change was everywhere, and the effect was disorienting. Nowhere was this change more dramatic than in the Democratic party. In retrospect, this was the end of the long-running successful formula cobbled together by President Franklin Roosevelt in the wake of the Great Depression. After three decades, the New Deal coalition of farm and labor, of urban Catholics, and ethnic minorities , was coming to an end. While the right side of the American political spectrum remained rooted to its traditional beliefs, those on the left turned on each other in a ferocious internecine fight triggered mostly by Vietnam." When I read that I felt like I was reading commentary about this election with the parties being reversed and the details of the reasons being different. The tone and conclusion would be the same though. I feel like this election is the beginning of the end of the Republican's long and sucessful strategy to play to the conservative Evangelicals and the rest will follow. It seems as though the Evangelicals are starting to lose a bit of ground in their heavy control on the Republican party. I don't know all of the reasons for that, but I think a big part of it is that those of us who are young Christians are not holding the traditional Christian conservative beliefs. I'm a registered Democrat and a Christian, and I know a lot of other Christian friends and acquaintances are not a part of the Republican party either. If that base begins to weaken the Republicans are going to have to come up with a new strategy. That could end up being chaotic for them after years of the tried and true formula. As for the part of the statement where Brokaw talks about the Right holding on to their typical beliefs during the 68 election, I see that as a bit different to what the Democrats are doing during this time, although I do see the usual Democratic concern for healthcare, education, and civil rights much more than I do from the Republicans. In the last part of the statement where he talks about the Democrats turning on each other in the fight over Vietnam, I see a similarity in the way the Republicans are turning on each other in the fight over "morals and values" first of all, but also Iraq. Your breakdown, BVS, of the sides the Republicans are taking really solidifies the observations I've noticed. Granted, Hillary and Obama have traded fierce barbs at some points, but I see that as mere political rhetoric and done more so by people in their respective campaigns than by the Clinton and Obama themselves. That's also been toned down a great deal. As for the Republicans, I see their mudslinging as far more than just typical political strategy to get the nomination. They all seem desperate to prove how "Republican" they are, as opposed to highlighting their real differences. The problem is that it's hard to define what a "Republican" is or wants this time around.

 

[deep]

So what do you think?

this wii die down a lot
once McCain locks up the nomination

and McCain can and will most likely beat Obama in Nov.

Hillary would give McCain a more difficult contest.

 

[BVS]

The problem is, if they split into two main factions (fiscal conservatives ie. moderates v. social conservatives ie. far right), neither party will be viable in an election. They will essentially be conceding to the Democrats over and over again. Which means they'll just have to consolidate into one party down the road (as they did in Canada). At which point the question becomes, which wing of the party will take over? And then you're back at square one.

That was exactly my thought this morning when listening to him. There's no way they'll split they'd be too scared of losing all viability.

Aside from getting one bad guy on the Supreme Court (Roberts) and one complete fool (Alito), Bush really hasn't done anything for the "base." I have often wondered about how stupid they are and how long it would take for them to recognize that their platform isn't going anywhere. Apparently they are awaking from their slumber finally.

Exactly, they aren't the brightest bunch. I think what will more than likely happen is that instead of splitting the Republican party will actually try and find a way to be viable without Dobson's "base". They will just move on and start ignoring this bunch, and this group will eventually realize you can still live their lives the same way even if their religion is kept in the church and home.

I'm not sure what the party will do along the lines of the fiscal split.

The feeling I got back in 2004 is that a good part of the Democratic establishment (lead by the Clinton wing) had no real interest in seeing Kerry win. And I get that same sense today about factions within the GOP....that they may just be willing to quietly and passively concede 2008. They have a candidate they hate, who stands for a number of things they can't stand, and the math may tell them to bide their time.

We'll see how it shakes down!

I kinda felt like Kerry was that decision you have to make when you have 30 seconds left and someone says "you better pick one", and you realize too late that you made the wrong decision under the preasure. I think we were all united in outing Bush, but just couldn't make the right decision in time...

 

[BVS]

Re: Re: The Fracturing of a Party...

this wii die down a lot
once McCain locks up the nomination

and McCain can and will most likely beat Obama in Nov.

Hillary would give McCain a more difficult contest.

I agree a lot of it will die down once McCain gets the nom, and most of this won't be an issue unless McCain loses.

But like this host was saying, that this has been slowly building for years, this isn't a new problem and McCain isn't exactly the one to unite the party, so these factors will continue to grow.

 

[BVS]

I'm a registered Democrat and a Christian, and I know a lot of other Christian friends and acquaintances are not a part of the Republican party either.

I've never registered under any party.

It's interesting, it came out close to his death that Billy Graham was a registered Democrat. Not that he was hiding it, he just never made a point to associate himself with a party. I remember when some of my "you can't be a Christian and not be a Republican" acquaintances heard this, they went irrate and said that made them lose their respect for him.

 

[U2isthebest]

I've never registered under any party.

It's interesting, it came out close to his death that Billy Graham was a registered Democrat. Not that he was hiding it, he just never made a point to associate himself with a party. I remember when some of my "you can't be a Christian and not be a Republican" acquaintances heard this, they went irrate and said that made them lose their respect for him.

He's still alive. His wife died last year. I remember reading that same article and being surprised. I always loved and respected him because he was so different than the typical "hellfire and brimstone Mr. Morality" preacher, but I knew that revelation would really piss some Christians off.

 

[BVS]

Yes, I meant close to his wife's death... my bad.

 

[U2isthebest]

Yes, I meant close to his wife's death... my bad.

No problem. I figured that's what you meant!

 

[BEAL]

Re: Re: The Fracturing of a Party...

this wii die down a lot
once McCain locks up the nomination

and McCain can and will most likely beat Obama in Nov.

Hillary would give McCain a more difficult contest.

You really think that? Almost every DEM, or Non Rep voter I know has said if HRC gets the nomination, they will either not vote, or go for some 3rd party.

She will unite the GOP, and it will be another 4 years of them running the country (not that there's anything THAT wrong with the GOP).

If Obama takes the nomination, I don't think anyone the GOP can come up with.

 

[Liesje]

Funny, if she gets the bid, every Dem I know will be at the polls with flags waving!

 

[phillyfan26]

Re: Re: Re: The Fracturing of a Party...

You really think that? Almost every DEM, or Non Rep voter I know has said if HRC gets the nomination, they will either not vote, or go for some 3rd party.

She will unite the GOP, and it will be another 4 years of them running the country (not that there's anything THAT wrong with the GOP).

If Obama takes the nomination, I don't think anyone the GOP can come up with.

I disagree that the Dems will be turned off by her. I think markedly few Dems are anti-Hillary. I think the only issue with her is the unification of the GOP.

And the GOP is absolutely that bad.

 

[2861U2]

Funny, if she gets the bid, every Dem I know will be at the polls with flags waving!

White flags, right?


I think the Democratic party is in trouble whoever gets the nomination. They were talking about this on MSNBC a while ago. All Democrats eventually wanted to see a black presidential candidate in their lifetime, and same with a woman candidate. But the problem is that they are running in the same year. Think about if Obama gets the nomination. A lot of women who really wanted the woman to win may be angry, and while they may like Obama alright, they'll stay home because "their" candidate didn't win. Same goes for Hillary winning and the black voters being disappointed.

I'm pretty optimistic about McCain. The Republicans will rally around him eventually. The Limbaughs and Dobsons may stay home, but McCain can do without them.

 

[phillyfan26]

I think that's completely ridiculous. People will put away their "anger" (an exxagerated statement anyway) to make sure the GOP doesn't keep control.

And McCain can't do without the conservative base, are you serious?

They will rally around him eventually? I'm not so sure.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Democratic women won't be "angry" if Obama wins-sorry, no way. The only thing that will make them angry is another Republican President, thus they will not even think of staying home. Watch out for us- we will decide this election, like it or not.

 

[BVS]

I don't buy that theory whatsoever... These aren't major idealogical reasonings, regular voters don't stay home because they really wanted a woman. That's pretty weak, whoever mentioned that...

That's the whole thing, I'm not sure your party can do it without the Limbaughs and Dobsons, ya'll depend on the wacko vote a lot.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

But women don't think, they're just ruled by emotions.

 

[2861U2]

That's pretty weak, whoever mentioned that...

That's the whole thing, I'm not sure your party can do it without the Limbaughs and Dobsons, ya'll depend on the wacko vote a lot.

I think it was Chris Matthews.

Yes, but McCain will compensate for them by getting some independents and Dems, (overwhelmingly if Hillary gets the nomination), something Romney nor any other Republican could do.

McCain's our best shot, that's for sure. I'd rather have McCain be our nominee and for Limbaugh to hate him than for Romney to be our nominee and all the far-right people praise him.

 

[martha]

But women don't think, they're just ruled by emotions.

Unless our men tell us what to do.

 

[martha]

Yes, but McCain will compensate for them by getting some independents and Dems, (overwhelmingly if Hillary gets the nomination).

You wish.

 

[U2isthebest]

I agree with you BVS, Martha, and Mrs. Springsteen. I am 100% behind Obama and I think that no one is better suited to lead our country right now. That being said, if Hillary gets the nomination I will gladly vote for her because I think she'd do a great job leading the nation in the right direction. I certainly wouldn't decide not to vote. One would have to be an incredibly irresponible and uninformed voter to do that. I would hope that we as Democrats are smarter than to vote for someone because of their ethnicity or gender.

 

[LemonMelon]

Yes, but McCain will compensate for them by getting some independents and Dems, (overwhelmingly if Hillary gets the nomination).

Not if he starts pandering to the right.

Which...uhh...he's been doing for ages now.

 

[martha]

I certainly wouldn't decide not to vote. One would have to be an incredibly irresponible and uninformed voter to do that.

Or a pissed-off right-wing whacko.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Chris Matthews? Well that's not exactly a great source for thoughts about women. Read what I posted in the hot stove thread about what he said about having a woman as commander in chief.

 

[anitram]

Think about if Obama gets the nomination. A lot of women who really wanted the woman to win may be angry, and while they may like Obama alright, they'll stay home because "their" candidate didn't win.

Oh please.

I'm a woman and I really want a woman to win. But I like Obama and that is the difference. The Democrats LIKE both candidates. The polls show that more than 70% of Democrats would be happy EITHER way.

And do you honestly believe that after 8 horrific years under Bush, anyone but the staunchest Republican is eager to repeat that clusterfuck?

 

[U2isthebest]

Or a pissed-off right-wing whacko.

Oh that's true. Was it Glenn Beck that said *le gasp* he'd vote for the Democrat if McCain gets the nomination? Well you know what they say, "Once you go left...."

 

[BVS]

I think it was Chris Matthews.

Yes, but McCain will compensate for them by getting some independents and Dems, (overwhelmingly if Hillary gets the nomination).

McCain has been doing well with independents, but so has Obama. And I really don't think McCain can grab that many Dems...

And Chris Matthews has a record for sticking his foot in his mouth...

 

[anitram]

Yes, but McCain will compensate for them by getting some independents and Dems

Especially if he nominates Huckabee as VP. Imagine the overwhelming excitement for moderate independents and dems - to vote for a creationist who wants to amend the Constitution to streamline it with the Bible. There's a fantastic selling point!!