The Future

If you have political sensibilities similar to mine, then yesterday's election was a disaster.  Despite Obama's woefully pathetic four years of governing - our nation voted for another four.  Despite impending doom about our fiscal cliff - more voters bought into the "Romney will take away your birth control" rhetoric.  As many have said - if Republicans can't beat a guy with this record, then they have some very serious issues.

No kidding.

One of my favorite websites is HotAir - and one of the big reasons is the quiet, thoughtful wisdom of Ed Morrissey.  Despite not always agreeing with Ed on some topics, Ed nevertheless virtually always gets my nod as a pundit who is respectful, considerate and examining the issues with a fair and open mind.  This is Ed's take as to what happened yesterday.  My opinion follows.

This time, Republicans can’t blame the candidate, or at least they shouldn’t.  Mitt Romney ran one of the most well-organized national campaigns in recent memory within the GOP.  He raised prodigious amounts of cash, keeping pace with Obama.  The RNC followed suit, building a massive and impressive GOTV effort that really did produce a big increase in turnout — but not enough to match what Democrats did in this cycle.  Republicans blamed John McCain in 2008 and even George Bush for the bailouts, but those fig leaves are gone, and the realignment is too apparent to ignore.

That reality presents a challenge to the GOP and to conservatives.  We do not need to change our values, but we do need to find ways to communicate them in an engaging and welcoming manner.  We need to think creatively about big issues, philosophy, and how we can relate conservative values to the needs of a wider range of voters.  Conservatism cannot become constrictionism, or the realignment will continue, and it will become ever more difficult to win national elections.

Ed - here is what I believe conservatives and their libertarian partners need to do.  They need to expand the freedom loving, market-conditions, personal responsibility to people's private lives as much as they do to their fiscal lives.  I strongly believe that Mitt Romney lost in large part because of the demonization of what a Romney administration would do to women's rights, gays, minorities, etc.  And although I actually disagree as to what the liberal pundits had to say for the most part on these matters, I neverthless think that a great many actions and words of the right did give them fuel for the fire.

What do I mean by this?  What I mean is that the right has to concede that we are a diverse nation - and one where we do have different values as to "family values," sexuality, abortion, birth control and the like.  Thus, just as the left should not be telling us whether we can purchase a Big Gulp or tax us into oblivion, neither should the right tell us what loving, adult partnerships are "worthy" of legal protection, what is "moral" sexual behavior, and so forth and so on.  It is fine for conservatives to discuss and preach in their houses of worship, in their neighborhoods and online.  Yet, they cannot, by law, force everyone else to accept what they think is right.  If they continue to try, instead of getting candidates like Mitt Romney elected, they will have more and more Obamas and Graysons (God help us).

Republicans have to become the party of freedom.  They have to reinvent what made our nation great - and let people know that freedom extends to all parts of their lives.  Yes, I can hear some of the conservatives thinking that this is "giving up" what they cherish and what is critical.  But all I can say is this.  How has the plan of forcing your socially conservative views into law been working with the American people?  Had the Republican party platform focused only on fiscal and security issues, and said "we leave people's personal lives to individuals" - then do you think we might have had a better chance yesterday? 

I do.

The answer is not more candidates who are "clearly conservative" in every way.  Our people are telling us, over and over, that they reject being told, by law, how they must live in their bedroom and in their personal relationships.  So.  If those of us who want to stop the trajectory of more out of control spending, more crushing regulation, more usurping of so many other freedoms by the government - then we have to extend that push for freedom into our social laws, too.

My socially conservative friends may think I am all wet.  Yet, if you do, all I can say is, "How is the Republican party's model been working so far?"  It is not the candidates (well, not all of them).  It is not realizing the world in which we live today.

And thank you, Ed.  You and HotAir continue to do a masterful job at presenting conservative and libertarian ideas in a respectful, cogent manner - day in and day out.  Even on a sad day like today....

Comments

[J. Reed Anderson]

I think you're right, Peg. In our state the only idea that mattered for consideration as a Republican candidate was anti-abortion. That's what conservatives are stuck with, and it's ironic because the great controllers of all things personal are progressives. I think that's what so attractive about the Tea Party to libertarian conservatives and so frightening to the Karl Rove RINOs.

[Peg]

J.Reed - thanks. What Republicans need to do is go out and say "We are the party of freedom. We are a diverse nation, and have differing views of personal morality and life choices. While we strongly support the right of every American to make the case for what they believe - we similarly strongly are against the government mandating that any of us be forced to make certain choices."

If they did this, all the "they want to take away your birth control, take away your choice with your bodies" would (if not disappear) be greatly diminished. I predict that without this, Republicans truly are goners.

[Chris]

Peg

There already is a party that says those things. They won the presidency last night.

Things the Republicans should be considering:
Treating the voters like intelligent people, not fools. People don't care to believe the "I have a plan, I just won't tell you what it is" argument.
Dealing with reality. I have seen so many insane conspiracy theories about Obama. I haven't seen any about Romney/Ryan. Take a look at http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/chart-obama-conspiracy-theories
it's astonishing the strangeness the Obama haters will believe. Note that our friend Wafik believes many of these.
Deal with reality. I know I just said that. But last night a friend of ours, college educated, bridge player, told me this was an important election because "Obama isn't an American. He hates America. He's a muslim. He's a muslim." Yes, she said the last part twice. When you arguments are irrational, rational people won't accept them.
Watch the racism. Bill O'Reilly noticed that the white establishment was dead. Did you see the crowd at Romney headquarters last night? See any non-white faces? The Republicans have become the party of racial hatred. A Stanford-educated woman last week told me Obama only got into college, law school, the law review and the presidency of the law review because of affirmative action. She cannot conceive of a capable black person.
Her husband, a former member of the California Bar Association Board of Directors, told me that after law school Obama was recruited by all the top law firms, the 7th district court and the Supreme Court, but took a community organizing job because he was too lazy to take a real job. He can't imagine a black man willing to work for the betterment of his country.
Deal with reality: I know, we're back here. You cannot cut taxes, raise defense spending and lower the deficit. Give people a plan that makes sense.
End the epistemic closure. Just because something contradicts what you think doesn't make it a lie. The polls were right, they weren't skewed, they weren't biased. The earth is getting warmer, it isn't a hoax. Evolution is not just a heretical lie told by the satanists.

Don't be the party of war. Bush started two wars. Romney was ready to start another. Wars are good for business, bad for people. People vote.

Don't think that everyone who isn't "severly conservative", as Mitt likes to say, is "liberal". Most of the country is moderate, centrist. I certainly am. Pretending that everyone else is a far-left loony liberal is a useless straw man that defeats your purpose.

I don't hate Republicans. We need two parties to keep the country from going too far in one direction. I just need for the Republicans to live in the same universe that I do, dealing with what actually exists.

And remember that it's all business, not personal. I differ with you, but that doesn't make me dislike you at all. I'll even buy you lunch in San Francisco in a couple of weeks and we can argue some more. Maybe we should invite Wafik.

Chris

[Peg]

First of all, Chris - you cannot blame politicians for what individual supporters say or do. For every Republican supporter who says something like "Obama is a Muslim" I can give you a Democrat who wants to assassinate Romney, says that Romney wants blacks to "be in chains" (oops; that wasn't a supporter - that was Vice President Biden) - but, you get my point. What matters is what the politicians and candidates say. They have no control over what the public says or does.

As for white faces?!? Are you aware that there were a number of black candidates running yesterday? That there are already a number of Republican governors, representatives, pundits, etc? I agree that there are more voters of color who support Democrats than Republicans. And - we can discuss why that is. But, the bottom line is that there are conservative/libertarian candidates who are of color and voters of color who support them. To state otherwise is essentially the same kind of lie that Obama is a Muslim.

As for what can and cannot be done - you can keep taxes low and raise more revenue. It's called creating an environment where more businesses need to hire, more profits are being made, more jobs are created and thus vastly more people are putting into the system instead of taking out. Do not ask me why, but liberals do not seem to understand that 15 to 30% of something is vastly superior to 50 or 70% of nothing. That being said, no matter what the tax rates are, unless we stop our insane spending on a vast number of programs that do NOTHING AT ALL to help our country, we're cooked - no matter who is in power.

Is the Earth warming? I still have seen conflicting data - but - let's assume it is. The planet has warmed and cooled for billions of years before man existed. The issue is not necessarily in what direction climate is changing - but how much man is responsible for it, and what humans can do (if anything) to have any appreciable effect upon it. Those last points are assuredly not "settled science."

As for other issues like evolution and war - I am no apologist for those who deny current science. Nor will I ever say I am "for war" - but - I don't believe most politicians of either party are "pro-war." At times, war is a necessary evil. Ask President Obama, who surely has been involved with war since he has been president.

As the saying goes - and it is certainly true for me - some of my best friends are liberals. I don't hate them; but I do think that some of what they want for our policy is extremely destructive to our country. I want to stop those policies now, when they are "only" very serious, before they become catastrophic. Once they get to the latter stages, our options are far more limited and often the consequences are vastly more dire than when they are addressed earlier.

I am not a Republican. My social views are too liberal to be considered one. And I am not a Democrat, as the party has become way too regulating, fiscally irresponsible and constricting of freedoms outside of social issues for me to vote for most of their candidates.

If either party would adopt fiscal responsibility, small government goals in ALL aspects of our lives - I predict they'd win far more than a fraction over 50% of votes. I only hope one day I get the chance to test out my theory.

[jammen]

"I am not a Republican...And I am not a Democrat,"

Are you afraid to acknowledge that you are a Ron Paul Libertarian?

[Peg]

If I am embarrassed about a position I hold, then I need to change it.

My philosophy is likely closest to libertarians ... but not Ron Paul. I don't believe in ignoring foreign policy and other nations. Other issues, too - but not enough time to look them up.

Gary Johnson is about 94% of what I believe - and - I would have voted for him in a heartbeat had I EITHER thought he had a chance to win - or that Romney had zero chance. My dream is that one day, politician(s) who hold views like Johnson's will actually be viable on the national scene.