The fight among the Republicans for dominance following their brutal demolition in the last two elections is in full force. One of the key fights has been between Rush Limbaugh and the Republican establishment in Washington. Rush constantly blasts them for being too soft. In Rush’s eyes, Republicans should never work with Democrats. He famously said back in February that he wanted Obama to “fail.”
Additionally, Rush has excoriated any elected Republican who dare take his name in vain, and every time the elected Republicans have come crawling back on their hands and knees to kiss his ring. So far Rush is winning.
Lately many have opined that the far-right positions and hard-line tactics embraced by Rush and apparently most of the GOP will sink in the Republicans. I disagree.
Messaging
The latest victim in this civil war, Rep. Cantor (R-VA), changed the purpose of his much publicized ‘Republican listening’ tour. Now he no longer claims it is a ‘listening’ tour. Why? Because Limbaugh attacked the tour, lambasting the idea that Republicans needed to listen. What Republicans needed to do, Limbaugh opined, was “teach”.
This fight over language gets to the heart of the conundrum Republicans are facing. If you ‘teach’, you imply that you are right and do not need to change, but the students, i.e. the public, need to learn and thus change. Likewise, if the Republicans do the ‘learning’, then that implies they need to change.
Rush does not believe hardcore conservative policies have failed; he thinks the public just does not understand the truth. Hence his statement that going on a ‘listening’ tour sends the wrong message. And on that count he is correct. If Republicans admit they have been wrong, that essentially says the Republican policies ever since Goldwater have been wrong; that the whole modern Republican brand is a lie.
Analysis: Short Term Gamble
Any admission like this will cause a mass exodus of voters from the GOP, especially moderates and independents. It also alienates the base. So in the short term, it is disastrous. This is what Rush, DeLay, Cheney, and other hard right ideologues likely want to avoid; they want to get back in power soon, and any admission of failure, bad policies, or need to regroup will prevent a quick regaining of power anytime soon.
Hence, we are seeing a Republican Party doing nothing but trying to block Obama and the Democrats at all costs. In the short term, maintaining strict party unity, playing aggressive defense, and blocking Obama’s initiatives might pay off. If things do not get better soon, the Republicans can blame the Democrats for the failures (the party in power always takes the heat) and then swing back into power off the public’s discontent with the lack of progress from the Democrats.
The tea parties and calling the Democrats the “Democrat-Socialist Party” highlight another effective strategy. By scaring the public with alarmist rhetoric like Dick Cheney saying Obama is putting America at risk, the Republicans hope to scare the public into thinking the Democrats have too much power. As a result, the public will run to the polls in 2010 and vote Republican.
This happened before not too long ago in 1994. Clinton had a new Presidency, lots of political capital, and much of the nation excited to see him in office, and Democratic control of Congress, just like Obama. A few missteps on gays in the military and health care and blam!, the Republican revolution of ‘94.
The rally the base strategy of Karl Rove still works, at least for the near future. The confidence displayed by sticking to your guns when times are tough shows a resolve the Democrats do not have. That wins votes.
I think the pundits will be surprised how well the GOP does in 2010 with this ultra right wing gambit. If Obama cannot turn the economy around or looks like he instigating too much ‘change’, the public will turn to the Republicans.
Analysis: Long Term Loss
Despite what I think is a reasonable gamble in the short term, the ‘teaching’ Republicans run a risk of destroying their prospects for power in the long term vs. ‘listening’ Republicans. Fighting abortion rights, opposing gay marriage, dogmatically defending free trade fundamentalist economic policies (that got us into our current economic mess), supporting torture, militaristic foreign policies, denying climate disruption, none of these positions currently track well with the public. Nor do they sit well with the Millennials, the youngest voting age generation. Millennials are overwhelmingly progressive, especially on social issues.
That means that if the Republicans maintain their neo-conservative, reactionary policies, they will be sunk in the long term. The longer they hold anachronistic and broken positions, the more they narrow their constituency. Obviously this makes it harder to win elections, especially as more Millennials enter the voting ranks in the next decade.
Hence the Republican’s conundrum. Hence their internal and external fighting.
If Republicans regroup and retool, if they ‘listen’, the process will set them further back with the voters in the short-term, but it would give them the chance establish themselves as a viable, modern political party. Likely though, they will follow Rush’s path and try to ‘teach’, that is, maintain their reactionary ideologies. This might help them regain power briefly in the short-term, but threatens to destroy the party in the long term.
Lesson for the Democrats
Let it not be the theme of this post that taking hard-line positions is bad. On the contrary, the refusal to do so has cost Democrats dearly in the past. Not wavering on core principals shows strength and conviction, two key traits people look for in their leaders. If people do not feel you have a strong set of principals, they will not trust you or vote for you. This has been a problem for Democrats for years, and Obama is not helping matters. Already Obama has flip-flopped on key issues in his short Presidency, the latest being the torture photos.
Tom Delay said something a few months ago regarding the Rush Limbaugh controversy that made a lot of sense. Rush had been taking a lot of flak for going after Obama despite his very high approval ratings. Delay stated,
“This whole notion that we’re not going to take on Obama but take on Pelosi and Harry Reid will get you nowhere. That’s a minority mindset of playing on the ball field of the left. You need to stand up and fight. And that’s what Rush is doing and why people are gravitating towards him and support him.”
DeLay is right, and Obama should ‘learn’ something from Rush and stand up and fight. With his high approval ratings, charisma, and gift of speech, Obama should have no problem winning that fight against the likes of Rush Limbaugh and others.
This may seem like a contradiction. I am arguing that taking hard-line positions will sink the Republicans in the long term, yet am exhorting Obama and the Democrats to take hard-line positions themselves. That is because conservative policies do not work; progressive ones do. Thus, Obama should employ the ‘teaching’ strategy. By taking a firm stand and explaining why progressive policies are better, Obama will risk more in the short term, but it the long term he will be setting up a progressive Democratic majority for years to come.
And of course, if Obama continues to take a conciliatory approach towards the Republicans and constantly throw progressive agendas and policies under the bus, the Dems will likely be safe in the short-term, maybe even expand their control of Congress. Yet in the long-term, the inability of the Dems to govern with a clear directive will hurt them, perhaps establishing another era of Republican dominance.
Conclusion
Sooner of later the Republicans will have to ditch their unpopular and ineffective positions. Democrats, on the other hand, need to be more forceful about promoting their popular and effective ones. If they do not, they run the risk of losing the field to the Republicans, and that simply delays the rebuilding the GOP needs to do.