7 thoughts on “The Emerging Republican Advantage”

  1. Much of this is cyclical. The majority party always has the most factions – that is how they get elected. After a time in the majority, many of the factions come to find that (what they view as) their interests are not being served. Eventually, some of them will move to the other party, if they feel they can get a better deal, thereby creating a new majority.

    As to 2016, if the Republicans nominate a principled candidate who is willing to stand up for himself – that is, give people somebody to vote FOR – then that candidate will win against whoever the Democrats put up, including Her. You can see this already in the recent Iowa polls. However, the needs of the power brokers means we will probably end up with Bush III, in which case it is anybody’s race.

    1. Judis reaches the opposite conclusion:

      The Democrats’ best chances in next year’s elections will come if Republicans run candidates identified with the Religious Right or the tea party or the GOP’s plutocratic wing. If Republicans are smart, they will nominate for president someone in the mold of George W. Bush in 2000 or the numerous GOP Senate candidates who won last year—a politician who runs from the center-right, soft-pedals social issues, including immigration, critiques government without calling for abolishing the income tax and Social Security, and displays a good ol’ boy empathy for the less well-to-do. Such a candidate would cater to the Republican advantage among the middle class without alienating the white working class.

      Who could be more in the mold of Bush than another Bush? I could see Walker, Christie or Kasich filling it as well. Paul, Huckabee, Santorum or Carson would have more trouble with the voters Judis is highlighting.

      1. There are so many possible GOP candidates that I forgot a bunch of them. Ted Cruz and Rick Perry might be too identified with the tea party (to appeal to the voters Judis is talking about). Sarah Palin probably would too, and she might be too identified with GOP social issues. Bobby Jindal, Mike Pence or Marco Rubio might fit the Bush mold, depending on how they positioned themselves.

        And then there’s Graham, Pataki, Fiorina, Bolton, and other possible candidates who have virtually no chance.

        1. Ted Cruz and Rick Perry might be too identified with the tea party (to appeal to the voters Judis is talking about).

          Remember the only voter Judis speaks for is himself. Here’s what he says on the matter:

          The Democrats’ best chances in next year’s elections will come if Republicans run candidates identified with the Religious Right or the tea party or the GOP’s plutocratic wing. If Republicans are smart, they will nominate for president someone in the mold of George W. Bush in 2000 or the numerous GOP Senate candidates who won last year—a politician who runs from the center-right, soft-pedals social issues, including immigration, critiques government without calling for abolishing the income tax and Social Security, and displays a good ol’ boy empathy for the less well-to-do. Such a candidate would cater to the Republican advantage among the middle class without alienating the white working class.

          Notice how the “tea party” gets lumped in with “Religious Right” and “plutocrats”. Typical propaganda ploy. And there’s his clueless apologism for Obama that follows.

          In retrospect, that analogy was clearly flawed. Roosevelt took power after four years of the Great Depression, with Republicans and business thoroughly discredited, and with the public (who lacked any safety net) ready to try virtually anything to revive the economy. Obama’s situation was very different. Business was still powerful enough to threaten him if he went too far in trying to tame it. Much of the middle class and working class were still employed, and they saw Obama’s stimulus program—which was utterly necessary to stem the Great Recession—as an expansion of government at their expense.

          If I were a Republican, I would be very foolish to take this person’s advice.

  2. Maybe the Millennials and the Middle Cass just realized they have been pawns for many years. Fooled by the mainstream media and the educational cartel, they fell for all the “cult of social justice” nonsense. Not all, but enough to hinder the democrat party.

  3. It’s best to always bear in mind one of the GOP’s greatest skills; the ability to snatch defeat from the looming jaws of victory.

    In this case, the GOP has several comparatively easy routes to accomplishing this; nominating a candidate that a significant chunk of the party despises and will stay home in November as a result, is one. Nominating someone with major (known or unknown) baggage is another.

Comments are closed.