I just read a short Yahoo! News article about a recent polling result:
The latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that nearly a quarter of Republicans are unwilling to back top-tier hopefuls Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain or Mitt Romney, and no one candidate has emerged as the clear front-runner among Christian evangelicals. Such dissatisfaction underscores the volatility of the 2008 GOP nomination fight.
For some Democrats/Liberals this may be a continuation of the cheery news that the 2008 Presidential election is increasingly likely to swing Democratic. But I wonder if this news may be the harbinger of something more profound.
First, let me say something about 3 of the 4 aforementioned “Front Runners”. In My Own Opinion,
Giuliani, McCain and Romney have demonstrated records of relative intelligence, integrity and competency. (When I say this I refer to their previous political careers before they started running for President and flip-flopping like a bunch of beached salmon in order to court the Republican base.) Giuliani and Romney evoke anger from Liberals who disagree with their views on certain social issues, but as Executive stewards of large metropolitan areas their records are pretty solid. McCain, before this election season, demonstrated a high level of integrity and a desire to “clean up” politics by standing against over-financed elections and pork-heavy legislation. I don’t have any specific love for any of these men, but compared to the really EVIL Republican names like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove and DeLay, they are a breath of fresh air. Hell, I can hardly remember the last high-ranking Republican who deserved anything approaching respect from me. (In hindsight, maybe it was Bush Senior.)
And yes, one could point out that maybe I just like them because they could all be considered moderates but I think it really is more an issue of competence and integrity.
Yet look again at that quote from the AP-Ipsos poll: a quarter of Republican [voters] are unwilling to back any of these men. What does that mean? My interpretation is that the Republican party is losing its cohesion and its identity.
A student of history will remember that Republicans have not always represented what they stood for recently. Abraham Lincoln’s (brand new Republican) party was about maintaining a cohesive Union and ending slavery more than anything else. In fact, racism was a staple of “Yellow Dog Democrats” (Southern Farmers who tended to be segregationists until Nixon turned them into Republicans with his famous “Southern Strategy”). And Christian Evangelicals weren’t implicitly Republican until the rise of Jerry Falwell’s “Moral Majority”. In short, the bigoted, small minded assholes who became the Republican Party really weren’t in control until the 1970’s.
The 70’s and beyond saw a new coalition of people (Libertarians, Racists and Bible-thumpers) who realized that by working together they could dominate American politics and forward their respective agendas. In the 80’s and 90’s their power built and they were so drunk with elation at their new power that they were happy with this arrangement. Then hubris, greed and incompetence struck with the DeLay/Bush zenith, and I think that once the honeymoon was over, many Republicans started wondering if they really were well represented by these various strange “special interest groups”.
That’s where I think we are today. I think there’s no good single definition for what makes a particular American citizen a “Republican”. Evangelical Christians might be (should be) feeling chagrinned at the corporate greed that is the antithesis of compassion and good social work and charity that they believe in. Libertarians may be wondering what government is doing giving out insane handouts (pork) to corporations and messing with social issues like abortion and gay marriage, and aggressive Middle East policy. Environmentalists (they used to be considered Conservatives and Republicans a long time ago) must be feeling sick to their stomachs.
I think all of a sudden Republicans are all feeling mis-represented by their entire political party. And with that we may be seeing a fundamental dissolution of their once-mighty cohesion.
If this is the case, I would consider it a good thing. This coalition built a lot of its strength on a mastery of divisiveness and bitter partisanship that has polarized our nation the most since the Civil War. It doesn’t serve anyone. I truly hope that in its painful nadir the Republican Party sees a fundamental “reshuffling” where some of the people in the middle (moderates) are able to even contemplate shifting affiliations without the the bitter consequences of the last ten years. I say that because such a willingness to “reshuffle” would mean the other thing this country so desperately needs: honest dialog about ALL the issues. The idealist in me believes our country is made stronger by the meeting and hashing-out of two sides of every issue. Compromise is NOT an inherently bad thing after all.