September 10, 2004
Republican Party Extinction?
The dinosaurs reached a zenith just prior to their extinction. It occurred to me we may be witnessing the same pattern with the Republican Party. As a minority party during the last part of the last century, Republican conservative views served our nation well on a host of issues. They acted as American conscience regarding debt and deficit spending. They acted as an ethical check on runaway cultural norms moving toward “anything goes”. And they served as a check on encroachment of state’s rights by the federal government and bloating federal beauracracy.
And for these valuable services, the Republican Party was rewarded by becoming the majority party, sweeping a majority of state governor offices, both houses of Congress and topping all that off with a Republican President. Their zenith has arrived. And now it appears their extinction may be all but inevitable. Extinction comes about by changes which a species cannot adapt to. At this zenith, the Republican Party has been thrown two large changes to which they have not, as yet, been able to adapt to. The first is the role of majority party. The second is 9/11 and a dynamic shift in the way people the wolrd over now view world affairs, events, and power struggles.
The Republican Party as a minority party sought, expected, and demanded party unity in the halls of Congress, in campaign organizational efforts, and among its party officials. By peddling itself as the party of inclusion though, a key component in their becoming the majority party, the Party allowed intra-party group identification differences provided they did not conflict with Party agendas. Thus grew larger ethnicity within the ranks, gay activists, both pro-life and pro-choice groups, etc. The Republican Party remained tolerant of disparate views during its rise to majority status resulting in the growth of the wings within the Party. The ultra-conservatives, moderate conservatives, and even to some extent, liberal conservatives. Like the Democratic Party, they had become a Big Tent Party, home to many groups with opposing issue positions.
With the advent of achieving a Republican President to top off their rise to majority party in the government however, it appears the Party began losing sight of its winning Big Tent strategy. With President Bush as the head of their party, agendas and policies were set in motion without Big Tent discussion and debate, and without unanimity among either its office holders or rank and file members. A prime example was the huge deficit spending agendas which infuriated the fiscal conservative membership of the party. That anger was slow to be expressed however since unanimity was still perceived as the basis of strength for the party. School vouchers and its threat posed to public schools was another rift opening up within the Party. And then stem cell research openly divided the membership. But all these rips in the Party's unanimity were overshadowed by 9/11 and all that it wrought.
When 9/11 occurred, and the Republican Party saw Bush seize the moment, politically speaking, by reaching out to Americans with empathy for what they felt, anger, confusion, fear, loss, and want for revenge, it seemed the future of the Republican Party as the majority party was all but guaranteed for perhaps decades to come. With 9/11, deficits could be defended. With 9/11 military growth could be defended. With 9/11 American military could be applied overseas in the oil rich Middle East and defended. In so many ways, the Republican Party benefited from the misfortune of the 9/11 tragedies and still do today. But a huge misstep occurred with the invasion of Iraq that was going to threaten the extinction of the Republican Party.
On purely principal grounds, the Republican Party stood nearly unanimous in favor of invading Iraq, based on the Bush administration's assurances of WMD in the hands of Saddam Hussein and the perceived potential imminent threat those weapons posed both to our allies and our own nation. Outside of the Republican Party, such unanimity could not be found anywhere. But, as long as the veracity of the threat of Hussien's WMD remained intact, invasion of Iraq appeared defensible even to those opposed to war in general. With the dawning of the revelation that the WMD premise was mistaken, and the slow realization that Iraq posed no significant near term threat at all to Americans at home, the house of cards began to tumble. And as the cards went flying, all of the pent up reservations and frustrations by factions within the Republican Party began to find voice.
Fiscal conservatives no longer felt compelled to withhold their outrage over deficits which exceeded even those generated by Democratic Congress majorities. Log Cabin Republicans announced they would not endorse President Bush for reelection. Nancy Reagan came out against Bush's constraints upon stem cell research. Prominent conservatives like Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan began churning out books immensely critical of their Republican Party and the Bush administration’s leadership of it. But, as Democrats know, being a majority party in government can only be sustained if policies and agendas appear to be working for Americans.
This week a crucial article was written regarding a poll of foreign nation's people regarding which candidate they backed for president, President Bush or Senator John Kerry. The Reuter's article states:
The world wants President Bush out of the White House, according to a poll released on Wednesday that shows in 30 of 35 countries people preferred Democrat candidate John Kerry.Kerry was particularly favored in traditionally strong U.S. allies and beat Bush on average by more than a two-to-one margin, 46 percent to 20 percent, the survey by GlobeScan Inc, a global research firm, and the University of Maryland, said.
Now, Republicans will be quick to point out that people in foreign countries don't elect our President. However, that is not the issue. The issue is whether the U.S. has the confidence and trust of other nations regarding its foreign policy initiatives and directions. It is an irrefutable fact, that the United States activities overseas will be helped by the perception of foreign nations that the U.S. President is acting in good faith and with the interests of the international community in mind. This poll clearly demonstrates that will not be the case if President Bush is reelected, and may be the case if Sen. Kerry is elected. Americans are not insensitive to how they are perceived overseas.
Another article reported by Rupert Cornwell regarding a poll of Americans states:
Seven out of 10 Americans are worried about the worsening of their country's image around the world, suggesting that global dislike of George Bush and his foreign policies could have an impact, albeit indirect, on the outcome of the presidential election.That is the most striking finding of a new set of polls released yesterday by the Globscan group and the University of Maryland. Of Americans polled, 40 per cent said that foreign antipathy to the US was a big problem, and 30 per cent "somewhat of a problem." Although almost three-quarters said world opinion would have no impact on their vote.
So, while foreigner's opinions of our President may not directly influence how American's vote in November, it is clear that among 70% of Americans, how we are perceived by foreigners is a concern, and that means a large number of Republicans hold this view. This clearly reflects another split in the rank and file of the Republican Party between those who believe America's stature and power determines what's right in foreign affairs, and those who believe that how we are perceived overseas is a matter for concern.
Extinction? So, how does all this fit into a theory regarding the possible extinction of the Republican Party? The Republican Party ascended as the majority partly on the basis of platform issues and a Big Tent strategy, and partly on the back of a general skepticism and loss of faith in our federal government under the reins of the Democratic Party. And let me be clear, the Democratic Party is already on its way to extinction in light of its huge losses over the last ten years at the local, state and national levels, its abandonment of the Big Tent policy which would have dictated embracing Ralph Nader instead of fighting him, and the party's inability to unanimously agree what it needs to do to win the hearts and minds of the people.
The Republican Party however stands on a precipice. Under the President's and the Republican Congress' watch, policies and agendas have been put forth on a partisan basis to further their grip on power. They advertise their party as the Party to fight and defend us against terrorism. They advertise themselves as the party to protect us from economic calamity. They advertise theirs is the party to eradicate terrorism throughout the world and bring peace and democracy to the world. And because of this partisan advertising, seeds of their extinction have been sown. After 9/11 and still today, the American people have shown an incredible resilience to adversity, an incredible tolerance for errors and mistakes by its government, and an incredible patience in waiting for signs of improvement. And any of a number of events could push the Republican Party over the edge of that precipice.
The American public, strong, resilient, and patient as it has been, will not tolerate another major terrorist attack on our soil. Not by a party that says it is the only party to protect us from it. Terrorism throughout the world is growing, not receding since the invasion of Iraq. Casualties of terrorism as reported by our State Department are increasing in the world since invading Iraq. The connection will be made in the minds of Americans between invading Iraq, increases in terrorism as a result, and another terrorist attack upon the U.S. They will also make the connection between this government spending 200 billion dollars to invade and occupy Iraq which was not a threat, and only 20 billion on homeland defense.
They will not tolerate the demise of our broad based middle class quality of life. The deficits and national debt are already reducing our government's options to act in ways that would otherwise be in the public's interest. Due to the 200 billion spent on invading Iraq and the public's demand that deficits go down, not up, our government has been constrained to a mere 20 billion dollars being spent on homeland security.
This government has and is spending Social Security surpluses faster than they have been coming in. And the day is coming when this same government will say, we are sorry, we spent your surplus payments into the program and now we have to cut your benefits or prevent you from retiring when you expected to because we just don't have the money. We spent it on making Iraqi lives better. We spent it on failed missions to the Sun and Mars. We spent it on pork projects for Congress person's pet projects in their local districts. We spent it on making the wealthy wealthier and corporate profits more profitable.
Our national debt, which will reach 10 trillion dollars in just a few short years, will eliminate or seriously diminish our option to stimulate the economy when the next cyclical world wide recession hits. It will also have to be paid down. And that means increasing taxes on Americans for at least major portions of their wage earning lives. Another recession which cannot be countered or softened because of our national debt, will remind Americans of the Republican Party and the Bush administration which ran that national debt up as if it had no limit.
The American people will not tolerate politicians turning world opinion against us and making Americans the ‘bad guys’ in the eyes of most other nation's people. If America sustains a growing image of being the bad guys and having caused world wide destabilization and years of sweeping growth in terrorist activity as a result of the Iraq invasion catalyst, it will be the Republican President the American people will rightly blame and hold responsible. The American people believe they are the ‘good guys’. American pride depends on the world recognizing us as a force for good in the world. And the goodness of the American people will turn allegiance upon the political party that diminishes or tarnishes that pride and belief.
Years of growing isolation of America by world opinion and increasing lack of cooperation by our allies and foreign governments could spell the extinction of the Republican Party. An economic demise in the quality of life and health of the middle class as a result of record deficits and debt could spell the extinction of the Republican Party. Another catastrophic terrorist attack upon U.S. soil will spell the extinction of the Republican Party.
Given that the Democratic Party is already on the road to extinction, if the Republican Party also seals for itself that same fate, it is hard to imagine what shape our political system will take. Perhaps the Green, Libertarian and Reform Parties will be the shape of things to come. One thing is for sure, the extinction of the two major political parties in America will be both tumultuous and full of threat to American democracy. But, it may also spell the first real opportunity American democracy has to improve upon itself since the 1930's and 1960's.
Posted by David R. Remer at September 10, 2004 09:14 PMEric, you must be referring to where I say “As a minority party during the last part of the last century, Republican conservative views served our nation well on a host of issues.”
Can’t please everyone. :-)
Posted by: David R. Remer at September 10, 2004 10:03 PMAccording to a report by the German Marshall Fund 58% of Europeans, consider “strong U.S. leadership to be undesirable.” The Chinese see us as rivals in the next decades. The large parts of the populations of Arab countries openly sympathize with terrorists attacking the U.S. America is the most powerful country in history. Our economic and cultural influence reaches all parts of the globe. Much of the world prefers a weaker U.S., (Think Gulliver and the Lilliputians) and they believe that John Kerry is more likely to give them the America they prefer.
Adapting a John Kerry analogy, the New York Yankees regularly crush the Boston Red Sox. I am not sure the Yankees would be well served choosing their teams and coaches based on Bean Town preferences.
David,
Be assured, that Eric’s lack of pointed argument with your thesis, validates it’s veracity and clarity. However, I cannot help being equally flippant, by saying ‘I wish! I wish!’.
Obviously, like many similar views I’ve seen expressed, you have a helluva lot more faith and trust in the American voter’s ability to ‘do the right thing’ - not me!
Not to say, there are not scores of us (even Republicans!), and that we present a formidable electoral force. It’s just, that the group who will dismiss your premise out of hand, are a slightly larger majority, I fear.
Those 7 out of 10 Americans who worry of a worsening image abroad, also want to hear candidates get back to debates over more important issues. However, just enough of them moved the polls over the Swift Boat attacks, and will not bother to go to www.johnkerry.com/issues, if you pointed it out to them. Knowing 30 0f 35 allies prefer Kerry is trumped when Cheney charges he’ll take his marching orders from France.
To Middle America with the attention span of a gnat, the 1000 fallen soldiers in Iraq and the two costliest months of the war, register just ahead of the Kobe Bryant trial.
This is where the same cynicism of what 4 years of Bush would wreck on an ignorant electorate - see Election night, November 2000 - kicks in.
Posted by: Bert M. Caradine at September 10, 2004 10:36 PMBert, the key to an uninformed public is keeping their lives too busy to keep up. Hence, the Bush designed overtime pay bill which would have caused as many as 6 million more workers to work even more overtime since the company would not have to pay a premium for it.
Thankfully, it is an election year, and enough House Republicans saw their chances of reelection diminished if that bill passed. Hence, just this week, Republican and Democrats in the House slammed the door on Bush’s Overtime Pay avoidance Bill.
Posted by: David R Remer at September 10, 2004 11:07 PMDavid: Some points in here I buy. Some I don’t.
But your whole Republicans = Dinosaurs metaphor doesn’t say what you mean it say. The dinosaurs didn’t run themselves to extinction. They were “extincted” by an outside event, not by collapse from within or by the steady chipping away of their opponents. They were replaced as rulers of the planet, but not because of anything they did wrong or because of anything their replacements did right.
It was blind luck. Or God’s Will. Or Karma. However you want to look at it. But it wasn’t their own fault.
I have serious issues with the way that a lot of Republican policy is made, and I agree that they need to change just as much as the Democrats. But what’s the big, inescapable, unstoppable meteorite from totally outside their world that’s going to wipe them out? Or the Dems, for that matter.
Posted by: murdoc at September 11, 2004 12:27 AMmurdoc, thanks for the reply. I can only respond to your comment about extinction by quoting what I have already said in the article: “Extinction comes about by changes which a species cannot adapt to.”
It matters not whether the change is slow, rapid, externally or intrinsically caused. Failure to adapt to the changes in the environment which supported it, results in extinction.
The rest of the article outlines what those changes are and are likely to be, and it remains to be seen if the GOP will adapt.
However, the short and simple answer to your question about what “meteorite” they will fail to adapt to is faith and confidence by the American populace. See the article for a more detailed and lengthy discussion on this argument.
Posted by: David R Remer at September 11, 2004 12:51 AMactually i think it’s the whole global warming thing, abstenence only schoolbooks, assault weapons back on the streets, middle income america entering poverty levels, medicare premiums going up 17%, america is for lovers, exept if yer gay kinda thing that might eventually burn the republicans out…..
honesty…i hope it doesn’t…i hope the part gets back on track…and away from this ultra-right idealogy that seems to have taken the party by the balls….
otherwise……hello ice age!
Posted by: rob at September 11, 2004 05:21 AMDavid, you are not to far from speaking the truth about the republican party fading away. This year you see the spiltering of the conservative party into smaller groups, lack of ability to keep their promises made to America back in 1994, and the tell tell sign of no now ideas on how to meet their party demands. Why do you think they liked Clinton so much?
Because our governments hands are tied, they can only do so much. After that they are as limited as the democrats in greatly effecting the council of government.
You only have to look back at our history in the early 1800’s to see how a party in charge of everything can lose it all. Check out how the Whigs and Federalist political parties meet their doom when Americans realized that they could or would not fix the social problems of the day.
Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 11, 2004 10:17 AMDavid: Fair enough on your description of extinction. But your article claims that the Republicans might be like the dinosaurs, and then runs through a list of reasons what they’ve done or are doing “wrong”.
The dinosaurs couldn’t adapt, but that had nothing to do with the actions or inactions of the dinosaurs. It wasn’t the dinosaurs’ fault. The mammals could adapt and came to power after the dinosaurs passed on, but that had nothing to do with the actions or inactions of the mammals. It wasn’t the mammals’ fault.
And while public opinions and faith about some things are swinging one way, opinions and faith about other things are swinging the other way. I don’t see a “meteorite that killed the dinosaurs”-level change in the atmosphere any time soon. Details have changed but the big picture isn’t all that different than it was ten or fifty years ago. The big picture isn’t going to be all that different ten or fifty years from now.
I’m not arguing your theory of the problems with the GOP, as such, just the nit-picking your metaphor.
Posted by: murdoc at September 11, 2004 03:38 PMThe dinosaurs reached a zenith just prior to their extinction.
Hmmmm…reached…a…zenith…just…prior… .
Well yes, I think that’s probably true. Their population grew until it didn’t grow anymore, and the moment it stopped growing was the point at which it reached its zenith. Sometimes the logic of an argument is so obvious that you wonder why the person making that argument even bothered.
Of course your point was that Republicans are past their prime and it’s just a matter of time until their demise.
But the more I think about this, the more I see today’s Democrats as the sluggish behemoths. Over time, the party has staggered further and further to the left, leaving many of its former supporters (myself included) behind. Along came Bill Clinton, who at least had the good sense to portray himself as a moderate, and even with all of his shortcomings, he was elected twice in that role.
But then came Al Gore, running harder to the left and alienating many of the moderates in his party. Of course the fact that he was an arrogant, elitist, loudmouth bully didn’t endear him to a lot of folks either. When you read the comments at this blog, the letters to the editor in your local paper, or watch which party is more likely to disrupt free speech, you see a lot of Algoritis on display.
Now there’s Kerry, running on the most liberal voting record in the Senate. Eventually he and McAuliffe will have to stop talking about purple hearts, Vietnam, or Bush’s flying physicals. When that finally happens, then the species-ending meteorite you’re expecting may very well be John Kerry’s own leftiness.
Unless the Democrat party can somehow lumber its way back to moderation, it may be a long and cold winter.
Posted by: NOTOTH at September 11, 2004 04:03 PMExcellent article, David.
“Perhaps the Green, Libertarian and Reform Parties will be the shape of things to come.”
Yes. But O God, I hope its not the Libertarians! :^)
NOTOTH,
You’ve run afoul of the reduce everything to where it falls along some left-right continuum mental block. While the most prudent path may often be one of moderation, wisdom can be obtained by listening to intelligent voices from disparate perspectives. All too often the political middle muddles about in meaningless muck and unprinclipled strategizing, while the interesting ideas are being discussed on the edges. Put Ralph Nader, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Jack Kemp together and you’ll have a much more enlightening discussion than one with McAuliffe, Kerry, Bush, and Rove.
Very good and humourous posts here. Personally, I’m alligning myself with the rats and cockroachs.
Posted by: Greg at September 12, 2004 05:15 AMDavid, both major parties are changing as far as what policies they support. Only a third party, since it doesn’t have to worry about securing its base and wooing independents to hold onto power (since it has no power to begin with), can afford ideological purity and utter policy consistency as the decades roll by. That’s why Democrats stopped being Dixiecrats—they had to in order to survive.
So right now we see Republicans nation-building, Democrats making a xenophobic pitch against third world workers getting jobs that “belong” to Americans.
Even elementary school biology tells us that the ability to grow and adapt to changing reality is EXACTLY what prevents extinction.
And so today Republicans control the Senate and the House, hold the majority of governerships nationwide and the White House, which they look at this point likely to keep (though that could still change). Some extinction. The tent just keeps getting bigger and bigger.
You grossly overstate Republican dissatisfaction with Bush. In fact, every poll I’ve seen shows a much larger percentage of Republicans saying they’ll vote for Bush than percentage of Democrats who’ll vote for Kerry. I criticize Bush all the time (I have serious problems with many of his policies). But the Republican tent is plenty large enough for me and disapproving of some aspect of Bush is FAR from the same thing as wanting to vote for Kerry (or anyone else).
Posted by: Martin at September 12, 2004 10:23 PMDavid,
Here’s the history link of the political parties in Ameica. Especially, check out the No Nothing Political Party of the mid 1800’s. They were a secert group that played in the background.
Remind you guys of anything?
Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 13, 2004 02:01 AMSorry missed the link link text
Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 13, 2004 02:04 AMTry this one for the direct page to the
history of political parites in America. link text
David—
A very well thought out and well researched piece, however I must express the same level of pessimism as Bert and (gasp) Eric.. Sadly, I do not have as much faith in the American people to throw of the yoke of tyranny as you do. The high numbers in the polls still willing to vote for Bush only serves to prove my point.
But I am trying very hard to be an optimist, I still have some foolish notion that at the last moment the American people will take back their government and their Republic and throw the bums out, only to be replaced by another set of bums. And after both Parties sunset, then what?
I actually think the Dems might be headed for extinction. As the GOP picks up more minority voters (like me), the Dems are losing a core constituency.
Posted by: miguel at September 13, 2004 09:16 AMMiguel—
A question if you will: what attracts you to the GOP?
Posted by: V. Edward Martin at September 13, 2004 01:24 PMI agree with Miguel. As the GOP picks up many minority voters and third party voters (like me), the liberals seem to be grasping at air. I don’t want to vote Bush, but the alternative is scarrier to me. Where am I wrong?
Posted by: Tim at September 13, 2004 02:26 PMV. Martin, thanks for you supportive comment.
I understand and share your cynicism about voters in the short run. But, in the longer term, as we struggle with dispensing or saving soc. sec., public education, national health care, the public, I believe, will begin to realize that the foundations upon which the middle class have enjoyed such success over the last half century are eroding, and they will move to act in their own self-interest.
Posted by: David R. Remer at September 13, 2004 03:31 PMMiguel, they are both losing core constituencies. It has been going on for the last couple decades. This is nothing new. Democrats have a huge number of wealthy supporters today, and Republicans have a huge number of small donor supporters. Reverse of what it used to be just 15 to 20 years ago. Blue collar was Democratic, White collar Republican, also reversing now.
There is nothing one-sided about switching parties these days and many books and articles have been covering this topic for some time.
Posted by: David R. Remer at September 13, 2004 10:34 PMDavid said:
Miguel, they are both losing core constituencies. It has been going on for the last couple decades. This is nothing new. Democrats have a huge number of wealthy supporters today, and Republicans have a huge number of small donor supporters. Reverse of what it used to be just 15 to 20 years ago. Blue collar was Democratic, White collar Republican, also reversing now.
I agree with David on this. ( I can’t beleive how much I keep saying that!) I think that the party loyalty -vs- local constituant loyalty has gotten way out of hand.Just look at the vote counts.(I live in NC and Edwards sure doesn’t represent our states views the way he votes, when he votes.) That is why people like McCain are popular. He irritates both sides. Why is that? He doesn’t agree with EVERY issue of both sides. He stands for what he believes in and doesn’t shift his positions. I haven’t really cared for him the last couple years, (I guess just because he wasn’t always on my teams side!) But hey, that’s what it is going to take to unify our leaders enough to at least get back working together a little bit instead of not being willing to bend. In my eyes (and I’m not an expert by any means) the unwillingness to bend (compromise) is why our deficit, (and lets not forget our national debt!) has gotten out of control. Neither party will budge towards compromise and the bills won’t pass unless they have everything that both parties want in them. If McCain (or a reasonable faccimmaly sp rises up) and went independent, look out!
I think on the route they are taking that both are headed towards a cliff. But it’s not too late to get back on track.I’ve learned a lot here on WatchBlog in just a few short weeks. There are more reasonable debates from real people than in any media outlet. The media just tries to pound their views AT you, but here I can get a glimpse of why the other sides feel the way they do on issues. I can understand them better. (well, some od them anyway)
