Friday, February 15, 2008

The real republican race

Yesterday we watched Mitt Romney endorse John Mc Cain, after Mike Huckabee remained in the race after losing the Potomac Primary and any chance he had of securing enough delegates to win the nomination. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4dnqb_romney-endorses-mccain-1_news

Governor Romney also added a slap (at Huckabee) by releasing his delegates to John Mc Cain. In other words, as much as Romney doesn’t like Mc Cain, it goes twice for Governor Huckabee. Obviously there is a struggle for future control of the party, as Mc Cain is ten years Romney’s senior and Governor Huckabee would like the Dixicrats to have greater control of the party, and Governor Romney would like the status quo to remain. But even moreso, these guys seem to detest one another.

Much of this primary is actually much less about the nominees then it is the future of the Republican Party. The old guard of “anal retentive brand of conservatives” have lost a fair amount of pragmatic sense that allowed the party to grow and come into power over the last two decades. This included the dixiecrats, the Reagan democrats , and the people who just are neither fiscally liberal or surrender monkeys.

However, even with one of the most liberal republican presidents in modern history leaving office, with a near nominee that is to the right of Bush on fiscal discipline and to the right of him on foreign policy, the old guard are acting like D.I’s at Parris Island on some alleged orthodoxy that they don't hold themselves to, rather than politicial astute people.

Many people are actually excited about the election this coming fall and the potential change it could bring. And people like Huckabee and to some extent Mc Cain are tapping into that core of people. Our standard bearers put them to sleep and couldnt drum up enough funds to keep in the race.

In four years from now, I doubt the republican party will look like it does today. I see Mike Huckabee and his guitar and I envision him asking the question that the 80’s group, The Clash asked ; Should I stay or should I go? (see side bar)

In listening to Sean Hannity I see where him and Newt Gingrich are talking about a new Conservative Party where they can define conservatism. It will be interesting to see if they can build any grass roots support or not. Hopefully if they do they will do more than craft a contract but actually follow through with living up to it, unlike the last one.

The real republican race may be either to save the party or run away from it by 2010. I wonder outloud which party will implode first, considering our countries approval rating of Congress and the President are at all time lows. Something has to break.

2 comments:

Steve said...

I'm not sure if you got gist of Newt's points when he was interviewed by Hannity. It may be that you don’t care for the Newtster. I’m not sure.

Newt is advocating "breaking" conservatism away from the GOP. Not leaving the GOP but staying with the GOP and taking conservatism, as a movement, and establishing it's own identity away from the GOP. It seems that Newt is saying that if the GOP wants to pretty much disavow conservative ideas (free markets, fiscal responsibility, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong defense of the homeland, sanctity of life) than conservatives need to establish their own identity. As Newt pointed out, there are many blue dog Democrats that could join this movement. It is a bi-partisan movement. The previous vessel, the GOP, is leaking a creaky. It is more concerned about being liberal, in order to get back-patting ink in the liberal press, than advocating conservative ideals. Newt knows that the majority of this country is conservative and they will respond with votes for the conservative who can articulate the conservative agenda without malice.

I agree with Newt 100%.

John said...

Steve,
I will respond in reverse order.
"Newt knows that the majority of this country is conservative and they will respond with votes for the conservative who can articulate the conservative agenda without malice."

Taken as a whole statement I would whole heartedly agree with that.

There is now a major trust factor though. We have been sold this bill of goods by Newt before and we bought it. We look at the end result today and we have him coming back and saying trust me again.

If there was a conservative who can articulate the conservative agenda without malice, of course it would sell, but where is that conservative? We rip our agents of change.

Tony Blair makes a few good points in that Clash spoof. This is about the future. I think Mc Cain has assembled a pretty good team of finance people. If Newt could work with Mc Cain (more his team), to bring solutions, not tell us our problems, it would work.

Right now, it seems like a history lesson of whining with no positive solutions for the future. No wonder an empty suit selling hope is selling like hotcakes. Yesterday is gone forever, it is time to move on. Will the Conservatives move on?