Frum is a smart man. Problem is, now they've let these people take over their party, there's no way to get them out again, without reverting to the kind of elitism that they always accuse the Democrats of having.
The emotional anguish of the Tea Party kooks has very real roots in the fact that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats really have anything to say to the working class that's suffering this recession and is likely to continue to suffer from it for another twenty years -- just as they have suffered for the past thirty (real wages for hourly earners are stagnant or declining since sometime in the 70s).
I'm not sure what your point about 1992 is, Dan. Perot's support did not come from conservatives only (some labor supported him too). He actually led in the polls for awhile, and had he not been such a kook (Stockdale!) he might've actually had a chance to win.
Haha. Frum has gone interestingly off the teabag reservation in all this. I always hated David Frum, but less because he's an idiot like Sarah Palin and more because he's of the "evil genius" persuasion like Dick Cheney.
I think Frum is the one conservative that's woken up to the fact that, with health care reform being accomplished for the first time in a long time, Republicans are stuck with an now-expired 1994 strategy in an America of 2010. He wants Republicans to win, and to be able to enact Republican policies without losing again, neither of which are not particularly on the agenda of the Republican mainstream anymore.
In this, he makes an important point: even if Republicans pull it off by swinging hard to the right, then what? Ban gays from the military again? Re-enact the medicare donut hole? Deregulate the financial markets, and allow huge bonuses? Double down in Iraq? There is no post-election strategy. They'll surely do all of these things, they still think "the real America" wants them. But then they'll just lose again.
What they're doing is making the mistake of listening to the media story they themselves are fueling; John McCain and Hillary Clinton also made this mistake when faced with Obama. They assume, because every pundit and his mother is assuming, that the Republicans are in for a great victory this November, a victory they barely even need to work for.
They're wrong, just as they were wrong last election cycle. I'm not the only one predicting Republicans are going down to electoral defeat this November. I'm joined by other conservatives like Frum and Sullivan.
It's hardly a pipe dream: it's a highly possible reality Republicans have no idea is coming. Just as they had no "Plan B" if they lost the health care fight, it's also obvious they have no "Plan B" if they lose these midterm elections. Given this, at the very least, the Republicans won't meet their expectations of winning back either chamber. At most, their minority is likely to get much smaller.
No lie, I would donate the maximum allowable amount to Palin if she would sign a sworn statement promising to run as a third-party candidate. It would be a small price to pay...
@6: Haha. Think less of 2012: what happens when JD Hayworth loses his primary to McCain? Or even if McCain loses his primary to JD Hayworth?
Things like this are going to happen; dozens of Republican incumbents are being teabagged in their primaries all over the country.
What if JD Hayworth then decides to run as an independent? What happens then is we're welcoming the new Senator (D) Arizona. The Republicans have not thought of this. At all.
Come on, the Bull Moose party was pretty bad ass. That was when Dem's hated black people and the Reps were trust busting "progressive." Oh history, why are you so funny.
@3- I agree, the Perot/Reform Party movement started as a pro-business/centrist party. It got hijacked later and died.
But Stockdale wasn't a loon, nor was he Perot's biggest problem. As last minute VP picks go, Stockdale was a hell of a lot better than Palin. Stockdale's performance at the VP debate was FANTASTIC, I don't care what the hater's say. He came off as completely unpolished, honest, and humble. I think the media dismissed him because if politics started looking more like him, there'd be less money in it.
Since David Frum is Canadian, he might also want to remind Palin how a second conservative party split the vote for over ten years and kept the Liberals in a majority government for three terms. Not that I ever complained ...
@2-- Problem is, now they've let these people take over their party, there's no way to get them out again, without reverting to the kind of elitism that they always accuse the Democrats of having.
(emphasis mine)
Why the fuck would that stop them? What, do you think they're worried about looking like hypocrites?
The emotional anguish of the Tea Party kooks has very real roots in the fact that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats really have anything to say to the working class that's suffering this recession and is likely to continue to suffer from it for another twenty years -- just as they have suffered for the past thirty (real wages for hourly earners are stagnant or declining since sometime in the 70s).
I think Frum is the one conservative that's woken up to the fact that, with health care reform being accomplished for the first time in a long time, Republicans are stuck with an now-expired 1994 strategy in an America of 2010. He wants Republicans to win, and to be able to enact Republican policies without losing again, neither of which are not particularly on the agenda of the Republican mainstream anymore.
In this, he makes an important point: even if Republicans pull it off by swinging hard to the right, then what? Ban gays from the military again? Re-enact the medicare donut hole? Deregulate the financial markets, and allow huge bonuses? Double down in Iraq? There is no post-election strategy. They'll surely do all of these things, they still think "the real America" wants them. But then they'll just lose again.
What they're doing is making the mistake of listening to the media story they themselves are fueling; John McCain and Hillary Clinton also made this mistake when faced with Obama. They assume, because every pundit and his mother is assuming, that the Republicans are in for a great victory this November, a victory they barely even need to work for.
They're wrong, just as they were wrong last election cycle. I'm not the only one predicting Republicans are going down to electoral defeat this November. I'm joined by other conservatives like Frum and Sullivan.
It's hardly a pipe dream: it's a highly possible reality Republicans have no idea is coming. Just as they had no "Plan B" if they lost the health care fight, it's also obvious they have no "Plan B" if they lose these midterm elections. Given this, at the very least, the Republicans won't meet their expectations of winning back either chamber. At most, their minority is likely to get much smaller.
2012 will be like shooting fish in a barrel if that happens.
Things like this are going to happen; dozens of Republican incumbents are being teabagged in their primaries all over the country.
What if JD Hayworth then decides to run as an independent? What happens then is we're welcoming the new Senator (D) Arizona. The Republicans have not thought of this. At all.
But Stockdale wasn't a loon, nor was he Perot's biggest problem. As last minute VP picks go, Stockdale was a hell of a lot better than Palin. Stockdale's performance at the VP debate was FANTASTIC, I don't care what the hater's say. He came off as completely unpolished, honest, and humble. I think the media dismissed him because if politics started looking more like him, there'd be less money in it.
http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/dumb_like…
(emphasis mine)
Why the fuck would that stop them? What, do you think they're worried about looking like hypocrites?