Do We Need the Republican Party?
As a lifelong Democrat (my father worked for JFK) and a recent Democratic Congressional candidate, I have spent my life working to beat the pants off Republicans. And as a citizen who has suffered through the abuses of the Bush administration and the Republican rubber-stamp Congress, I would like nothing more than to see the architects of the last eight disastrous years banished to the far reaches of outer darkness.
However, if the Republican party were truly to disappear as a national political force (a fate they themselves wished on the Democrats), the nation would actually be worse off for it. By the way, this seems to be exactly what the current leadership of the Republican party has in mind. For the past eight years, the conservative wing of the GOP -- who are currently at the helm of the party - have steered a course straight for the rocks, alienating nearly every segment of the country except for the most reactionary elements of conservative America. From Latinos to big business, from Reagan Democrats to suburban moms, GOP leaders have waged war against the mainstream of our country, and they are now getting the full blowback of that ill-conceived and unjustified war.
So why not let the Republican party, now in the hands of a disgraced and disreputable conservative minority, head straight for the dustbin of history, where much of America now believes it belongs? Shouldn't there be some consequences for their recklessness and irresponsibility? From a moral standpoint, absolutely. But from a practical standpoint, we still need a responsible - and I emphasize the word "responsible" - opposition party.
The past few months of the financial crisis demonstrate the dangers of a renegade and irresponsible opposition. While the Republican leadership might have been expected to navigate a compromise in Congress with the help of the White House, the Democrats in Congress and President-elect Obama, instead they resorted to their old stonewalling tactics, determined to sabotage any constructive, bipartisan action. In the name of a rigid and outmoded ideology, they went back to the barricades when the rest of the country was trying to muddle through this mess together. The result--the GOP further alienated mainstream America.
Not that there are not a few voices within the party who have tried to be responsible. Even Bob Corker, who ultimately came down on the side of the know-nothings, tried to make a responsible argument against the auto bailout before he was drowned out by the voices of the Republican stonewallers. And there are other examples of moderate Republicans who could make important contributions to a national debate aimed at practical solutions, if they weren't swamped by the forces of extremism in their own party.
Ironically, the Republicans will have a real opportunity during the early days of the Obama administration to stake out reasonable opposing positions that might offer to restore a least of modicum of their vanished credibility with the American public. And responsible voices of opposition would likely be welcomed by the Obama White House, as they always are in times of crisis. After all, Barack Obama has promised not only change, but also a new approach to leadership that bridges historic partisan divides. When will the Republicans - both moderates and reasonable conservatives - push back against the extremist elements in their own party? It would not only be good for the GOP - possibly rescuing it from oblivion - but it might even (gasp!) be good for the country.
Follow Hoyt Hilsman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HoytHilsman
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Yes, The United States need the Republican Party just like Irag needed the Baath Party.
Another great piece by Hoyt Hilsman. His argument is not only cogent and reasonable, it assumes that thoughtful people are interested in what's best for the country, rather than in merely throwing more gasoline on the fire of division. We have real problems to deal with in the coming years, and endless partisan bickering is no way to approach them.
Does a dog need fleas?
I say give the Rethugs four or five of the southern states and let them rule their little empire. Leave the rest to the true Americans who respect the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
BLinCincinnati has it right. The Democratic Party will start to split in about 6 to 8 years into the centrists and the progressives. That is the best option for the country. The centrists will attract responsible, honest Republicans who currently feel politically orphaned (e.g., my son-in-law, ex-military, can't stand GWB and GOP, and voted for Obama). Progressives will launch the Progressive Democrats of America, uniting Greens and other (metaphorical) left parties.
Moderate Republican politicians in the past 30 years couldn't get past the primaries because they supported abortion rights and responsible tax policy. E.g., Norma Paulus in Oregon, driven out of the GOP by wing nuts and religious ideologues.
The best result of the Madoff scandal and Wall Street collapses is the drying-up of GOP fat-cat political contributions. Without money, the GOP is doomed, and frankly, I just don't see where their funding will come from.
As long as Obama and the Congressional Democrats remember that their AVERAGE political donation was under $100 and came from the 80% who aren't even in the UPPER middle class, they will be able to put through legislation that benefits the country as a whole. We need a strong progressive movement that reminds them constantly how they got to where they are now. Eventually, the current GOP will sink into infamy and die away, done in by their disdain for our constitution and their fellow human beings, and by their greed.
See Hoyt Hilsman's Profile
Very intriguing scenario by BLinCincinati as well as your comments. It does remind me a lot of the so-called Progressive Era at the turn of the 20th century. Teddy Roosevelt, elected as a Republican -- and fairly conservative, pro-business candidate, then turned progressive when he saw which was the wind was blowing. Then he ended up running as a third party progressive candidate. I could certainly see a scenario that split the Dem party, although probably not into a viable 3rd-party movement. It didn't really work with TR.
The probably with the contemporary Repub party is that they have a dwindling core constituency and don't really have a viable, forward-looking ideological stance. Unless they really change that dynamic, I could see them fading away or, more likely, being radically reconstituted by newer, more vibrant forces. Simply being the opposition party is not enough to keep them relevant. History is full of failed political parties who simply outlived their usefulness.
opposition yes, republicans no
What they tried to do in the last decade draws no quarter
Not openly, not with malice, and not at the cost of good government
but no quarter
Please! This stuff runs in cycles. People were saying the Democrats were finished a few years back. The Republicans will come back again, then the Democrats will, and on and on it will go.
Look in on the current bunch of Dems in the Congress, six, eight years hence, there will be corruption scandals, invincible egos, special interest fixers, all the stuff you complain about now with the Republicans. And there will be a reaction to it, just as there has been with the Republicans.
You have to have an astonishingly limited period of reference to think that the Republicans are through.
For the last 8 years, and the last two elections previous to this one, PEOPLE were saying that the Republicans were stealing elections! They never really came back ... they just stole what they couldn't get legitimately, not just elections but everything. But when they finally stole our DEMOCRACY, they crossed the line! This brand of Republicans have been clearly and soundly rejected by the American people, including members of their own party! They are now perceived as a party of old white men who promote exclusion, intolerance, opposition and obstruction, unwarranted wars and of course, tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, none of which reflect the ideals upon which our nation was built and upon which our nation stands for today. They have effectively broken the cycle of the past, and have effectively broken themselves. We've seen the face of this brand of the Republican Party at the McCain/Palin rallies and in Palin herself, and this is who the Republicans have now become. Are these the people that are "coming back?" Who, outside of themselves, is going to vote for them?
See Hoyt Hilsman's Profile
Yes, I do agree that these things run in cycles, but I wouldn't say it is strictly a pendulum pattern. There are political parties that have ceased to be relevant, although they often re-emerge in radically changed form. You could say that the Labor party in Britain with Tony Blair was an example of that. Lots of people inside Labor argued that the Blair revolution was exactly that, abandoning many of the core principles of Labor. My point is that the Repubs may have to undergo a similarly radical revisiting of core principles. Simply being the loyal opposition is not enough to ensure their survival. In fact, Newt Gingrich is currently arguing that the Repubs should not be attacking Obama on trivialities like Bill Ayers or Blagoyevich (as they did in the early 1990's), but have to move on to constructive policy and strategy alternatives. That would be a big change for the Repubs and also an important contribution to the course of the country.
First thing the Reps need is to purge the neocons. Then immunize themselves from this evil.
Second, we need more than a two party system. We need to develop stronger 3rd parties to disrupt the contrived duopoly.
Third, we need the "none of the above" option on the ballot so people can reject the lack of choice often presented by the Reps and Dems.
The first thing the Reps need is to purge the neocons, the racists, the religious fundamentalists, the fear-mongers, the uneducated and uninformed ... etc. And then, if anyone's left, they need to move to step two!
I agree with a third party option.
NO. Barack has filled his cabinet with enough DIVERSE opinions we dont NEED there Republican party. Oops my bad I mean the Obstructionist Party. Who's only agenda is to OBSTRUCT Progress.
Carol
No. We don't need the Republican party. And I don't see them coming back. In fact I hope to see something else happening if we are lucky....
1) 2010 Democrats win more seats.
2) 2012 Obama wins election and Dems win more seats. Republicans are a very small minority.
3) 2016 The Democratic party starts to divide into two main caucuses... a Moderate to Conservative half and a Progressive to Moderate half.
4) 2020+ A "new" party starts to take shape... The return of the Progressive Party, originally founded by FDR.
We will see the Republicans remain to the far right, with the Democratic party occupying the center-right to center-left, and the Progressive Party occupying the center left to left.
Hopefully this will lead to an end of the 50+1 mentality and the "us vs them". Probably won't, but it's either 3 party system, or a super majority of Democrats who caucus in 2 or 3 main groups but still manage to work together on compromises that work for America.
No, we don't. After the Bush disaster, Repugs need to take time out to retool. America has changed. Rethugs need to understand this and to recaliberate their politics. Playing race, religion or sexuality no longer apply. Understand this, or perish. America expects better.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
