| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
The Right's Task: Propose A Future and Make It Possible
Submitted by Kristen Soltis on Tue, 06/03/2008 - 09:34
[Promoted - Kristen Soltis makes good points about something very important to the resurgence of the Right: criticisms and policies aren't enough - we need a to tell a compelling story about the future we envision - Jon Henke]
As Republicans, we are faced with the unfortunate reality that our ideas frequently lack the easy, fuzzy and warm narrative that Democrats can offer. In his recent Doublethink Online piece, Conor Friedersdorf brings up the example of rent control - while liberal policies may actually make things worse for poor families, the pro-rent control narrative is easier to tell.
A talented reporter, given enough time and space, could craft a narrative that illustrates how rent control ultimately makes poor families worse off. His job is relatively difficult, however, for he can hardly write a pithy anecdotal lead about the hundred families that won’t occupy a non-existent apartment building because a foolish policy eliminated an unknown developer’s incentive to build it.
Unfortunately for us, in addition to the head start the left has in crafting an attractive story, the word "Republican" now has it's own set of drawbacks. In his column today, David Brooks discusses research conducted by my firm, The Winston Group, about the impact of the Republican label on our policies.
More fundamentally, McCain’s problem is that his party is unfit to govern. As research from the Republican pollster David Winston has shown, any policy becomes less popular when people learn that Republicans are supporting it. If the G.O.P. sponsored the sunrise, voters would prefer gloom.
Brooks, however, concludes his piece noting what we need to do:
McCain needs to come up with a one-sentence description for why he represents a clean break and a compelling future.
He's got it right. The problem we face now is that we aren't proposing a future, we aren't saying "Here's what the world will look like with our policies in place, here's how our policies make your life and future better." McCain took a crack at this with his speech outlining what Iraq will look lke in the future - good. Now, this needs to be expanded to the rest of his agenda. And it can't be done with fifteen bullet points, it needs to be done in a clear, concise way that cuts through the clutter.
David Winston also has a column today in Roll Call (subscription required) calling for a GOP to define a future and make it possible. Rather than campaigns based on painting Obama and Democrats as "liberal" or "out of touch", or trying to hang the last two years around their necks, it's high time that we figure out what it is we're selling to voters - not just what we're asking them not to buy.
What does that mean? It means defining a view of the future that is compelling and possible, not defining one’s opponent. It means defining a Republican Party concerned about people, not one that says problems can’t be solved or it isn’t Washington’s job.
It means applying conservative principles to problems with the kind of intellectual vibrancy that underpinned the Reagan and Gingrich revolutions. That is the challenge facing the party in this historic election. The Republican brand problem is all about defining the future for voters — what a Republican president and Congress can do to help them.
While the factions of the GOP don't all have to agree on each bit of policy, there has to be more than a process we tend to agree upon - we need an outcome that a Republican government is working toward. When we were in power, when we had the reins, we failed to achieve outcomes that Americans wanted, and thus, as Winston's column notes, we were "fired". Luckily, we still have a chance to prove why we should be hired again.
While Democrats face the same kind of voter discontent, they remain ahead in national polls because Republicans haven’t broken through as a viable alternative. Contrary to Democratic claims, however, voters haven’t embraced their party’s ideology over the past year. That gives Republicans an opening.
Whether the party can take advantage of the opportunity depends on whether it accepts the premise that ideas will win this election, not money or dogma, and shows that it is ready to govern. That will take a clear break from the past to modernize and create the Republican Party of the future.
(7 votes)
- Kristen Soltis's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Promos
Recent blog posts
lgm
0 comments
Skip MacLure
0 comments
In between
0 comments
Ironman
4 comments
John Smith
0 comments
Anita MonCrief
2 comments
Wayne from Jere...
0 comments
John Smith
2 comments
lgm
30 comments
Skip MacLure
3 comments
Recent comments
-
venn99
-
venn99
-
venn99
-
Remains of the ...
-
John Smith
Search
Links
The American Scene
Conservablogs
Election Projection
FiveThirtyEight.com
Jonathan Martin
Marc Ambinder
Megan McArdle
Patrick Ruffini
Pollster.com
The Foundry
Government Bytes
Race 4 2008
Real Clear Politics
RedState
Ross Douthat
Soren Dayton
Infrastructure
America's Future Foundation
Americans for Prosperity
Americans for Tax Reform
American Majority
Club for Growth
Election Journal
Heritage Foundation
ATR Blog
Leadership Institute
NewsBusters
Sam Adams Alliance
Republican National Lawyers Association
Republican Liberty Caucus
Washington Watch
National Taxpayers Union
NetRight Nation
Good Lefty Blogs
MyDD
Open Left
Swing State Project
Comments
If conservatives ever needed proof...
...it is time to "party-build rather than vote for McCain, just re-read this post.
As I have stated, I know it sounds heretical, but, hell's bells, man, when the country wants to commit political suicide, the best thing to do is take it out behind the wood shed and put it out of its misery as soon as possible so we can get on with party-building sooner rather than later. It's the only humane thing to do, unless you think it better to vote for McCain and have the good name of the true Republican Party tarnished for years to come and our republic changed forever.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Exhaustion, 1952 Style
I would commend anyone to read David Halberstam's epic history of the Korean Campaign, The Coldest Winter.
Within that volume, Halberstam describes an America in 1952 that was exhausted with the Democrats after twenty years of war and the New Deal. So they turned to Eisenhower and Change.
If we lose in November, it will be because Americans are exhausted with the notion of Republicans in power in Washington anywhere.
It will be up to us at the State Level to rebuild our issues and our brand, but to do so in an intelligent manner.
The Democrats have been an extremely angry and, let's be frank, hate-filled opposition. This will make it extremely hard for them to govern. As we rebuild, we must oppose as Reagan did: with reason and judgement-that looks good to regular voters.
Trust me on this: the Democrats will find a way to wear out their welcome.
Nice post, section9
However, if we win in November -- well, I shouldn't say "we". I should say if the Progressive Republican wing -- wins in November, it would be a far, far greater loss for us Goldwater/Reagan-Republicans.
In fact, if the Progressive Republican wing of the party wins in November, there won't be any Goldwater/Reagan Republicans running for local office until the Progressive Republicans wear out their welcome, as they inevitably will, and then it will be the liberal Democrats turn to fool the most people, and then maybe the ruling class taxing interests will finally decide it is our turn to fool the people in their name once again.
As you have correctly pointed out, we have been down this road before. If conservatives can just become aware of this point, things may change, but not before.
ex animo
davidfarrar
One Sentence?
Government programs are like eating in a restaurant that has one item on the menu: Grilled Cheese Sandwiches.
The Democratic party's solution to everything is to replace the one million solutions provided by the free market with a single government solution that's worse.
Republican: Because having the government run your life is the 10th circle of Hell.
The 11th circle of hell...
...is being duped into believing the conservative right of the Republican Party is made up of only of the Religious Right. The Religious Right of the party is only a portion of a much, much bigger conservative right who understand that individual responsibility is the key to our Republic.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Well, there's your problem.
McCain needs to come up with a one-sentence description for why he represents a clean break and a compelling future.
McCain is NOT a break, clean or otherwise. He represents eveything wrong with the Republican Party these days. Not to put too fine a point on it, the man is a liberal. I know, many here object to labels like "liberal" and "conservative". But McCain is a big government guy. He's Huckabee, without Huck's saving grace of appealing to the religious right.
Disagree that McCain = big government
McCain has a lot of ground for saying he isn't for big government, in my opinion. For instance, he voted against and I believe even tried some kind of filibuster action against the prescription drug Medicare Part D entitlement program. I haven't parsed out his full record, but between fighting pork and votes like these, I'm not seeing as many "big government, big spending" sorts of things popping up - but if you have examples, please provide them, I'd be interested to see where your argument comes from.
However, the Medicare Part D situation is another perfect example of how the conservative narrative can be so easily eclipsed by headlines like this one from The Hill. Instead of "fixing a major program that may likely be unsustainable or irresponsible", the more easily consumed narrative is "Cutting this program means old people won't have prescription drugs that they need to survive."
I would have to disagree with most commentors here, and say that I believe a McCain presidency just might be what the GOP needs to form a clean break - despite what Democrats will say over and over about McCain being "Bush III". However, he needs to explain how he's going to do it. He's got until November to tell that story.
You're absolutely right. . .
. . .about McCain with regard to fiscal restraint. He was the only serious Republican voice to be heard in opposition to the expansion of Medicare. He has been the strongest voice against farm subsidies. He has been the strongest voice in opposition to earmarks and pork barrel spending in the Senate for years. He was the driving force behind the preventing Boeing from landing a contract with the Air Force to build refueling tankers through bribery and corruption which would have provided fewer tankers on a longer timetable than EADS offered in its proposal.
When he opposed the Bush tax cuts -- for which he is still roundly criticized -- he also offered his own tax cut, albeit a smaller one, with accompanying spending cuts.
Ironically enough, he was labeled a RINO for all of these things.
Ironically?
When he opposed the Bush tax cuts -- for which he is still roundly criticized
He opposed those tax cuts on liberal grounds - he called them tax cuts for the rich. Boy, you can't even attack tax cuts for the rich these days without being called a RINO!.
How fitting is it. . .
. . .that McCain's detractors would focus on the admittedly unseemly rhetoric he employed in opposing a tax cut rather than the fact that he offered a smaller tax cut, accompanied by the kind of spending cuts that conservatives are now begging for -- some six years after the fact, along with all the other efforts he undertook to keep spending under control.
Oddly enough, that's just the sort of thing that your little buddy David seems wont to chalk up to pa-pa-pa-politickin'.
By the by -- where was all this rage back when President Bush decried "balancing the budget on the backs of the poor" in his quest to bring about a new, compassionate conservatism?
Your newly rediscovered principles are quite precious. Too bad we didn't have them a long time ago, huh?
How many times have we heard this refrain
I can readily understand how a "Progressive Republican" like yourself, and other Independents, now climbing on to the McCain bandwagon, are willing to given him a chance, just this one time. But we conservatives have been down this road before.
If you look at McCain's Senate record, McCain-Feingold, his Immigration policy, his support for Cap and Trade legislation...all speak volumes about McCain's record.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Apparently not enough
Because you still cling to the fantasy of gold buggery as a plausible means of repairing our economy. But, hey. It really won't matter much. The John Birch wing of the GOP has been purged before, and it'll be purged again through its own self-imposed irrelevancy.
Indeed, we have been down that road before.
Yes, Walt. Thank you
And it's going to be John McCain, the great Rockefeller-Republican, who is going to show us all how to reel in government spending. If anyone really believes such gibberous, I have some great swampland in Florida I would like to sell you.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Well, David, you're more than welcome.
But, the fact is, McCain has been one of the sole voices in the Senate to advocate fiscal restraint for years -- often to the sound of keening protest among his supposedly more "truly" conservative colleagues.
There is a point when skepticism crosses over into defiant ignorance. Those who presist in perpetuating the fallacy that McCain is a big-spending profligate have crossed over.
Ha, ha, ha.
McCain has been one of the sole voices in the Senate to advocate fiscal restraint for years
The price tag for his amnesty was, and will, be in the trillions of dollars.
The price tag for his global warming nonsense is likewise in the trillions of dollars, and has been described as the biggest expansion in the Federal government since the New Deal.
National Review - "When it comes to expanding Uncle Sam’s girth, nothing tops the global warming cap-and-trade proposal currently before the Senate."
The WSJ - "the most extensive government reorganization of the American economy since the 1930s."
That's McCains cap-and-trade poposal, in case you're forgetting. McCain is an advocate for fiscal restraint in the same sense as Hitler was a pacifist.
It does not matter what Republicans say
What all of the Karl Rove wannabe's have to remember is that for at least the next decade, it does not matter what any Repubican says. After the lying and blatant disregard for campaign promises, the Repubicans have zero crediblity. Until the few remaining Republican politicians decide that credibility is more important than personal entitlement, the Republican Party will continue its death spiral.
The untimely death the Repub
The untimely death the Repub Party has been predicted before, we're still here.
So instead of beating up on ones now holding office, you should be holding their feet to the fire. There is a difference in tactics. Don't get me wrong here, I consider McCain a LIBERAL, however, like most liberals he reacts to strong public opinion like the illegal immigration issue. I see McCain this way, he's a guy who prides himself on knowing his own mind, doesn't shrink from a political fight and doesn't change his opinion but bows to political expediency when he knows he can't win the argument. Our job at minimum for the next four years is to light the fires by informing the public on various issues like the foolishness now going on in Congress over the Lieberman-Warner Bill. The only way to overcome a propaganda campaign is to expose the loose ends and point out the logical conclusions which the public finds unacceptable. This means camping at the various websites putting your two cents in, suggesting stories to the editors and get as many others as you can doing the same. This is how you deal with a person like McCain, scorched earth policy.
We aren't simply dealing with liberal Dem policies based on deceit external to our party, we are also dealing liberals within the Repub party that need to be reformed or pushed out. Good riddance to Lincoln Chaffe. Getting the party supporters to engage and publicly speak out about the issues will make things very unconfortable for liberals since they depend upon public acquience to get away with their agenda. A wary enraged public is the worst possible scenerio for liberals. Exploit it!
Great plan.
The problem is, we will be called John Birchers, right-wing ideologues, conservative fanatics by our new found "Progressive" Republican friends. We will be demonized, but most of all, it will be endlessly pointed out to us that we too voted for the guy.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Well, you might as well get used to it. . .
. . .as long as you're going to use "Progressive" Republican in an attempt to tweak people who:
In short, if you don't like being derided as a Bircher, stop behaving like one.
And, finally, as I'm fond of saying when confronted with someone who rends his garments over such things, it's time to climb down off your cross. You can't drive the last nail in by yourself, and no one is interested in helping you finish the job.
You don't believe in those things.
So spare me your drama-queen routine.
Do too!
So there!
And the Winna! By a Knockout!
Walt ' No Man Can Eat 50 Eggs' Gilbert!
Well Played old bean, Well played indeed.
Progressive Republican
I've seen the term "Progressive Republican" quesioned in a couple of threads, so I should clear something up. "Progressive Republican" isn't really about the current "progressive" movement; it's a Republican Party faction from the early 1900's, embodied by Teddy Roosevelt.
A Progressive Republican
Is a Republican who doesn't have a clue what conservative values mean beyond what is necessary to put together a coalition of liberals and Independents. A progressive Republican is a Rockefeller Republican, a demo-lite, it's code for a liberal Republican. There -- for the record, now you know what I mean when I use the term: Progressive Republican.
It's kind of like the difference between classic liberals and classical liberals, if you get my drift.
ex animo
davidfarrar
You mean silver spoon Repubs
You mean silver spoon Repubs (Progressive) versus blue collar Repubs? It's my impression that the silver spoons tend to be oriented toward special interests whose donations supported their election. In the case of those who supported amnesty for illegal immigration, some of their financial support came from ADM and others who benefited by cheap labor. The problem of cheap labor of course is they as a group disproportionately use government services and so become a burden on the taxpayer. Everybody should be paying their fair share and that means everyone should be a contributor and not sponge off the taxpayer. Employers who underpay using illegals are essentially shifting their labor cost on the taxpayer, it's just another form of socialism. We have over $500 billion a year in social programs to prove that point. There is no such thing as a cheap head of lettuce when we are taxed to make up the difference. Blue collar Repubs understand that point, silver spoons know it too but have more money so they don't notice the cost. It's like Al Gore having a $1,000/month electric bill and not considering it excessive.
Name Calling
No offense to anyone but all this name calling isn't very productive or interesting. We can get that at Free Republic.
I agree with the post that began this thread...we must give voters something to vote for. We must package our ideas in a way so that they appeal to the average American voter. I'm not saying change the product, just explain it better. Communication has been the weakest point in the party for a very long time.
We need a message that contains our main beliefs spelled out in a way that makes them understandable. The message should be Republican solutions to real life problems that explain how a nanny state creates problems for ordinary Americans instead of solving them. We need to tell people why they are better off with less government interference and how government regulations make their lives worse.
It seems to me that creating a coalition of groups and well known Republicans who are not in office, and who can agree on a few major points, would be a good start. This coalition would need to be supported by pundits and the blogosphere.
You are right. We must define the future and the role of the Republican Party in making it a reality.
Compelling Future
Good points, Kristen, and well stated.
Coincidentally, earlier today I sent the following to the Heritage Foundation regarding their "What Would Reagan Do?" feature:
BEGIN QUOTE: "I admired and respected President Reagan; to my mind, he ranks high on any list of truly great American or world leaders. But he left office 20 years ago!
"It seems to me that looking backward is the worst thing we can do now. President Reagan himself didn't look backward! His eyes were always on the future.
"'What will Jindal do?' would be a better frame of reference. I respectfully suggest that you let 'The Gipper' go and look to tomorrow. Get a subscription to The Futurist and read Kurzweil's The Singularity is Near and encourage innovative thinking among Republicans. As Obama trumpets 'change' across the land, the last place Republicans want to be is looking backward 20 years, no matter how worthy the scenery." END QUOTE
Although I, personally, align with Thomas Paine - "That government is best which governs least." - it seems to me that the American public is moving past the debate of government vs. private sector and toward a future in which it's accepted that many tasks could be done by either government or the private sector, and the main concern is whether those providing goods & services are efficient and responsive. People want things to work. Policies and messages geared to that concept will win out.
On to the topic, if I may
Lynn, I agree with you. Kristen's point is that labels and name-calling aren't getting us anywhere.
With all respect to Conor Friedersdorf, John Stossel is all over the pithy journalism. He's doing a fine job and not convincing anyone as far as I know. It's little wonder; his well-written article vs. a 30-second ad paid for by teacher's unions.
I envision Republican t.v. commercials. A suburban morning: a parent drives their kid past a bullet-ridden, rat-infested school, where the kids are hanging out dressed like baby hookers and gangsters . . . into a safe neighborhood, to a tidy school where the kids are carrying books and dressed like young citizens. "This is your kid's education on school vouchers. Vote Republican."
Things that show a concrete improvement in your daily life, which will moreover add up to a better future. There are dozens of other possible examples.
What's Most Popular in 2009? links of london Definitely!
In the Radio City Music Hall, lying in New York where the 63rd Annual Tony Awards was taken place. links of london links of londonMany Hollywood well-known stars were attracted to come to this award show. links of london links of londonJane Fonda, Colin hanks, Anne Hathaway, Susan Sarandon all appeared in beautiful full-dress and links of london, links of london being followed by a loud applause, praises as well. links of london First, have a look at Anne Hathaway who made herself like a ballet girl by wearing a black dress with insets of ruffled chiffon decorated with a brilliant links of london. links of london Dolly Parton, being regarded as the queen of American country music, was not left behind. links of london links of londonA piece of pink dress and a pair of links of london with special design apply glamour and myth to her. links of london links of londonlinks of londonlinks of londonlinks of londonIn addition, the Oscar-winning actress Jane Fonda presented with a black deep V-neck dress and a diamond-studded links of london, appearing many compliments. links of london links of londonlinks of londonWhen it comes to the prizes, the first place finally was seized by the wonderful musical play Billy Eliot. links of london links of londonlinks of londonSo no wonder it won 15 Tony nominations, and finally achieved a good result: involved in 6 great awards. links of london links of londonlinks of londonIn a TV interview, Lee Hall, the author of this libretto said that, links of london links of londonlinks of london"Thanks to Elton John! It's him who made a proposal to adapt this great work to a musical play." links of london links of londonlinks of londonAnd at last, the two men, Lee Hall and Elton John shared the award Best Original Music Composition. links of london links of londonlinks of london