In GOP base, a 'rebellion brewing' (politico)

[jefferson_dem]

In GOP base, a 'rebellion brewing'
By BEN SMITH & JONATHAN MARTIN

A quick tour through the week’s headlines suggests the Republican Party is beginning to come to terms with the last election and that consensus is emerging among GOP elites that the party needs to move away from discordant social issues.

There was Sen. John McCain's daughter and his campaign manager who last week demanded that their fellow Republicans embrace same-sex marriage. Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman – the most devoted modernizer among the party's 2012 hopefuls – won approving words from New York Times columnist Frank Rich for his call to downplay divisive values issues. The party’s top elected leaders in Congress, meanwhile, spooked by being attacked as the “party of no,” were recasting themselves as a constructive, respectful opposition to a popular president.

But outside Washington, the reality is very different. Rank-and-file Republicans remain, by all indications, staunchly conservative, and they appear to have no desire to moderate their views. GOP activists and operatives say they hear intense anger at the White House and at the party’s own leaders on familiar issues – taxes, homosexuality, and immigration. Within the party, conservative groups have grown stronger absent the emergence of any organized moderate faction.

There is little appetite for compromise on what many see as core issues, and the road to the presidential nomination lies – as always – through a series of states where the conservative base holds sway, and where the anger appears to be, if anything, particularly intense.

"There is a sense of rebellion brewing," said Katon Dawson, the outgoing South Carolina Republican Party chairman, who cited unexpectedly high attendance at anti-tax “tea parties” last week.

<SNIP>

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21677.html

[Gman]

1. The 30% that still thinks Bush was a good president

now has control of the GOP. They intend to nominate someone for prez that will kick Obama's ass. Someone like Palin or maybe even Rick Santorrum, even though I haven't heard his name out there just yet. They firmly believe that all they need to do is start being more conservative and they'll win every election forever.

[MUAD_DIB]

18. Dick Rectorum will never be elected POTUS.

Me may be nominated, and we can only hope that is the case which would be another failure of the GOP.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

31. "They firmly believe that all they need to do is start being more conservative and they'll win"

This cracks me up so much when I read them saying this on boards like FR. They honestly believe they have to be more conservative to win, lol!


(sorry, I like a train wreck and have to visit there sometimes to see how angry they are)

[Jennicut]

2. Good. May they implode on themselves for years to come.

[alcibiades_mystery]

3. They are the Democrats circa 1981

Directionless, pulled out of electoral contention by the radical base of the Party, completely unaware of massive social and economic transformations, gripping tightly a bygone era when their now laughable rhetoric was actually effective. They need to dump the crazies and regain a moderate message. They will be in the rhetorical and electoral wilderness until they can find a way to win outside some the kooky districts.

[villager]

16. Was RFK's rhetoric in 1968 "laughable?"

I never felt that way...

Who were the "crazies" in the Demo Party circa 1981 after the -- sane? -- Ronald Reagan (who had such bastions of stability as Dick Cheney among his apparatchiks) that needed "purging?"

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. "Crazies" is a matter of perception and attunement

It's not necessarily wrong. It just doesn't resonate, and therefore doesn't win. I know it's hard for 60's liberals to hear. Their entire discourse was dead in the water by the late-1970's, and had to be reinvented as something else.

The same goes for the current conservatives. It may take them 15 years.

But to your question. Here's what I said: "when their now laughable rhetoric was actually effective..." That means that when RFK was using it, it was ACTUALLY effective, and not laughable. The answer was in the statement, if you read it carefully.

[villager]

20. I just don't consider some of that rhetoric "laughable," even in retrospect

...whereas, for example, we can also say some of Clinton's attempts at moderation, or rapprochment with far-right Republicans in the 90's were "laughable."

Don't forget 60's liberalism was deliberately targeted by the right -- excessive rhetorical flourishes on the left (usually from outside the Democratic party) notwithstanding.

That said, you continue to speak in generalities, without giving us specific examples of what you now find "laughable."

[Dennis Donovan]

4. Amazing that Meghan McCain has more power over the GOP than her Dad does...

:rofl:

[lostnotforgotten]

5. I Think It Is A Mistake To Underestimate The "Bubba Rage" Factor

In many ways it is similar to the left's rage at a machine politics and the ruling oligarchs hold over our country and government.

[Bosso 63]

7. Agreed, but I think their rage is the result of fear.

[lostnotforgotten]

9. Yes, And Some Of That Fear Is The Same Economic Fear That Many Here Face

That is the point of overlap between the two groups.

[skooooo]

10. And?

The idiots are hoarding guns.

[salguine]

14. It's not as a result of fear. It IS fear.

[salguine]

15. It's only similar in its intensity. Otherwise it's completely different. "The left's

rage at a machine politics and the ruling oligarchs hold over our country and government" is understandable because we have a system of machine politics in which ruling oligarchs hold sway over our country and government. "Bubba rage" is based on fear of problems that aren't even problems, like the existence of non-white people, non-Christians, and gay people. Perfect example: look at how the rank-and-file Teabaggers were almost literally foaming at the mouth with rage over taxes they weren't even paying.

[lostnotforgotten]

17. We Will Have To Politely Disagree On Some Points

eom

[Joanne98]

6. Why don't they just split the party in half? tee hee

[MADem]

8. "...move away from discordant social issues..."

See, this is why they've been putting up Michael Steele and Meghan McCain and Bobby Jindal....soft talkers who stress the "what do we have in common" aspects.

All I can say is, I hope the Dems hang on to all that footage from those conservative hatefest meetings. That stuff will come in handy in future elections.

In Congress, those "Party of NO" clowns are realizing that their seats, and with them, all those perks and access, are on the line. They've got to play the "Obstructionist??? Not MEEEEE!!!" game.

[AllentownJake]

11. When you marry yourself to a certain extremist religous element

and you than try to change your electoral strategy because that element is shrinking you are going to have push back.

If you have told rabidly religious people that God wants something than try to tell them God know longer wants that...good luck.

[Geek_Girl]

12. They fed the beast of hate and bigotry for decades

and now they are paying the price. It's good to see IMHO.

[Arkana]

13. "Unexpectedly high"?

There were like 180,000 people nationwide--anti-war folks got like three times that in one place.

[The Hope Mobile]

23. but didn't get anywhere near the same coverage from the MSM nt

[tanyev]

21. Oh, that's too bad.

*snort*

[NYC Liberal]

22. They're going to split. The religious right-wing nutjobs will probably break off

and form a "Conservative" party.

[The Hope Mobile]

24. That would be awesome. They're so clueless and paranoid

they'd probably end up killing themselves off.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

33. I really hope they do... it will put so many Dems in power!

[beachmom]

25. Their only path back to power is something like a DLC but for Republicans

Now by the year 2000, I was no fan of the DLC, but it had its purpose in getting Bill Clinton elected, and allowing the Democratic Party to move on from its time in the wilderness when Reagan got elected.

The difference, though, is that it seems the conservative base has a death grip on the Party, and in a sense, this needs to play itself out (i.e., more elections lost) before the base will shrink, lose power, and those remaining be desperate enough to be open to compromise. I don't think they are there yet.

[SpartanDem]

26. They do have some centrist organizations

there actually is a RLC, but it doesn't seem particularly active they have don't have any listed members on their website. The main centrist GOP org is Republican Main Street Partnership to which people Snow, Collins and Schwarzenegger are members. But as we all know they're so small in numbers these days that they have no real sway with the party.

[burning rain]

27. The GOP has alienated suburban and better-educated voters,....

so they find an even greater proportion of their membership consisting of rednecks and lumpens who are plenty angry, but who actively work against their own interests by demanding policies that will harm them, such as abolishing all social spending and cutting taxes for billionaires. They do this because they're convinced that absolute self-sufficiency is the American way, but the more they get their way, the more enraged they become -- because their agenda is one that screws them over. But you can't tell them that. Perhaps what they need to happen, for starters, is to get shellacked again in 2010 and 2012, so that they'll realize they can't lead.

[Cha]

28. They're "staunchly conservative" for

everything but bush's wild idiotic spending and killing..and then they were just downright vicious.

They lie, cheat and steal to act like self-righteous homophobic, anti choice monsters who think they've co-opted "In the name of Jesus"..but they're dead wrong.

And their tea parties were attended by the dumbest and the ugliest faux-limpbaugh listeners to ever misspell a sign.

[Ikonoklast]

29. I'd hate to see a rebellion.

I want a full-out civil war within their ranks between the god-botherers, who brook no argument or dissent from their divinely revealed political path, and the political realists, who can actually see themselves becoming the permanent minority party unless they can transform themselves back into conservatives.

I hope they fail miserably.

[Arugula Latte]

30. I hope the same thing happens to them nationally as happened here in Oregon.

A good chunk of the Republicans in this state are hardright loonies and no one can win a primary without being a hardright loony. (There used to be a proud strain of progressive Republicans here -- I know that's unthinkable now -- but of course they now are known as "Democrats.") Meanwhile, the state moves ever leftward. Republicans can't win a statewide seat -- including things such as Secretary of State. There hasn't been a Republican governor elected here since the early 80s. We got rid of our Republican Senator last election (Smith). The only Republican of any note is Greg Walden, who holds one of the five U.S. Congressional seats (in rural Eastern Oregon).

These nutjobs won't give an inch, and as a result they've truly marginalized themselves ... I love it.

[BlooInBloo]

32. Any moderates who might have existed left and went for Obama...

Like any rational person would. The republican party is currently nothing more than a regional party of bigots, idiots, and lunatics.

[cwcwmack]

34. it's quite simple

they're split into three pieces

fundie right

and

libertarian right

and

blue blood right (who are kinda' embarrassed by the other 2)

[sampsonblk]

35. The GOP is dead

Their party is no more. All they have left are a few factions that can't stand each other. They are no longer a competitive national political party.

They are not worthy of bipartisanship. They are not an equal partner in our political system, and there is no sign that they ever will be again.

All they can hope for is a bailout. Lets not give it to them.