search
top

Quote of the Day

From this very worthwhile lament on conservative marketing, from a Hollywood perspective:

I grow a bit tired of the in-fighting on all the conservative blogs and news shows between the “social conservatives”: and the Libertarian wing of the party.  Ditch abortion.  Don’t ditch abortion.  Move to the center.  Don’t abandon principles.  It’s a defeatist argument and one that really doesn’t need to be fought.  The David Frums and Meghan McCains have it half right.  Where they lose me is in their obvious attempts to gain approval from our enemies.

But they do have one thing right.  In the current climate, many of the social issues are big losers amongst certain voter groups.  The biggest bloc, and the one we have the greatest potential to turn, is women.  Women tend to poll liberal on issues like gay marriage and abortion.

Now, before this turns into a two-hundred comment post with people yelling about not giving up their core principles, let me be clear.  I do not advocate that the party pull left or advertise itself as “Democrat-light.”  But I do advocate prioritizing the issues that form the foundation of our marketing campaign..

I agree with him that fiscal and economic issues ought to be front and center, because it’s one area there’s pretty much uniform revulsion across the entire Republican coalition, including many independents, for the current status quo.

The real difficulty, keeping with the film analogy, is the Main Stream Media owns all the big theaters, and they only show one side’s movie.  To the extent they are willing to even show our trailers, they like to edit them first, to mislead the public about what the movie is really about.  It’s tough to get our message out there.  Made no easier by the fact that the last actor in our starring role wasn’t exactly Sir Laurence Olivier.  That’s not an excuse for not trying, but the deck is more stacked against our message than you might think.

Hat Tip to Instapundit

9 Responses to “Quote of the Day”

  1. penitentman says:

    I believe what the Republican party needs to do is return to its conservative foundations, the foundation on which it was built and the foundation on which it was successful. The Republicans used to win elections back when they were actually the conservative party.
    Before you dismiss me as a right wing extremist, allow me to clarify my position.
    The Republicans need to go back to being conservatives, or more precisely, Constitutional Constructionists. As a national political platform the Republicans should hold to the Constitution and its defense. They should declare that they will support and uphold the Constitution and that the Constitution should and will be the rule of Law.
    I, like yourself and many others, tend to be a bit more liberal when it comes to social issues. This has absolutely nothing to do with the Federal government or any national party. The Constitution spells out just what the Federal government is and is not allowed to do and where they can and cannot stick their nose into the States or The Peoples business.
    The Federal government should be no more involved in most social issues than to see that no one’s rights or freedoms- as enumerated and spelled out in the Constitution and its amendments- are being denied or abused.
    Other than that, it is all Tenth Amendment. The Federal government has no right or jurisdiction to meddle, direct or demand anything of or from The States or The People and should stay the hell out of it.
    Abandon completely the arguments of whether the party should be more left or more right, embrace The Constitution not only as Law but as a platform.
    If The Constitution says nothing about this or that issue then it must be something left to The States or The People and the Federal government should not try to butt in and try to make itself master of anything or anyone.
    My best friend is a Constitutional constructionist, a die hard conservative and a Republican, he and I are both disgusted at how the Republican party has been operating.
    Another good friend is a Constitutional constructionist, a self proclaimed liberal and a Democrat. He and I are both disgusted at how the Republican party has been operating.
    Both of them believe The Constitution is and should be the rule of law, the basis on which the country and government should operate and the limiting factor of how far and how powerful a reach the Federal government should have.
    The Republicans need to get conservative candidates who will defend and enforce The Constitution. That should be their only national political stance. If they are questioned about an issue, they should ask back “Is that mentioned in The Constitution as something that is within the jurisdiction of the Federal government?” If it is not, then the answer would be “That issue is up to The States or The People to decide.” There would be no non-answer answers, there would be no attempt to satisfy both sides and end up angering both instead.
    If the Republican party expects to survive and stay viable they need to become a single issue party.
    That issue is The Constitution.
    Learn it. Live it. Love it.

  2. RAH says:

    The GOP should never be ashamed of it conservative principles and for it’s religous supporters. Should the GOP hide that Christian homeschoolers are supporters and activists? Should it hide the 2A GOP supporters? No , so why should we trash and be ashamed of our more religous supporters. Is abortion the bright line that divide us? Do we want to support abortion and throw away those who believe it is kiling our children?

    Most of the religous GOP want family friendly values and to be left alone to bring up their families with out interference from the government. I can agree with that. They are against the culture of death that promotes abortion. I am also. I may believe abortion is convenient but that does not make it right.

    Or is the main issue Gay marriage? Many non religous is also against that and believe in traditional definition of marriage. Is that too reactionary now?

  3. NJSoldier says:

    Real conservatives are Federalists. Proper reading of the Constitution and the 10th Amendment pushes all these issues back to the States and THE PEOPLE. The Republican mistake was to engage in these debaes on the natioal level.

    What they should debate and fight for is the restraint of government.

  4. RAH says:

    Personally most of thes GOP lite went over to Obama and want the liberals to like them . They are not the mainstay of the GOP. Afterall we tried it their way and got McCain who is not a rabid conservative or fundy religous person. The moderate GOP did not even get out the GOP vote in GOP districts by you own report Sebastian.

    So lets push the capitalism message and freedom to worship as we want and bring up our children as we want and our freedom. Low taxes would resonate right now. More business hiring more people will also resonate.

    When we are contented, low taxes are not that important. I doubt that is true now.

    Bush was too much in he big business pocket and he spent as a moderate compassionate conservative, It did not work.

    So stop trying to get the liberal progressives to like you.

    Be proud of our conservatism and show how that is better for people. The message is pull peoplel to your side not go over to their side.

    • Bitter says:

      It’s not a matter of throwing social conservatives under the bus or hiding them away in a closet. What they are suggesting is to highlight the issues that are common to everyone instead of just common to anywhere from a third to half the population (depending on the soco issue at hand). On some of the soco issues, the generation gap is stark, and going to be nearly impossible to overcome – in particular gay marriage. That doesn’t mean we throw opponents under the bus if they coalition with us, it just means that we shouldn’t let that one small issue become the overarching issue for the GOP.

      That said, I think the same can be said for specifics within any fiscal conservatism argument. While the GOP does need to argue that it’s good with specific policy plans, they shouldn’t let one idea bog the whole thing down. In fact, I’d say McCain is a great example of a losing issue on this. Earmarks aren’t even a dent in the federal budget. Yet his entire claim to fiscal conservatism is tied up ending them. That’s great, and we should do it. But, he needed to go farther than that and he didn’t. He actually didn’t tell people how they would be better with a more restrained federal government. Instead, he flew back to Washington and said that he needed to be there to help the federal government get bigger.

  5. “The Republican mistake was to engage in these debaes on the natioal level.”

    This wasn’t a choice. Passage of DOMA was because the actions of some judges in Massachusetts created a situation that required federal ground rules to protect states from an obligation to recognize same-sex marriages.

    To the extent that abortion has been a struggle at the national level, it is because the Roe v. Wade nationalized it. In 1973, five states had very relaxed abortion laws, and 45 states had very strict ones. (And oddly enough, abortion rates in the very strict states were sometimes higher than in the relaxed states. Doctors weren’t obeying the law.)

    Much of social conservative “nationalization” of these issues is in response to liberal nationalization.

  6. I do agree that the primary focus needs to be on fiscal responsibility. Partly because this is something that unites libertarians, conservatives, many moderates, and even some liberals who recognize that welfare state capitalism is a golden egg that relies upon a productive goose.

    I am also skeptical that same-sex marriage divides as neatly along generational lines as many people claim. My experience is that people who have lived under GOG (Gay Occupation Government) tend to be less sympathetic to it than those who have not. Hence, Maine voting for SSM, and California voting against it.

  7. One more point: on the issues of abortion and SSM, blacks are strongly in opposition to the political party for which they overwhelmingly vote–and to a lesser extent, this is true for Hispanics.

    Obviously, these issues alone aren’t enough to get blacks and Hispanics to vote Republican. But if the Republican Party chose to make a real issue of the destructive effects that open borders have wages for unskilled U.S. citizens and legal immigrants, this, in conjunction with the social issues, might detach enough blacks and Hispanics from the Democratic Party to be a winner. But that would require Republican leadership to stop worshipping the open borders crowd. Yeah, the business interests that like cheap, docile illegal immigrant labor have a lot of money to throw around. But they don’t have votes.

  8. talgus says:

    The issue that must be solved, to have any real chance, is how to get the Conservative message out with a hostile MSM, in a one big theater town. Until we address the hostile MSM and get a method to make them carry our message UNEDITED, we are fighting with both hands tied behind our backs.

top