For years Arlen Specter has been a thorn in the side of conservative Republicans. I personally know hard-core pro-lifers who even stopped supporting Bush when he raised money for Specter in 2004. Frankly, a great many Republicans are pleased to see him leave the party, as he today announced he will to run as a Democrat in the 2010 Pennsylvania Senate race. After all, he did vote essentially as a Democrat over 40% of the time. But his departure is obviously a huge blow for Republicans in Pennsylvania and nationwide.
Much has been said already about the impact Specter's jump will have in the Senate. The Democrats now have a solid filibuster proof majority. Between retirements and primary challenges, it will likely grow by a seat or two this cycle. But this is a reality we've been dealing with for weeks and months. What concerns me most is the future trend this switch signals.
After our loss in November, pundits opined that the Republicans would split in twain, probably into a fringe right-wing and a moderate mainstream party. And everyone could agree, at least, that some major reworking was in order. What Specter's switch tells me, however, is that between Obama's tent pole popularity and the tarnished Republican brand, every moderate voice could be pushed from our ranks and into the Dems' waiting arms. If you don't believe me, take a look at Texas in the 80's. As Democrats found themselves to the right of their party core and felt the winds change, they jumped ship in droves. Our current joke of a governor is one such opportunist. The personal popularity of the Republican president was a major factor in these decisions, as was the far left's refusal to find a middle ground and give their candidates some political cover.
Today, the far right of our party refuses to accept reasonable solutions to the immigration problem. They label anything short of outright exodus “amnesty.” Some in our party have carried the banner of fiscal conservatism so far to the right any combination of “government,” “spending,” or “taxes” might as well be a four letter word. We've let ourselves be defined by a few ultra-polarized issues, like abortion, and shortchanged our immense collective wisdom on a host of other issues.
Who's next out the door? Anyone to the left of Attilla the Hun? And don't think it's not a witchhunt--our Texas governor's led the charge against “not Republican enough” legislators himself. In a couple election cycles we won't be a conservative coalition, just a few of nuts clinging to our guns and religion, and yammering about succession.
7 comments:
Are you in favor of abandoning the party platform on abortion? You seem to imply that it's an antiquated position.
Not at all, and I apologize if I give that impression. I just mean that a lot of Republicans have become one-issue voters (on abortion specifically), which I think hurts our chances of being a majority party again.
Haha, succession. I admire your wit, OHB.
Concerned about the "one issue voters" and your favored candidate's run for the governorship?
the GOP will recover whether we want to or not. obama and the dems are going to run into a brick wall called reality. come 2012, the GOP will be ready to pick up the pieces...unless, of course, we nominate palin...then we're all screwed.
Yeah, one issue voters make life tough for any candidate. On that particular issue, though, there is a lot of misinformation that presents a special challenge for a certain candidate.
Set the record straight for me
Post a Comment