Parties ax handled in presidential elections with coattails into the house and senate have to undergo what in business parlance and pyschobabble parlance is second order change. The old rules do not work, so they have to redo the entire playbook. The same goes for the democrats, frankly, as some key incumbents were broomed out of office.
This happens when parties hew too far to an extreme. It happened to democrats in 1972 and 1984, and they really did not get it figured out until Bill Clinton came along in 1992 giving a forearm shiver to the NAACP with his Sister Souljah renunciation after the two previous candidates had offered Jesse Jackson all sorts of paid perks under that banner. Dick Morris came along to coin the term “Triangulation” which was just a new phrase for what Dick Nixon had done so masterfully in his election cycles.
The silent majority is far more moderate than party activists. So it has always been; so it shall always be.
Some republicans seem to be rediscoovering it. Some do not. Tim Pawlenty was pressed on the MSNBC show Morning Joe on whether or not there was room for someone like Olympia Snowe in the Republican Party, and he did the Ralph Kramden “humina, humina” verbal dance in response. Today RNC Chairman Michael Steele was on that show and interrupted host Joe Scarborough asking the same question of him to simply say “Absolutely.” Drink more of that Kool Aid, Mr. Steele, its an electoral elixir.
The Republican Mr. Hyde was in play in the New York 23rd district where moderate republicans were driven off, and a candidate running on the Conservative Party banner gained traction. In this race a socially liberal Republican, Dede Scozzafava, finished a woefully distant third, followed by Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman. Democrat Bill Owens captured what had previously been deemed a fairly safe Republican seat. Scozzafava, in a rare move, endorsed Democrat Bill Owens while Republican Party honchos raced in to endorse the Conservative.
Whoops.
But there are just as many Lessons Learned to glean from disasters as from successes ... if one is objective.
Hoffman had appeal for his fiscal conservatism. Therein in lies the silver lining. He also banged away on social issues, and therein lies the storm cloud that keeps raining on Republican parade routes. The party jumped the shark federalizing the Terry Schiavo issue when the nation wanted action on matters such as, oh, I don’t know, the Iraq War, maybe?
Republican Dr. Jekyl showed up in Virginia and New Jersey where they picked up two governorships. Republican Chris Christie, a former prosecutor known for corruption busting, focused on high taxes and financial issues to oust Governor Jon Corzine, a wealthy banker turned politico for whom Obama made last minute appearances.
Corzine did what any person has done in the past in tight races. He went negative and personal focusing on Christie’s rather rotund appearance. This kind of sniping is about as repulsive today to the average voter as republican nanny state lectures on abortion, gay marriage, and family values while decrying democrat nanny state lectures on health care and other matters is as well. It’s not that social conservative republican dislike big government intrusion, it’s just that they do not like where it intrudes. It’s not principled, it’s agenda-driven.
It rings hollow.
In Virginia the results were somewhat more alarming. Won by an 20% margin just last year by Obama, this state gave the Republican, former state attorney general Bob McDonnell, nearly 59% of the vote over Democrat R. Creigh Deeds for an 18 point win, or a 38 point swing in just one year. McDonell’s promise, much like Obama’s a year before, was to work on job creation. A social conservative who focused on fiscal matters. Imagine that.
So two Governorships gained, and one safe congressional seat lost in a comedy of errors. The congressional seat followed the old playbook of railing on social issues, with those within the party not on board with such sermons derided as RINOs, or Republican-in-Name-Only. Presidential hopeful, Rick Pawlenty played the same card on Olympia Snowe, one of the few moderate republicans left.
The Governorships were won focusing on fiscal prudence with nary a mention of down-the-nose admonitions on social matters. Virginia’s margin of difference, according to the exit poll tea leaf readers, stems from Independents breaking 2-1 in favor of the Republican whereas last year they split between the two parties in the presidential election.
To steal from James Carville, “It’s the economy, stupid.”
So therein lies the second order change the republican party has to make. Social issues do not build majorities. They solidify an increasingly smaller and smaller portion of “the base.” Parts of the RNC from that core group swooped into the NY-23 race to bolster the Conservative candidate. So, sure, the guy had a close run at it, but he lost a safe seat.
The two successful republican candidates in New Jersey and Virginia did not focus on social issues. At least in the case of Chris Christie, he eschewed negative ads simply reiterating messages about the economic fears gripping virtually the entire nation right now. In each case the candidates did some rather profound things that ought to give Democrats pause.
Democrats could be headed for 1994 all over again in 2010 based on fears of over-reaching and lack of focus, or trying to take on too much too soon. That will be on them. Republicans can capitalize on that if they realize they have to throw out the current version of the rule book masterminded by Karl Rove of divide and conquer over social issues and seek to pull the nation together on some universal concerns over economic stability and fiscal austerity. Healthcare discussions with glib sidesteps on real costs do not sit well, frankly. Americans fear fiscal irresponsibility these days almost as much as they do health concerns. Each goes right to the core of every American and their sense of security.
So Democrats have to watch out for pulling a Terry Schiavo on healthcare and other nationalization policies that highlight national fears of THEIR party’s excesses and poor reputations, and Republicans have to pull in on the national fears of their overreaching on social issues that did bring them down in 2006, by stressing fiscal austerity and job creation while leaving the moralizing to the professionals in the pulpits and pews of our personal choice.
In short, Republicans, to capitalize, have to do what Democrats did in 2006 by finding more centrist candidates to run against the opposition. The successes in the Governor’s races provide as much positive examples of that for the Party as the exploding cigar that was the NY-23 congressional race does in a negative way.
Social conservative aficionados Pawlenty ,Palin, and Armey handed out those cigars. Smart pols with a tad more temperance such as 1994 architect Newt Gingrich (Odd to think of Newt as temperate, but in this climate he is.) and business professional Mitt Romney declined the opportunity. Gingrich knows well the missteps soon after 1994 with 73 freshman congressmen deluded by the tidal swing into believing it more what they had to offer rather than a rejection of Democratic party excess in the early part of the Clinton administration. Romney, if he knows nothing else, knows economics.
As James Carville said with great success: “It’s the economy stupid.” Those, not social issues, are the roots of the Republican Party. It’s high time the party returned to them and put Mr. Hyde back in the closet.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
JustJuli
neilpaul
trig palin
Donna Carbone
Martha Nichols
Joan Wilder
Salon.com
Comments
On a micro level, in the 23rd, it helps if the candidate a) lives in the district, and b) is somewhat knowledgable on local issues affecting the constituents.
In Jersey, and I get this data from my close friend a Republican judge, both candidates had flaws. It was a choice of the lesser of two evils, and the incumbent party got ousted. Based on their track record, it was well deserved.
In VA, you had a candidate run a effective campaign and one who was incompetent. To borrow from Mort Sahl if McDonnell ran unopposed he would have lost.
To respond to "In short, Republicans, to capitalize, have to do what Democrats did in 2006 by finding more centrist candidates to run against the opposition. "
The true believers are the power behind the party right in the GOP. If rational thought occurred in the party's highes ranks, We'd be talking about Congresswoman elect Scozzafava this morning.
The big story that's under reported is how did a Democrat win a seat that's been a Republican seat since Abraham Lincoln was President? What did the Republicans learn from this? To quote the late Edwin Starr: "Absloutely nuthin'!"
Sorry for rambling, but rated.
The comparison between over-promising Republicans in '94 and over-promising Democrats in 2008 is accurate, tho both courted trouble for opposite reasons -- the Republicans too little govt and the Democrats too much.
In that, both reflected the mood of their party's respective bases, which in each party is probably little more than 20% of the electorate. The Republicans hold an advantage on that score in that their base consists of far more dedicated voters. That is a two-edged sword, however, since that also means primary victories often go to candidates too conservative to win in the general election -- and NY 23 is a perfect example.
NY 23 was a special case in many ways. Hoffman fit the radical right-wing agenda, but he was a piss-poor candidate who knew nothing about local issues and didn't even live in the district. Bill Owens was not a great candidate either, the default choice, since really marketable Dems didn't want to run in NY 23 since it is about to disappear with redistricting. Given that, the conservative loss in that district ought to be even more of a warning to R operatives.
I'm hesitant to draw too many general conclusions from the other two elections, however. Corzine lost because he deserved to lose based on his record (and in a nation where 35% of the population is said to be obese, attacking fat people may not be the best campaign move).
In Virginia, Creigh Deeds also went negative, mostly because he didn't have any ideas of his own -- the Party of No SHOULD pay attention to that. They should also understand that guys like McDonnell probably won't sell any more outside the South and in isolated NRA/Libertarian pockets in the boonies of Idaho.
The politics of division served the Republicans well for thirty years, but Rove wasn't smart enough to understand that the electorate changed dramatically during that time. Obama did understand that, and coupled with an utterly abysmal eight years under w was why he was elected.
The politics of division with its barely disguised racist appeals and phony patriotism are now on a par with fat attacks. You mentioned Schiavo, and never was heartless political opportunism more on callous display than in that episode.
If the Rs want to return to power -- or if the Ds want to remain in power, they are going to have to send the children in their respective parties to their room and figure out a way to appeal to that vast 60% of the electorate that has come to the conclusion govt is necessary -- but only if it's good govt.
Tom: Not sure how to decipher that one. Seems there's some agreement in terms of the need to meet in the middle and to lay off social issues, which both newly elected governors did, while social issues were very much at the forefront of NY-23. Therein lies the lesson I hope gets learned. Steele seems to have gotten it, if Pawlenty, Palin, Armey did not, and Steele frames the recruiting and overarching campaign strategy going into 1o. From these results, it is not unreasonable given the times and the historical analysis to expect Dems to lose seats. How many is still up in the air. Times like 1994 happen very rarely.
Much was made of Obama's romp in Virginia, with the pundit speculation being that population in Northern Virginia was changing the make up of Virginia and turning it into a much bluer state than it had been in the past.
THAT is what I meant by that comment.
As I said, I don't think Corzine proved anything other than "throw the bum out". And McDonnell benefited from not having much of an opponent.
Those who are looking for "trends" in all this are looking up their rear ends as far as I can tell. 2010 will provide a much better test, and when the bulk of the electorate goes to the polls in 2012, we might actually be able to talk about real trends.
2012 might well determine if the Rs have found their way back to the center or gone the way of the Whigs. One trend I do see -- the Rabid Right will not go quietly, and I would not be surprised to see a semi-permanent Conservative Party emerge, much as the Progressive Party did in the last century.
After all, if God is on our side, who can be against us -- other than the voters in NY 23?
OldNew: It's an old story, this splintering of extreme single interest voters. Not to pick a scab, but Nader picked up 80,000 votes in Florida in 2000. Even if many stayed home, the split of those who would vote would have clearly been greater than 600 more for Gore than Bush, thereby changing the outcome, right? So the question becomes whether or not lessons learned will prevail. Virginia was the home of the Christian Coalition, remember, and the candidate focused on ECONOMIC ISSUES to court independents back into the fold. Not sure if they should be called Reagan Democrats anymore, as the demographics have shifted, but they are basic folks in the muddled middle with pretty simple concerns right now about financial security.
Sally: I appreciate your input and validation on this stuff. Does make me a little itchy to try to find a way to get back in the game, as it were, as 2010 should be an interesting cycle. Could be 1994 all over again, to be honest. Beware overreaching or less than open discourse about the financials behind the public policy goals.
Perhaps it's just a metaphor malfunction?