Our Platform Needs to Resonate with Moderates For Us to Win...
By dhannon_pdx Posted in Archived — Comments (34) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I posted this in the letter to Huckabee letter, but I thought it deserved its own entry...
During the 2004 race I read an interesting article from David Brooks who said that we are a polarized nation for two possible reasons. One we are polarized, because we have figures who have inflamed (either positively or negatively) both opposite ends of the political spectrums, and in the last 20-30 years those ends of the spectrums have crept towards the middle, swallowing the moderates. Another theory, is that Americans have been educated better than before and therefore we are more involved in the political discussion and more passionate about politics.
I think the true answer is a combination of both (if I were to over-simplify the issue).
I am not going to claim who is a true conservative or not in this post or any other. I believe that people who tune into this site and other similar ones are people interested in the Republican Party and conservative principles.
I believe republicans who did not attend the Baltimore Debate is a reflection of where our political discourse has evolved. Cowards ignore debates against adverse audiences. I wish we could go back to a time when audiences weren't staged and filled with plants. There was time different minded Republicans and Democrats could have intelligent, civil conversations and debates. We have evolved to a point where people of the same party cannot have those discussions.
The era of politics, advocated by Rove and others, where we preach to our own party and hope we simply turn out more members of our own party than theirs, and creating wins separated by 1-2% of the popular vote needs to end. Instead, we need to preach how our principles benefit those who do fall under different socio-economic groups, different races (smagar), different genders, and different ages.
This is what Huckabee intends to do. Unlike Romney, Huckabee was a conservative in a liberal, southern state. I am not blind to some of the problems Huckabee presents--but his outreach to Republicans, independents, and maybe conservative democrats is not one of them. His issues with criminals is his biggest obstacle, but when he runs against a liberal like Obama or Clinton that issue will be moot.
All Huckabee is trying to do, is communicate to a group of Americans that are not being communicated to by other candidates. Reagan explained how deregulation helped middle-class and lower-class Americans. Newt did the same. Reagan explained how tax cuts would help lower and middle class Americans. Newt did the same. Reagan and Newt's messages did not resonate with the American people because they conversed with those who were already convinced, but because they communicated to those who needed to be convinced. That is what Huck is doing with his free media. Broadening his base of support.
My favorite line form Huck's conservatism is when he describes himself as a conservative, but he is simply not angry about it. We have a perception issue with non-Republicans (who we need to convince to ultimately win) that we do not care. Now, we know that is ridiculous, but there is nothing wrong with reminding Americans--all Americans, that we do care, and our platform illustrates how we care. That is what Huck tries to accomplish.
If we continue being satisfied with only convincing ourself, we will continue to intensify those who already support us, and become a passionate, informed MINORITY Party. To win, we need to create a broad appeal, without sacrificing our principles. That occurs by electing party leaders who can communicate our principles effectively.
I just do not understand why Huck's attempts to explain how our platform, minus the scandals and reckless performance by our prior elected (now expelled) partisans, angers so many of you. It is as though you want the pure conservative (whatever that is) regardless of whether or not they can convince a voter.
We need to begin seeing the forest from the trees. We are not the enemy to the party. A Democrat who can garner bipartisan appeal is the person we should fear. I hope Hillary wins the nomination to galvanize our base. If she does not, and we do not have a candidate who can communicate our principles to moderates, then we will lose.
"All Huckabee is trying to do, is communicate to a group of Americans that are not being communicated to by other candidates. Reagan explained how deregulation helped middle-class and lower-class Americans."
The problem is that Huckabee is communicating liberalism! What good is that? Obama is a better orator that Huckabee. Just vote for him.
Aren't CNN/Youtube and Desmoines enough of an example ?
Sure attend the debate but only if we get to pick a moderator and control the format. Otherwise why walk in smiling to an abattoir ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Spitballs?!?! / Yo No Soy Marinero, Soy Capitan
All Huckabee is trying to do, is communicate to a group of Americans that are not being communicated to by other candidates.
Or, were African-Americans only listening when there is a (drum roll...) Baltimore Debate!!!!
As Rod Stewart says in Young Hearts, "There ain't no point in talkin'/if there's nobody listenin'" The Morgan State/Baltimore and DC media crowd have proven themselves to be an audience less interested in listening to, and more interested in throwning things---insults, verbal rocks, even a certain brand of politically-charged cookie or two--at GOP candidates.
To imply that the GOP is to be faulted for not trying to communicate to African-Americans is unfair and selfish on your part. We have reached out to the African-American community. And, its political and media leaders thanked us by biting our hands. Pray tell, why should we expect them to treat Huckabee any differently?
Perhaps, though, they will treat Huck differently---if they can portray him as the "good" Republican, trying to "change" his party by making it more humane and decent...er, "inclusive." In that case, I'll bet that Team Jackson, Task Force Sharpton, Tavis Smiley and PBS embrace Huck, as proof that the Republicans can, indeed, become "good." And, it seems that Huck and The Huckabots are eager for such an embrace! Thank you very little, Team Huckabee.
'scuse me, Pastor Huck, but I don't need your kind of saving. And neither does this party.
We must resist the temptation to pander and offer empty platitudes in hopes of winning votes. For this campaign, it seems that that also means we need to resist the message and tactics of Team Huckabee.
"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)
Send the "Moderates" a conservative message. See if they like it better than the progressive leftist message.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
Tbone
As one of them moderate Republicans who has seen first hand in California what passes for a "conservative message" as you put it for over ten years, I can tell you it's not selling worth a darn out here. Fiscal irresponsibility, softness on crime, open borders, while being sold a Hair Shirt on social issues does not attract moderates, independents or conservative Democrats in the Golden State. It's why we have not elected a single Republican save the governator to a state wide office in the last two election cycles, and why we have the idiot sisters of DiFi and BabsBoxer as our Senators.
Argue all you want that the rest of country is not like California, and I would agree with your assessment in the coastal areas, but out in Inland CA people are concerned about the same things people in the rest of country are and it's not the usual array of social issues.
When you speak of a conservative message, think hard about if that message is a return to traditional values of the Republican party without the over emphasis on the social issues.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
Smagar
Outside of the mega church sort of voter, and we do have many mega churches in Inland CA, I can't imagine anyone less appealing to moderates, I's and moderate D's in CA than Pastor HuckaFraud, the Christian leader.
CA can't or won't even pass parental notification initiatives (2X tried and I supported both), so the thought that his message of social conservatism will win in CA is close to 0. Leading last time I checked in CA was Rudy G. go figure.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
The very stuff that so appeals to the 20% of the GOP base that supports Huckabee would absolutely creep out independents. After two presidential elections waged over the issue of Vietnam, we'd have one waged over the age of the earth. Ugh. The good pastor *might* win a handful of southern states. Please, anybody but Huckabee.
-exits
I'd correct that statement to a very small handful of southern states and nothing North of say North Carolina or West of Louisiana, and not so sure about LA ether.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
The Dems, along with Arnie the Dim, have now run CA broke. The state is so gerrymandered that Republicans will never win the legislature unless a major redistricting takes place. Further, I doubt that any conservative for governor or POTUS can overcome the liberal population centers of the goofball Bay Area or the Entitlement Zone known as Central LA.
However, in Normalville, USA a conservative message is more appealing to a moderate than liberal tripe. Fred carries that message well. Huckabee is just a second rate crook from a two bit state.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
It would be a step up for Rudy, John, Mitt and an escalator to the mezzanine for Huckabee.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
Tbone
I asked the very same question earlier, what is that conservative message?
More social conservative all the time, which is what the Republican party at the national level has stood for over the last 10 years, will not sell in CA. I'm not sure it sells well in the rest of the country ether given the drubbing in '06 for many reasons, but in my view the forgetfulness of Republicans on matters fiscal, law and order along with with war and peace helped secure that defeat.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
of being Socially conservative with being someone who feels that the government has a mandate to write laws imposing a narrow slice of values.
I also point out all too often that if you enlarge government your socon position dies anyway. A big government NANNY state does not promote conservative values of any kind. If you personally don't have freedom or liberty its that much easier to deny it to others including the unborn.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Balderdash. And poppycock. It bothers me less that you don't seem to know what movement conservatism is about than that you don't seem to have any confidence that the message can be sold. Granted, since the former seems to mean you see conservatism as being cold-hearted and mean, I suppose I can see why you might believe the latter.
IME, 'moderates' mostly don't exist. A very large portion of the middle third of the country's electorate is uninformed, and has no strong opinion because they have no information on which to base one. Some of them are of a classification that straddles one or more policy divides between parties, finding themselves more at home with the Greens, the Libertarians, or some other small also-ran.
Given the influence of the news media, we aren't likely to win a national election on insubstantial feel-goodism. We need to win on substance. Mike Huckabee is not a man of political substance, whatever personal charisma or speaking ability he might have. God knows we could do worse, but that's a poor excuse for not doing better.
I am a moderate and I am very well informed. Even though I am a political junkie, I still feel like "a man without a country." The Republicans are just a little too conservative for me and the Democrats are just a little too liberal. I am still technically registered as a Democrat, but I'm going to register as a Republican, so that I can vote for Mike Huckabee in the Republican primary. I like him so much, that I'm willing to change my party affiliation. He's the first honest-to-God, right down the middle candidate (on the issues that I care about like health care, education, the environment, and the GWOT) that I've seen in a long time. Mike makes me very comfortable--although I'm well aware that he makes a lot of you guys quite uncomfortable. Y'all have a good night and a Merry Christmas.
candidates who (1) represent the principles of the Republican party (e.g. are conservative) and (2) can win. Running as a conservative is clearly not a prohibitive obstacle to running for president. There is no reason for conservatives to sacrifice (1) for the sake of (2).
It is clear that many Huckabee supporters in 2008 are like the McCain supporters of 2000---democrats, independents, and RINOs.
Republican voters should be mindful of who they are voting with.
Remember Anderson in 80? Perot in 92? Lets go with a conservative this year.
I thought that the Republican party was a big tent party. Is that not true anymore? Are only conservatives welcome now? You write that, "Republican voters should be mindful of who they are voting with." So, are you saying that I am not welcome to join your party or vote in your primary--or that I shouldn't vote in the primary of my choosing? Are you afraid that conservative voters will catch moderate cooties from me? So, you don't want me to vote in your primary, but just shut-up and vote for the Republican candidate, of your choosing, in the general election? Just wondering.
In fact I think, as a party, that we need a few more moderate views. But most of us feel the Huckster is significantly left of moderate on most non-social issues.
I'm glad to know I'm not alone in this. I have felt like I wasn't quote at home in the field until I really started listening to Mike. Unlike you, I've sort of always been a light-red Republican and have worked for two very moderate Republicans in New England election campaigns. I'm glad to see his health care and education stances are noticed by some others, because it wasn't just the Christian conservative that swayed me. That just caught my attention.
It's reassuring to know that there's someone out there who feels the same way that I do. Oh, by the way, I also like Huck's moderate stance on energy independence. I forgot to mention that one. Have a Merry Christmas. :-)
You have a valid point that it would be muted against Clinton, but Obama has no such skeletons.
Obama would crush Huckabee in the general.
I personally won't vote for Huckabee. If it's a choice between him and HRC I'll vote for Hillary. I trust her more on national security.
Huckabee is a shyster of the lowest form.
If the GOP is stupid enough to nominate the Huckster we will completely deserve the inevitable beating we will receive, thus handing the SCOTUS over the Dems.
But Hey!! Huck's pro-life right!!
LOL
this is why self annointed social conservatives always go down. They, and their supporters, set such high standards, they almost always go down in a "scandal". I wonder if this poster would eschew his favored candidate if he ever pardoned a murderer? There are so many other, conservative, reasons to oppose Huck. This gotcha politics is why so many of our own party have fallen while the Dems just laugh off their own peccaddilos. At this rate, we will next have someone come foward and say Huck was a swinger or said Maccaca in College.
_________________________________________________________
Molon Labe!
to the family of Carol Sue Shields? She was sexually assaulted and murdered by Wayne Dumond, a convicted rapist who was pardoned while Mike Huckabee was the governor of Arkansas.
I agree that there are countless reasons why Huckabee should not be the GOP nomination. The pardons are only one of the more disgusting reasons.
My post was in response to the diarist's point about Huckabee's pardon problem.
I won't vote for the dirtbag under any conditions. If that is seen by you as having too high a standard, so be it.
I do not know the specifics of the Huckabee parole scandal. I am not downplaying the idea he could have been in the wrong or that he might have a pattern of leniency towards criminals. The only thing I know I have heard is that he was pretty tough on crime and signed more death warrants than any other modern Arkansas governor.
My point is that there is a group of Republican voters, mostly strongly socially conservative, that are the first to turn on their own kind for various anecdotal events. Look at how we took on Clinton over Lewinsky, but it was Livingston, Gingrich, Hyde, and Delay that went suffered.
I think if there is a serious lack of judgement, a pattern of such a failing, then it is worth considering. However, I do not want to have to dig through parole records to decide to whom I will give my support. I am against Huckabee because he is a nanny state authoricrat. Also, I would bet most governors allow some prisoners parole during their tenures. If parole is part of our justice system, then the idea that if a parolee commits another crime, the parole was a breach of trust seems a high standard in general. No man can predict or guarantee the actions of another over a period of years, it is simply not part of the human experience.
__________________________________________________________
Molon Labe!
but you think it's red herring issue.
You've "heard" Huck was tough on crime.
Well you've sold me.
LOL
I am completely against Huckabee. My points were clear, you never answered my question whether you would drop support for your preferred candidate if he ever paroled a convicted murderer. Anyway, you stay with the Greta's and Nancy Grace's, I will stick to my knitting, voting for those who want to preserve the Constitution. Good day sir, I said good day. smirk.
__________________________________________________________
Molon Labe!
It's not social conservatives who brought down Livingston, Gingrich, Hyde, and Delay.
It was weak Republican moderates don't have the guts to defend anything.
... without resorting to populist rhetoric jettisoning more than five decades of fiscal conservatism, ceding all sorts of foundational philosophical premises to the Left, and divisive appeals to religion.
I think Huckabee is an amazing marketeer and communicator, no question about that - but that's nowhere near enough. As Reagan himself says;
I, as a FisCon and DefCon just as much as I am a SoCon, have a problem with Mike Huckabee's content - it doesn't look or sound like the content I heard from Reagan and Newt. From his rhetoric to his record in Arkansas, which, for all intents and purposes, is actually a great deal worse than that of his closest rival.
I want a great communicator - I've been a broken record on this subject all year. After Bush (who scores a D), I'd settle for a guy with a C average - provided he's communicating the right message - that'd be a great step forward. An A+ communicator communicating the wrong thing is a step backwards.