We all have one of those friends… the “genius”. They’re always spouting off their brilliant ideas (or maybe blogging about them!), and if you’re lucky the ideas they’re spouting aren’t always totally ridiculous. The thing is that they seem content with just having the ideas, as if their mere conception is sufficient to demonstrate their superiority and value to the rest of humanity. Seldom do they take the next step which would be to assist in the implementation of these grand ideas, which is actually an equally important part.
In today’s political landscape, the Republican Party is in danger of becoming that friend. Conservatives mimic the line of liberals when their ideas are not embraced by the electorate… “the problem is in the messaging”. Clearly that must be the case, they suppose. The ideas are so wonderful, how could anyone dismiss them if they were sufficiently articulated? And if clearly articulated and yet dismissed, the next explanation must be that the public is greedy… or lazy… or just plain dumb. Of course a case can always be made for these explanations. Messaging can always be tweaked, and people have been known to be occasionally greedy, lazy, or not fully informed. Welcome to the real world.
The idea that Barack Obama and the Democrats succeeded in this past election because they played the role of Santa Claus to a childish electorate may have a degree of validity, but simply identifying that factor does little to move us forward in rectifying the situation. The GOP has been referred to by its critics as the party of no ideas, or simply the party of no. It’s an abstract distinction, but Republicans can’t be said to have no ideas, so much as “no” ideas. “No” new taxes, “no” new regulations, “no” new spending, agencies, government programs, “no” illegal immigration, “no” abortion, “no” gay marriage. While much of this agenda may be laudable, it’s hard to sell a negative. Seeking election chiefly by trumpeting how little you will do if elected, basically in a “do no harm” strategy, feels a little like you’re a thug selling protection. We pay you so nothing bad happens.
Don’t get me wrong, given the alternative, “do no harm” is not an unreasonable position. It’s just that the libertarian leaning idea of smaller government is easier to sell from outside the government, than while your attempting to become a part of it. A pledge about what you’re not going to do, like the Norquist pledge, may prove less effective than a pledge describing what you are going to do, like the Contract with America. People generally want their public servants to do “something”.
Of course, the knee-jerk reaction for either party to a stunning loss is to “adjust” their principles to more closely resemble those of the other party. In a generation or two the parties may be indistinguishable, just a question of your favorite spineless “team”. If a party has genuine core values what needs to be adjusted is strategies, not principles. If the principles are abandoned, then there is no practical reason to have that party. Observing successful strategy and mimicking that, when possible, in keeping with the party’s core values, is a reasonable alternative.
All the superior tactics associated with the tech savvy Democratic campaign are bound to be a fruitful avenue to pursue in future contests, but for this blog I hope to focus on the “changing” demographics of the electorate, and the idea of appealing to the various voting blocks. The contention that we are moving from a “white” majority country, to a country more dominated by “browns and blacks” is racist at it’s core; we are a nation of immigrants, and the composition of the “minorities” is in constant flux. To suppose that one’s political ideology is predetermined by the color of your skin is the very definition of racism. Of course, economic factors and social association often affect one’s politics; and race or ethnicity often correlate with these factors; but determining voting blocks by skin color falsely assumes an analogous lack of fluidity in political persuasion apart from your “voting block”. That is to mistakenly say that blacks will always vote as a block, as will hispanics, and that the only approach is to try to appeal to the entire block, or write them off completely… these are complex human beings, not just black or brown poker chips.
Mitt Romney’s infamous 47% quote, while certainly misrepresented, does show how Republicans can write off entire segments of the population as “unreachable”. The inevitable fatalistic logic of this position is this: Government dependent people vote democratic… democrats get elected… democrats create more government dependency… more people are government dependent… more democrats get elected… end of story. Obviously, an alternate view is advisable. If people in these groups do indeed tend to vote for the party that “gives them things”, and that seems a reasonable contention, how do Republicans compete? Either they need to also “give them things”, or they need to move them out of these voting blocks, remembering that the blocks are determined by their social and economic status, and not by their ethnicity. Up until now, Republicans have tended to try to convince these voting blocks that their grand ideas of liberty, freedom and small government are the gifts they bring in place of food stamps, health care and housing assistance. That’s a tough sell to people for whom the American Dream seems more like a fantasy.
Self-interest is one of the foundations of capitalistic thought, and so we ought not judge too harshly those who cast their ballots in accordance with what they view as what benefits them most, even when it is a little short sighted; that’s generally what we all do. You can make speeches or write blogs to try to convince voters to vote against what might appear to be their own self interest, but how effective is that going to be against community organizers who have a presence in these neighborhoods helping them find government assistance, free phones, a sympathetic ear, and a voter registration form? Are your ideas so seductive that spouting them like the “genius” friend should suffice to attract these voters? What if they don’t read your blog?
The road forward is not so easy. To reach these people we need to be beside them. Parading out the many blacks, hispanics, women, young people that represent your party, will not somehow magically convince these coveted voting blocks that it’s ok to vote Republican… they don’t know these people. I’m not talking about bribes, but I am talking about things that might actually cost something. Republicans spent millions on political contributions and PAC money in this election to no avail. Even just practically speaking, maybe it’s time to start putting some of this money into things that actually help people, while at the same time move people away from the influence of the government dependency crowd. Privately funded programs that help people get on the road to discovering the American Dream, to experience the freedom of financial independence, the dignity of self-support, would demonstrate that there is a better way, and would start a grassroots swell within these communities where even one Republican vote can often not be found. Are public schools failing us, both academically and ideologically? Where then are the conservative philanthropists or charitable organizations who would offer a quality alternative to at least a few of those doomed to an inferior education? What about Conservative colleges courting students by, gasp, lowering tuition? We rail against government assistance and suggest that it should be greatly replaced with private charity, so let’s go ahead and do that… provide charity on various levels that replaces the government programs with voluntary programs that do the same thing, only better. How about community based organizations that provide financial counseling, job training and career counseling, health assistance, immigration facilitation, mortgage assistance, small business start-up investment… things that are a hand-up, not just a hand-out, ways to move people off government dependency without being dependent on the government to do it. Where local and state government can help, that’s fine, we have 30 Republican governors; but it’s a little ironic to depend on government to decrease government dependency!
The only black United States senator is newly inducted Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican. His story is a lesson for how we can help reach these voting blocks… these human beings. He grew up in a single parent home, flunking out of high school, no hope for the future… typically ripe to fall into a lifetime of government dependency. But Tim’s life took an all too rare turn of events. The conservative manager of a local fast-food restaurant took a liking to him and reached out, mentoring him in individual responsibility, self esteem, and math. It changed his outlook, and his future. It cost the manager time and money to make a difference in Tim’s life, but what is more fulfilling or vital than that?
IMHO: The best strategy moving forward is not diminishing the party to appeal to the baseline of a public that seems in free-fall. If there is to be a country remaining to be worth leading, it must salvaged by those willing to do more than just spout off or shake their heads in disgust. Our forefathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to the establishment of this great nation; did we suppose it would require anything less to maintain it?
