Obama Giving the GOP a Golden Opportunity?

Having given this election a lot of thought it occurs to me that Obama presents the GOP with golden opportunity. A chance to "rebrand" themselves. Additionally having read Obama's policies I can say that they are light on the specifics. Obama is essentially selling Americans a dream. If the GOP could pressure enough of its high profile members to tackle Obama respectfully on the issues rather than using the tactics that have worked in the past like fear mongering, exploiting racial polarization, attack ads, and whisper campaigns they might be able to beat him and in the process shed many of the negatives associated with the GOP, win back many independents, and become a party that is defined by what they are for rather than a part that is defined by what they are against.

However given the that maxim "If it ain't broken don't fix it." is part of the core of conservative thought I don't see the GOP doing anything differently anytime soon. The fact1 that the Clinton campaign used many of the same tactics in the primaries and lost I'm betting that Obama is counting on more of the same from the GOP and is expecting the same results in the general election.

Thanks to The Big Stick for linking to this post.

1: Changed the word "given" to "the fact" because I'm picky sometimes.

Regula to Retire?

From CNN:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) – Rep. Ralph Regula of Ohio, the second longest-serving Republican in the House, will announce Friday that he will retire rather than seek re-election to a 19th term next year, two GOP congressional sources told CNN Thursday...

The departure of Regula, first elected in 1972, brings the number of GOP House members retiring next year to at least 10, adding additional difficulty to the party's chances of taking back the House in 2008.

In addition to those 10 retirements, another Republican member, Rep. Heather Wilson of New Mexico, is running for the Senate, and Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia is also expected to leave to seek a Senate seat."

Additionally five Republican senators have announced they will retire so far. Given the current mood of the American people I seriously doubt the GOP will be winning all of those seats back. They'll be doing good just to keep the seats they have. What the GOP is truly fearing is that the Dems pick up enough seats to have a veto proof majority (well that and Clinton as president) My question is that should the Dems pick win across the board will we see the same levels of pork, corruption, and scandal we saw under the Republican majority? If I were betting I'd have to lay odds on yes.

Is the GOP Crashing?

Because its traditional supporters are certainly bailing out fast. Take the business sector for example:

From the WSJ

GOP Is Losing Grip on Core Buisness Vote

WASHINGTON -- The Republican Party, known since the late 19th century as the party of business, is losing its lock on that title.

New evidence suggests a potentially historic shift in the Republican Party's identity -- what strategists call its "brand." The votes of many disgruntled fiscal conservatives and other lapsed Republicans are now up for grabs, which could alter U.S. politics in the 2008 elections and beyond.

Some business leaders are drifting away from the party because of the war in Iraq, the growing federal debt and a conservative social agenda they don't share. In manufacturing sectors such as the auto industry, some Republicans want direct government help with soaring health-care costs, which Republicans in Washington have been reluctant to provide. And some business people want more government action on global warming, arguing that a bolder plan is not only inevitable, but could spur new industries....

But polling data confirm business support for Republicans is eroding. In the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in September, 37% of professionals and managers identify themselves as Republican or leaning Republican, down from 44% three years ago...

And then there are members of the religious right:

From Salon

Religious Right May Blackball Giuliani

A powerful group of conservative Christian leaders decided Saturday at a private meeting in Salt Lake City to consider supporting a third-party candidate for president if a pro-choice nominee like Rudy Giuliani wins the Republican nomination.

The meeting of about 50 leaders, including Focus on the Family's James Dobson, the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins and former presidential candidate Gary Bauer, who called in by phone, took place at the Grand America Hotel during a gathering of the Council for National Policy, a powerful shadow group of mostly religious conservatives. James Clymer, the chairman of the U.S. Constitution Party, was also present at the meeting, according to a person familiar with the proceedings.

"The conclusion was that if there is a pro-abortion nominee they will consider working with a third party," said the person, who spoke to Salon on the condition of anonymity. The private meeting was not a part of the official CNP schedule, which is itself a closely held secret. "Dobson came in just for this meeting," the person said.

I'm can't blame either group. Speaking as a fiscal conservative I wouldn't support the GOP either. Once they had all three branches of government they behaved as badly with America's money as the claim Dems do.

I expected the religious right to stay home rather than endorse a third party though. After all they were expecting an end to abortion and a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and all they got was the faith based initiatives program. By threatening to jump ship they are sending the strongest possible message to the GOP. However if you read both articles you find that a strong attempt to retain the religious right will cause them to lose more people in the business sector unless they prove that they have mended their free spending ways. For now though its good news for Dems (and probably The Constitution Party) and yet another sign that its going to be a tough couple of election cycles for the GOP. That is unless the Dems behave just as badly once they have control of the Oval Office, the Senate, and the House.

Hey, it could happen.

GOP Not Participating in Minority Debates is Pure Folly

I'm not one to buy into or promote stereotypes which is why when the front running GOP candidates pulled a no show at the NAACP debates I didn't post about it. Additionally when the same candidates blew off the debates hosted by Univision I didn't post about that either. (They also all blew off a conservative Christian forum in Florida around the same time.) However now that they have all opted out of the PBS debates at a historically Black college we officially have the beginning of a pattern. While many may attribute the worst possible motives to this behaviour I see other more likely and more logical reasons.

Number one being that by and large the GOP has written black voters off much in the same way the Dems had previously written off the South. Meaning that the numbers have shown that spending time and effort elsewhere turns out a greater number of voters or wins more districts. However in regards to the Hispanic debates I see another motive altogether. Simply put the odds of having to answer really tough questions about immigration are about one hundred percent. In a debate like that the odds of you having a better answer than the guy after you (who had more time to think) go down drastically. Given the strong anti-illegal immigrant sentiment amongst certain subsections of the GOP base actively engaging Hispanics or seeming sympathetic will invariably swing their votes to another candidate. Additionally given the fact that Hispanics are not a solid voting block there is no guarantee of a decent return for ones efforts. So by not engaging Hispanics the GOP front runners avoid losing votes from the base.

The problem with this "its all about the numbers" strategy is that it puts short term individual gains ahead of long term party growth. Couple that strategy with the fact the GOP leadership has in the past exploited racial strife in order to turn out white voters and the Dems have free reign to paint the Republicans as the little tent party. Now I'm no marketing expert but it seems to me that allowing your competition to define your public image isn't the best way to be successful. In order for the GOP to be viable in the long term it must take steps to engage minority voters even if it costs them votes from members of the base. Because given current demographic trends those members of the base that have been lifting them up will soon turn into an anchor that drags them even further down.

CA Electoral Votes to Be Split?

From The New Yorker:

Two weeks ago, one of the most important Republican lawyers in Sacramento quietly filed a ballot initiative that would end the practice of granting all fifty-five of California’s electoral votes to the statewide winner. Instead, it would award two of them to the statewide winner and the rest, one by one, to the winner in each congressional district. Nineteen of the fifty-three districts are represented by Republicans, but Bush carried twenty-two districts in 2004. The bottom line is that the initiative, if passed, would spot the Republican ticket something in the neighborhood of twenty electoral votes—votes that it wouldn’t get under the rules prevailing in every other sizable state in the Union.

The Tuesday after the first Monday in June is California’s traditional Primary Day. But it’s not the one that everybody will be paying attention to. Five months ago, the legislature hastily moved the Presidential part up to February 5th, joining a stampede of states hoping to claim a piece of the early-state action previously reserved for Iowa and New Hampshire. June 3rd will be an altogether sleepier, low-turnout affair. There may be a few scattered contests for legislative nominations, but the only statewide items on the ballot will be initiatives. More than two dozen have been filed so far, ranging from a proposal to start a state-run Internet poker site to pay for filling potholes to a redundant slew of anti-gay-marriage measures. Few will make it to the ballot. Many are not even intended to; they’re a feint in some byzantine negotiation, or just a cheap attempt to get a little attention—for a two-hundred-dollar fee, anyone can file one. (Actually getting one on the ballot requires more than four hundred thousand signatures, and the outfits that collect them usually charge a dollar or two per signature.) Initiative No. 07-0032—the Presidential Election Reform Act—is different. It’s serious. Its backers have access to serious money. And it could pass. full article

The article goes on to point out that due to CA's moving up it primary date there will be this year the big primary and a smaller primary for state (including ballot) issues in June. That means a fraction of the usual turnout in June. All the GOP has to do is turn out its base and get the talking heads ranting. Should this initiative pass then the Dem's have to find a way to swing the pendulum back in their favor or they are so totally screwed. Once they've restored the balance by unlocking another states electoral votes independent presidential candidates will have a much easier time running for election. Thats a winning proposition to many Americans that are tired of voting for lesser evils.

h/t to Donklephant