Catch 22 in 2012:  The GOP and the Presidency

I’m not a political junkie.  I don’t attend party rallies, constantly post my opinions in social media, or harangue the kids at my daughter’s bus stop.

I listen to sports talk and music, not to Rush Limbaugh or Ed Shultz. 

It is because of my position and preferences in life (and perhaps also because of my appreciation of history) that I am free of the group-think, mob-like mentality that plagues political zealots who spend their days boldly preaching their particular brand of gospel to adoring choir members.

Here is the plain truth:  The GOP is doomed when it comes to presidential elections now and for the foreseeable future unless serious changes are made.

Even setting aside the Hoover-esque way that Americans continue to blame Bush for all of our economic woes fully 4 years later , there is no way this election should have even ben close much less a victory for President Obama.

The failure of the GOP in this Presidential election (and almost certainly all that will follow) boils down to 2 simple words:  Social Issues.

Say what you will about the Religious Right, but they are vocal, motivated, and committed to their beliefs at a level matched only by the extreme pacifists and environmental contingents of the left. 

Sadly, and perhaps fatally, for the GOP, the ferocity of this group’s zeal is matched only by a financial footprint in the Republican coalition that far exceeds their actual numbers.

Republican candidates for Senate seats or Presidential office, desperate for the money to compete with well-funded Democrats who often enjoy the support of deep pocketed labor unions, are forced to cast their lot with people whose uncompromising social agenda is distasteful to some in their own party and loathed by most of the Independents whose vote they need to remain competitive.

The funding  problems faced by GOP candidates who do not kowtow to those banging the social issues drum is further compounded by the Religious Right’s propensity to abandon candidates who do not share their social zeal by staying away from the polls or threatening a third party split-off (See McCain, John: 2008).

Once a candidate has the firm support of his/her own party, the key to election rests with finding positions that are acceptable to one’s base without alienating the Independent or moderate voter.  This particular fence is much harder to straddle for candidates on the right as their positions on social issues have a tendency to alienate specific voting blocks (women and gays in particular) and are offensive to many educated independent voters.

For the last 4 years, GOP candidates enjoying large leads in their races at the outset have crashed to earth in spectacular fireballs under an onslaught of TV adds highlighting their stance on social issues. 

For example, in 2010 in Colorado, Republican Ken Buck initially enjoyed a 5-7 point lead over incumbent Senator Michael Bennett.  During the greatest economic crisis in the last half century and when fellow senators and congresspeople of the left were being repudiated by voters across the country for forcing Obamacare down the throats of a choaking electorate, Bennett’s camp pursued the single minded purpose of putting Buck’s social issues positions on display.

No commercials about Buck’s business acumen, positions on foreign affairs or energy policy.  Just a steady drumbeat of Buck’s right-wing social issues positions.   When the smoke cleared, a comfortable lead had evaporated into a loss and the Democrats retained yet another seat.

Michael Castle, a shoe-in for the Delaware seat, was defeated in the GOP primary for not living up to the extreme right's idea of a proper candidate.  The victorious tea party stooge (a social issues conservative and little else) was soundly defeated by a self-proclaimed socialist in the general election.  The insistence on running un-electable candidates simply because they subscribe to a specific line of religious conviction shows how obtuse zealots are regarding legislative politics and committees.

Even in this last election, I could not find a single intelligent person who could claim with any semblance of a straight face that President Obama and his entourage possessed an understanding and appreciation for economics anywhere near that which Mitt Romney brought to the table.   Almost without fail, independent voters who went for Obama cited the social issues platform of the right as their primary reason for avoiding Romney.  It was not a vote against Romney or fiscal conservatism, but a vote against a party that brings too many personal beliefs to their platform that run contrary to a largely secular independent voting block and then battling so vociferously for these positions that it creates the idea that vital issues such as the economy are of secondary importance.

Listen, I know that many existing Democrats are not going to switch parties and vote GOP under just about any circumstance.  I also know that a large number of self-described “Independents” are already firmly in the camp of one party or another.

However, elections in most Presidential races come down to a small percentage of ballots one direction or another in a series of swing states.  The GOP must find a way to grab a percentage of an ever growing minority electorate.  They must cast aside the impression that they serve the interests of a bunch of bible-thumping chauvinists who adhere to archaic and foolish ideas of female subservience.  Above all, they must find a way of shedding the albatross of social issues from their neck without causing oversensitive fanatics with copious amounts of financial resources and zeal to “take their ball and go home.”

In order to avoid joining the Whigs, Know-Nothings, and Bull Moose on the ash-heap of history, the GOP should continue to trumpet fiscal responsibility, personal accountability, small government, and a robust national defense.  However the following changes to the platform should be made immediately:

1)       Effectively immediately, the GOP ends all opposition to government sanctioned same-sex civil unions.  Conversely (firm in our belief in the separation of church and state), we do not believe that religious institutions should be compelled to perform or condone these unions.

2)      It is the party’s position that using abortion as a means of birth control is abhorrent.  However, we recognize that there is no justice in absolutism.  There is a major difference in allowing women access to medication that prevents eggs from attaching to the uterine wall then in allowing someone 32 weeks into a pregnancy to abort a viable child.  Effective immediately, we propose to drop opposition to all preventative birth control including morning-after pills.  Moreover, we grudgingly cease opposition to a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy in the very early stages.  In return, a ban on late term abortions must be passed in all cases aside from danger to the mother.

3)      Marijuana is a gateway drug.  So are cigarettes.  So is alcohol.  We agree to legalize and regulate marijuana and industrial hemp production. 

--Prohibition didn’t work and neither does the marijuana ban.  When’s the last time you ever heard of someone smoking up and beating their wife or knocking their kids around?  Have you ever read of a pot smoking hippie breaking into houses desperate for a fix and murdering the inhabitants to steal a few nickels for their next score?  Not all drugs are created equal.  Use the freed up resources to crack down on the dangerous stuff and those that pedal it.  Legalization would be a boon for the economy (if not overtaxed and regulated), cripple the Mexican drug cartels (reducing crime), eliminate the need to harvest forests for paper use, and create a new and more efficient agricultural sector.

4)      We continue to oppose illegal immigration in all forms.  However, we recognize the reality that millions of law-abiding and hard-working people are already in this country trying for a better life.  We wish to create a speedy path to citizenship for those without criminal records.  Moreover, we will make it our goal to reform the ICE to make legal immigration far easier and cheaper for future Americans.  In return, those in the country illegally who commit crimes or opt against undergoing the steps needed to immigrate to our great country need to be removed immediately and denied the benefits of government assistance provided to legal immigrants, residents, and citizens.  With immigration made easier and more affordable, and with the corresponding loss of government services to those who would refuse to follow the process or break the law, a substantial decline in illegal immigration can be expected.

5)      Effective Immediately, we cease opposition to all embryonic stem-cell research with the condition that only unwanted or discarded embryos (already slated for destruction) are used in the research.  Furthermore, no embryo shall ever be created with the sole purposes of testing or research.

6)      We re-affirm our belief in the importance of a separation of church and state.  Just as scholars cannot come into Sunday school classes and place stickers on bibles and religious books stating that they are only stories and not to be taken seriously, religious institutions and politicians should desist all efforts to bring religious beliefs into public schools. 

7)      Birth Control does not kill anyone.  If a doctor prescribes it to a patient, we believe that all medical facilities should be obligated to provide it or provide the cash equivalent to the patient so they can purchase it on their own.

With these ideas implemented into the platform, I believe that you would gain at least an 8-10% increase in total vote percentage.  In fact, many moderate democrats who lack the genetic flaw of Bolshevism would jump over to such a platform as it addresses some environmental concerns, no longer makes a pariah of the gay community, assuages the fears of a “war on women”, and contains a realistic yet compassionate immigration policy.

The danger in such a move for the short term is the bail out of religious zealots who are unwilling to eschew forcing their view of morality upon the electorate.  However, the influx of young and educated independents and moderate democrats would more than offset this loss and will take the teeth out of the primary campaigning tool of the left.  Let them form the “new Theocracy” party, or the “League of the righteous” and see how long it is before they become irrelevant and have to throw their weight behind the GOP yet again as the only group not openly hostile to their world views.

Of course, out of touch pundits who spend their days fielding letters from members of their congregation or phone calls from like-thinking listeners will claim that conservative social policies are the key to victory, not realizing in their delusion that moderate Republicans lose general elections not because they are too moderate, but because they are forced to embrace positions that are archaic and offensive to young, educated, and independent voters in order to secure the nomination of their party in the first place.

It is also been said with some vitriol that the country is doomed without a moral compass.  To this I ask:  Whose moral compass?  Dr. James Dobson’s?  Muhammad’s?  Buddha’s? Sean Penn’s?  Zues’? 

None of these systems of morality (with the possible exception of Sean Penn’s) is any less provable or viable than the other. 

I am sure that a gentleman in some desert community  is right now lecturing his 12 year old daughter that she must not drive, go to school, travel, marry who she loves, vote, complain about being beaten or be seen in public without full covering lest she upset the “moral compass” upon which society relies.   Moral compasses change like the seasons, and the party that shackles itself to a corpse rather than flexibly adjusting itself to meet the needs of a modern country inhabited by a more educated and worldly constituency is doomed to repeat the 2012 election in perpetuity.

It is time the GOP embrace reality, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and reverse the progression toward irrelevance.