In an excellent piece, which, to some degree at least addresses a point some readers have been debating in the comments sections to other posts, Michael Barone suggests that the GOP go upscale by “downplaying the cultural issues that were an important reason for Republican victories from 1980 to 2004.”
Instead, they should target younger voters by pointing out that Democratic policies limit our choices. “Republicans,” he contends, “can argue that their policies will let you choose your future.” Seems like he favors pushing a freedom agenda, adapting Ronald Reagan’s ideas to the world today. Good plan.
Not only does Barone offer the right approach to Republican rebuilding, he also understands the qualities of a woman likely to be one of those at the helm of our party for years to come. Noting the appeal Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has to “downscale voters,” he observes:
Despite the scorn the media heaped on her, she has excellent political instincts and seems capable of developing the knowledge base that would make her a credible presidential candidate in the future.
Numerous people, included this Democrat, who have worked with (or otherwise come into contact with) the 2008 Republican Vice-presidential nominee have called her a “quick study.”
The more Palin familiarizes herself with national policy at the federal level, the more she’ll overcome the image created during the campaign by awkward moments in interviews with aggressive reporters that hurt her image. Note how her detractors all focus on interviews she conducted before the Vice-Presidential debate. They all but ignored her performance after that.
Once Sarah Palin gained a greater command of the issues, got accustomed to the style and format of these exchanges, as well as the agenda of the national news media, she came across much better in such settings.
I mean, if Sarah Palin kept doing poorly in such exchanges, wouldn’t her detractors focus on more than just the Couric and Gibson interviews? Barone has it right. Once she develops that knowledge base, she will become a credible presidential candidate.
Oh, and with anything my Michael Barone, just read the whole thing.
I’m all for avoiding social issues that don’t make any real difference but the trick is where to draw the line. What some beltway pundit sees as trivial may be deeply important to a lot of people he disdains.
It’s depressing to think that electoral success is little more than marketing (going “upscale”). The problem with “upscale” is that it’s marketing to people who have the luxury of voting in ways that make them feel better about themselves; they don’t live with the fallout of their votes.
I live (over my head) in an upscale ZIP code. You’ve never seen so many expensive cars and homes; mobile homes in trailer parks start at $300K (really). Lots of Obama stickers and signs during the election.
To people around here, illegal immigration, crime, feral children, gangs, squalor, loss of blue-collar work, flat wages, bad schools (a euphemism for bad kids) and all the rest are little more than abstractions – they can’t worry their pretty little heads about what goes on in more and more of the country. I mean, no one here gives a damn when some underwear factory in Mississippi shuts down and leaves a bunch of hillbillies out of work… Surf’s up!
Instead they parade their sophistication and open-mindedness by spouting liberal talking points and expressing contempt for those they consider downscale (stupid) and looking down on people like Sarah Palin because she went to a state school instead of Wellesley.
It’s common to read comments on this blog by people who condemn Palin for being (allegedly) “anti-intellectual”. I’ve known and worked with people from a variety of backgrounds over the years (engineering). Some people had high-school educations, others vocational or military training, and more than a few Ph.Ds. When it comes to common sense, I’ve not noticed any correlation.
Is it too much to ask that politicians with a sincere desire to leave things better than they are make an effort at instruction?
Filtered… and I spent some effort!
Sarah Palin is Marge Gunderson from Fargo. Did anyone doubt that Marge Gunderson was smart? Did they doubt she’d never stop until she did what she set out to do? don’t understand how liberals can love movies like Fargo and not get Sarah Palin. I’d much rather have Marge Gunderson as President than Will Smith from Six Degrees of Separation.
So you finally admit she was not ready?
Sonicfrog, I’ll just say that I wish she had had more time to brief herself on national issues before the campaign began.
Wow, my esteem for the wisdom of Michael Barone has just taken a big hit. That column, in my not so humble estimation, is the biggest load of crap I’ve seen him lay. Its wrong-headed from beginning to end. Several points:
1. His rebranding of the social conservative v moderates debate as “downscale v upscale” is offensive, deeply telling, and not at all supported by the facts. Nor, I would point out, does he come even close to proving that it is. Instead he points out that younger voters, “They oppose criminalization of abortion, but they also disfavor it — the position of the great middle of the electorate” …and its been the position of the middle of the electorate for decades. Fortunately, absolutely no Republican is or has been running on criminalizing abortion. Talk about canards. Nor did any Republican run on outlawing same sex marriage in 2008, when Republicans lost. And his ultimate proof that the electorate no longer values values? They like ipods!
2. When did values even enter in to the 2008 election? John McCain certainly didn’t run on them. Abortion was off the table for, I believe, the first time ever. Gay marriage wasn’t an issue, illegal immigration wasnt an issue, gun rights were avoided.
3. Barone says the suburbs have turned Democratic, which is a blatant mischaracterization. This was not a pro-Democrat election, it wasn’t even really an anti-Republican election. It was an anti-status quo election. Obama and the Democrats did not run on agenda, indeed, they tried to hide their agenda as much as possible. Obama ran as a “blank-slate — he admits it himself — on platitudes of “hope and change” and congressional Democrats largely ran on his coattails and largely passed themselves off as conservatives.
The problem with all that is that American’s didn’t vote for what Democrats are now serving up. They voted against the economy and against the nasty political atmosphere that Democrats intentionally created. The majority of Obama supporters wrongly believe that Republicans have controlled congress for the last two years and are eventually going to realize, as the same policies get redoubled, and the people responsible for Americas economic mess expand the damage they have done with more of the same, that there is no there there in the Democrats message of “change”.
In order to claim the suburbs have turned Democrat, Barone needs to show that they have embraced Democrat policy, which is simply not possible when they believe Republicans have been running things for the past two years. And voters are just now associating results with Democrats for the very first time.
4. And finally (for now) and most importantly, Barone’s suggestion that Republicans need to “go upscale” shows a shocking lack of understanding for why we are where we are, and frankly that he is part of the problem, not the solution. Republicans do not win by dividing up the electorate and targeting specific demographics, that is the Democrats divisive game. In fact, thats how Republicans lose. Republicans win by espousing conservative ideas — hell, a lot of Democrats win by espousing conservative ideas — and by differentiating themselves from liberalism. Polls show only 14% of Americans know the difference between Republican and Democrat ideology. THAT is why Republicans lost.
In other words, the problem is not that Republicans aren’t targeting the right groups, its that Republicans have utterly failed to define themselves in the first place, allowed Democrats to define them and by their ceaseless compromises in congress and unwillingness to defend themselves, given Americans every reason to believe that Republicans are just incompetent Democrats.
And THAT is a load of very bad writing. Sorry. I hate proof-reading in this tiny little window. But my points are still right, even if poorly written.
I admit Palin wasn’t ready — not that she isn’t ready to lead, only that she isn’t ready to campaign — two very different skill sets. And there are certainly other politicians who are more ready to lead than she is. The problem is, Barack Obama is not one of them.
Please, please, please do all you can do to have Sarah Palin run again. Having a Know Nothing on the national stage is highly entertaining.
There. Fixed it for ya.
Here’s the problem. The left aggressively and unapologetically uses government to promote its social values … abortion on demand, multiculturalism, acceptance of alternative lifestyles. If the left weren’t using government to promote social values, there would be no need for a social conservative movement to fight it politically. Much of what is called the ‘Culture War’ is a defensive reaction by people who feel, rightfully so, that their values are under assault.
It’s scary that rugged individualism, self-sufficiency, independence, faith in God — the values that made America a great nation … are now considered extremist views.
Dan, I know you’re a big fan of Barone’s; to me, he’s always been the brightest tool in the political analysis toolbox… he knows how to “read the tea leaves” after an election and I trust his analysis.
Barone strikes an important note for GOP leaders –we need to look beyond the conventional “soc-con” agenda to what ought to be defining the real GOP core. I think that should be smaller govt, limited intern’l interventions, lower taxes, unapologetic strength on defense and natl security, local decision making, less regulation in the marketplace, equal opportunity not equal outcomes, conservation/protection of our natural resources.
It shouldn’t be about a woman’s choice. It shouldn’t be about stem cell research. It shouldn’t be about a federal marriage protection act. It shouldn’t be about English as a primary language or the flag as tool of protest. It shouldn’t be about how one worships or doesn’t worship God, either. And it sure as hell shouldn’t be an American concern or issue what people in Mexico, South America, Africa or Eurasia or NATO-member troops do on those or other soc-con issues.
Unfortunately, pols can’t take a pass on legislation when confronted with those items many see as part of culture war; after all, the culture war is what got many agitated in the pews and it was why they came to Reagan’s column in the 1980s. To step back from that “history†sounds to some of those soc-con activists as a retreat. And, as Barone knows, when pride is involved, retreat is a bad remedy… for the soc-cons its a call to fiercer, harder, more passionate battle. Or they take their marbles and go home in a snite or pout.
Maybe what GOP leaders need to do is leave the culture war for battling out on the airwaves, in the pews, in the media and elsewhere. The GOP leadership ought to take the approach: “Look, that’s not an issue for the federal govt to handle”; it can all begin with a simple No and then an appeal to the pocketbooks, your kid’s future, the safety of America, etc.
Barone’s saying, in essence, that the GOP leadership simply needs to start saying NO to those soc-cons who want to defend America’s honor against the next immoral impulse from the Left, the MSM, or the UN… whether that’s loud rap music, half-high trousers or condoms for bush people in Africa.
The New GOP Majority needs to stake its claim on the core issues: fiscal restraint, lower taxes, strong natl security footing, less internt’l intervention, more opportunity for all, local decision making, etc. They need to vote against bad legislation or appointments –against judicial nominees, for instance, who are bench-legislators rather than constitutionalists or strict constructionists… not because they are/aren’t supportive of Roe as settled law.
And the new RNC Chair and others need to willingly chastise GOP elected officials when they don’t do the right thing… like if some moronic GOP Senators vote for the Obama Bailout. Bad policy means voting No. No excuse. “We worked in a bipartisan manner to make the Obama Bailout better but it still is a rotting cesspool of corruption, pork barrel waste and the wrong answer for America right now and tomorrowâ€. If a GOP Senator needs to vote for the bailout to stay in sync with their own view of their state’s electorate… well, make damn sure that that isn’t the face of the GOP that people/media take away from the issue. The RNC Chair needs to point out that was pure politics and not good public policy.
Barone, unfortunately, used the phrase “upscale” to describe the direction the GOP ought to begin moving… I don’t think many in poli sci would think of Hispanics as a “Barone upscale voting block” and, growing at an incredible clip, Barone’s analysis is flawed because he doesn’t include that segment in his vectoring for a New GOP Majority. And I seriously take issue with his characterization that Palin is a downscale choice… that just doesn’t even make muster.
But county-by-county post-electoral analyis, Barone’s hunch fits with what many GOP stalwarts have been saying in the wake of DeLay Era. The path to a New GOP Majority doesn’t begin with pandering to the soc-cons and advancing their agenda (sigh) one more tedious time.
you see–my posting of that link may have been irrelevant to your post, but it got you thinking, no?
#12 – That is the most convoluted excuse for a bad posting that I’ve ever seen. And I’ve seen some doozies in my life.
I guess that’s what qualifies as “libtard logic” – an oxymoron if I’ve ever heard one.
Regards,
Peter H.
Peter, it’s quite illuminating actually.
“Me! Me! ME ME ME ME ME ME! It’s all about me! Ignore the fact that Dan sources Barone frequently! It’s all about my off topic post!”
umm, bob, wrong thread. No?
thanks for demonstrating your stupidity.
Yes please make this woman the voice of the Republican party. This will assure your continued demise and continued minority status. As for where she went to school, who cares, she is dumb either way. Bush went to Yale and was stupid as dirt. So please keep pushing this woman as the hero you wish she were because the media was so mean to her. If she can’t handle that, how is she going to handle Iraq and Iran?
#16 – You post on the wrong thread and accuse ME of stupidity?
Boob, get a mirror, please. Otherwise stop all this projection because it really is making you look dumber than Joe Biden. And that is DUMB.
Regards,
Peter H.
#17 – “Bush went to Yale and was stupid as dirt.”
Really? And your source for this tidbit of info would be….?
Oh sure, Bush was so stupid that he (a) got an MBA, (b) was able to run his own company in Texas, (c) got elected for two terms as Governor and as President and (d) kept us safe for the rest of his time in office.
Now compare him to Algore, who (a) hypes global warming while not complying with his own regs, (b) can’t get elected President because his own state votes for Bush, (c) flunked out of divinity school and (d) was baby-sat during his stint in Vietnam.
Unlike you and other lower-casers, I can back up my words: http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2000/10/30/gores_nam_flashbacks.
Personally, I’ve always wanted to ask Algore: how did you flunk God?
Not like he’d give me a coherent answer.
Regards,
Peter H.
And while I’m on a roll, it seems like the libtards are always harping on who is “smart” and who is not, but their elected leadership in Washington wouldn’t exactly make the MENSA list. Let’s review, shall we?
1. Ted Kennedy (Harvard, no idea of class rank, but a certified homocidal driver)
2. Nancy Pelosi (what higher ed did she have?)
3. B. Hussein Obama (law degree – so what? All he did was community organize.)
4. Harry Reid (see Pelosi above)
5. Al Franken (SNL and flailing Air America owner)
6. Bill Clinton (Arkansas, Harvard, Oxford and numerous massage parlors)
7. Hillary Clinton (see above but delete massage parlors)
8. Barney Frank (I guess you could say he’s bringing up the rear…)
I think they have this delusion that just because someone is articulate and eloquent, they must be geniuses. That, and they place such high emphasis on so-called “elite” Ivy League schools which are the hottest beds of Marxism this side of Beijing.
These idiots eat with the classes but don’t identify with the masses. Enough said.
Regards,
Peter H.
DaveA cheers: “Yes please make this woman (Alaska Gov Sarah Palin)the voice of the Republican party.”
Sorry, DaveA. That job now belongs to Michael Steele. Palin has no more claim to the GOP voice than do Bush 41, 43, McCain, Dole, Newt, Kemp, any US Senator or Congressman, any GOP governor, any RNC member, RushBo, Sean or AnnieGetUrGunCoulter or any GOP strategist.
The GOP voice now is rightly claimed by Michael Steele.
BTW, he’s on record as saying that his leadership will be directed toward expanding the GOP’s base, attracting new voters, building coalitions to move toward an electoral majority, invigorating the grass roots, looking to GOP governors for proven, tested solutions on policy problems and kicking some Dem butts.
But if you want to listen gleefully to just Palin, I’d advise you take off the tinfoil hat… she hasn’t learned how to communicate with your type yet. Maybe a weekend hunting expedition in Area 51 would help her get into your mindset… or maybe that’d be a waste.
Hey DaveA:
A female conservative Governor who can pick off moving targets from the air is proof that she can do a better job than The Snob.
And you worry how she’d react to Iran/Iraq? Puh-leeeze!
Regards,
Peter H.
peter: i’m pretty sure #3 on your list became president.
Boob, I’m pretty sure it was the MSM propping him up and refusing to vet him properly that got him to where he is now. Symbolism over substance, remember?
Regards,
Peter H.
And now I’ve finally learned what it means to be a “community organizer”. It means using the Community Redevelopment Act to extort money from banks through ACORN for home loans for people who cant pay them back.
THAT worked out real well for us, eh? Just imagine the carnage the rest of his policies will wreak.
Peter H,
As a straight guy, may I respectfully suggest that you capitalize Boob to indicate that you are referring to a hatchling from the Booby Hatch rather than a charming part of the female anatomy?
bob aka Boob,
May I suggest that you take a humility inventory and find something, no matter how trivial, to start the list?
Barone ends saying he thinks the Republicans should go after the “upscale” votes. Unfortunately, Barone is not very clear about who he includes in the “upscale” block. Nor does Barone have anything to say concerning the current economy.
I suspect that the economy has much affect on the “upscale” voter.
It would be of great interest to know what specific reasons “upscale” voters state for their 2008 votes. It would reveal, I suspect, that Obama made them swoon.
Barone and his ilk are great at dissecting voting patterns and pigeon holing people by their superficial labels. However, like football and war, game plans are generally good through the first contact.
Sarah Palin scares Democrats because they realize that she connects with voters. So did Ron Paul and H. Ross Perot. So did Obama. Democrats are not worried about a Perot or Paul, but they thrash and trash Palin. Are they consumed with keeping Republicans from making a mistake that will greatly harm the Republican Party?
The other thing that scares Obamacrats about Palin is that she does what is completely foreign to them — she criticizes and ousts corrupt people in her own party.
As we can see with Obama’s Cabinet nominations, corrupt criminals and tax cheats are the people that the Obama Party supports and endorses.
What I object to is the Republicans that are scared by Palin, of if not her, the social conservatives — the “downscale” conservatives they think she represents. There is a real effort afoot, represented by the articles GPW keeps highlighting, to promote the idea that the reason Republicans are in the doghouse is because of all those backwater, redneck, social conservatives.
Whereas the truth is just the opposite. John McCain was our candidate, not Sarah Palin, and he lost, not her. It is the wobbly, principle-compromising, feckless moderate Republicans like him and the Senate-type Republicans that he represents that are the reasons for our loss.
For example, House Republicans stood up for conservative principles and unanimously opposed the stimulus — they grew a pair and led on the issue — and what happened? The American people are following. Public opinion has shifted dramatically.
The problem is a lack of principled conservative leadership. And the attempt by moderates (whose ideal candidate just managed to lose an election during an economic disaster caused by Democrats to a man with no experience whatsoever) to pin the blame on social conservatives in an election that had absolutely nothing to do with social issues is, frankly, despicable.
Didn’t he cheat on an exam or something?
In the grand scheme of things, is there really a whole hell of a lot of difference?
OK Helio, just for you I’ll address bob as (B)oob. Does that work? 😉
Regards,
Peter H.
You guys keep on dreaming. You think Sara Palin is the next coming of Ronald Regan. He has been out of office for 20 years. You guys need to get over it. She is a loser. She dragged McCain down and no matter how much your party loves her the rest of America doesn’t. She is folksy and simple. Just what we need another simpleton in the most important job in the world a dumb frack! The party is over girls! You guys lost let the other party succeed or fail .
#32 – Another reason why there should be literacy exams prior to voting.
Regards,
Peter H.