Bull Moose Rudy

[H2O Man]

The new edition of TIME features an interesting article by Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, "Still Looking for Mr. Right." In it, they discuss some of the growing divisions within the republican party. It reminded me of how my father used to tell me that the strength of the republicans was their unity, and their ability to get out the vote. He said the ability to deliver the vote was found in precinct level: people would make the local phone calls and even drive people in their neighborhood to the voting booths.

He said that this type of organization was hard to disrupt, but that republican unity often imploded in cycles. The more special interests within the party at the second and third tiers, the better. An example of this is found when the TIME article quotes "conservative patriarch Richard Viguerie, 'They think they call holler, "The bogeyman's coming!" every four years, and conservatives will get on board. There is zero evidence of that. They think that we will be so afraid of Hillary and losing the Supreme Court that we will fall in line. Well, we might want to run another candidate." He is expressing some of the conservative republican dislike for Rudy Giuliani.

They also quote James Dobson, the leader of "Focus on the Family," who speaks of his disappointment with Fred Thompson: "He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me."

We know from previous experience that it is at the end of primary season competition that these republican divides become the more stressful. Think, for example, of in 1992, when Ross Perot became something more than a curiosity, and actually began to take votes from Bush the Elder.

Another example that older DUers will remember was 1964, when Barry Goldwater was nominated at the Republican National Convention. After he finished his acceptance speech, the majority of the NYS delegation walked out with Senators Jacob Javits and Kenneth Keating.

Michigan's most powerful politician was George Romney. The national party viewed him as their best resource for getting the votes out in his region. He told reporters, "Well, we're going back to work just as hard as we can to assure republican victories in Michigan." Reporters asked if he meant republican victories across the country? "I meant exactly what I said," he responded. (The Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson; Eric Goldman; page 163)

In 1912, when Teddy Rosevelt lost the republican nomination to Taft, he formed the Progressive Party. He said that the goal was, "To destroy this Invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics..." His party was known as the Bull Moose Party. His dividing of the republican vote was in part responsible for Woodrow Wilson's victory. Wilson's campaign was based on a "New Freedom" platform.

Will the republicans experience such divides in 2008? Let's hope so: it will spell defeat for their party on many levels.

Will grass roots democrats learn a lesson from the republican mistakes of the past? Let's hope so on that one, too.

[Gabi Hayes]

1. it's a question of venality vs. insanity: which side will out?

nobody is more venal than Richard Viguerie. he's the FATHER of mass mail marketing, and a crooked weasel to boot (personal knowledge from many years ago)

I'm not buying his bluster at all; he'll fall RIGHT into line with whichever fascist they nominate, which I can't conceive of being anyone other than St. Rudy. hope I'm wrong, because the media are still allowing the wool to be pulled over most news consumers' eyes, and it'll be Bush/Gore all over again.

[H2O Man]

2. I'd agree

that Viguerie is full of crap. He is bluffing, to try to increase his position, and to promote his demands. But there are fractures within the republican party, and the more democrats unite behind common goals (if not a single presidential candidate), the more the republican divides will grow.

[Gabi Hayes]

4. agreed on the possible schism, but they LOVEto follow, especially authoritarians.

they'll fall in line...just watch

the M$M are touting the just released Ipsos Poll (IIRC) which has respondents saying that Rudy has the best chance of beating Hillary, over McCain (2d place in poll) by FORTY SEVEN to EIGHT percent

they've learned to care about winning more than anything. they're too filled with hate for the Clintons to let even abortion (except for the really really extreme maniacs) keep them from falling into place, like the sheep they are.

I hope I'm wrong, and that they won't be able to turn out the trog vote, as they bragged they were able to do in 04, but, then there's this: I can't really bear the idea of Hillary as president, either. not that I won't hold my nose once AGAIN and vote for whomever the demcan is, but, gott in himmel, this is getting too depressing to take.

[Me.]

8. Now That They're Calling Their Party's Bluff

Will they be forced to show their hand? Will it come down to sit up or shut up?

[immoderate]

3. This points out the Republican shortcoming of "teaching to the test."

A parallel situation is the No Child Left Behind program, which helps to prepare children for a career of taking multiple choice tests. When they realize that this skill is not valued in the outside world, it will go the way of most simple solutions to the problems of education.

When I taught math, I taught problem solving, not a specific test. If you can solve problems, you can figure out the test -- and other things. The Repubs think that getting elected is the only problem, so they devote no thought to governance, except how to eliminate it, and milk it in its death throes.

There is a limit (we hope) on how much people can be diverted by things that mostly do not affect their lives, but that Republicans like to demagog. This excludes the hard core, who persist, to our amazement and amusement, but are not enough to call an election.

This is a good time to expect the rifts that you hypothesize, H2O Man. I hope.

--IMM

[Gabi Hayes]

5. amen to the comparison, with this addendum: the election is the multiple choice part of the test

the adminstrating part represents the math/writing exemplars, at which the students in our school usually do horribly.

one of the reasons we're on the AYP list

[bleever]

6. Rudy's single-minded devotion to Rudy

may well have the same historical effect as TR's devotion to progressive government when he ran against Taft.

Go, Rudy! :rofl:

[Me.]

7. It's A Fitting Sideshow To The End Of The Current National Nightmare

I wonder if it ever occurred to them that their unhappiness with their field isn't because of their candidates (though a sad sack bunch it is) but unhappiness with the direction the country as been taken in overall. It seems to me that the rallying issues have become rote for them, code words for just like us. Their party has generally ignored them and yet they keep voting for the party based on those code words. Perhaps what they really want is a real change from what they have but psychologically cannot bring themselves to admit they are more like us than they can conceive. They've been on that narrow path for so long they don't know how to step off it and deal with the real issues that plaque us all.



Hi Jim :hi:

[brer cat]

9. The republicans have a very good chance of imploding

because so many of them are focused on their one issue, and one issue alone, whether it is abortion, anti-gay marriage, etc. The dems could possibly implode for the same reason if we as individuals choose to vote for our own one issue, i.e., the war in Iraq, gay rights, etc. We must choose a candidate who best meets the collective needs of the progressive community, while agreeing to give up being less than perfect to all people. The latter simply won't happen, and we will lose if too many dems demand a perfect candidate.

I believe it best to champion our own personal interests during the primaries, but pull together strong after the nomination. Let Dobson and others tear the republican party apart, let's keep ours together.