Commentary
Forty years ago, Chicago police battled protestors outside the Democratic National Convention and began to shout in unison – “the whole world is watching.” Last week, as President-Elect Barack Obama greeted hundreds of thousands of jubilant and curious onlookers in Grant Park, the whole world was watching once again. Except this time, it’s a different kind of revolution.
In 1968, Richard Nixon and the Republicans took over the reins of the White House. The Reagan era soon followed with George H.W. Bush completing a nice 12-year run, and in the midst of the Clinton administration, the Republicans gained control of Congress for one of the few times between 1930 and 1994.
But when the GOP finally did get full control of Capitol Hill in 1994, what did they do with it? Tom DeLay led a band of radical Republicans who actually shut down the Congress to intervene in the case of a brain-dead woman in Florida – a move that will likely be remembered as the high water mark of theocratic power in the United States.
Obama got lucky. Had Wall Street collapsed in 2009 instead of 2008, he would have had a much harder time selling his agenda. However, the critically important fact for Obama’s agenda is that a conservative Republican (President Bush) is the one who essentially nationalized banks with more than a trillion dollars of public money. That discredits the GOP argument on spending but also on the proper role of government, which is essentially what separates liberals and conservatives on social issues. If Obama offers a big, budget-busting program next year, it will be more likely seen as fair than irresponsible.
What Went Wrong – Is it Fair to Blame Palin?
So what exactly went wrong? Why did the Republicans fail to retain the White House?
On the Thursday before Election Day, I purchased a few groceries at the new Jewel/Osco on Route 34 and Orchard Avenue in Oswego. While waiting to conduct my transaction, a young male cashier and a high school-age female bagger began to discuss the upcoming election. My ears perked up because two students, under 20, were talking about their voting choices, something I had not heard in public for at least 16 years.
The young man was picking McCain, while the young woman was choosing Obama. But it was her reason that was most interesting. She stated that if either McCain or Obama met an unexpected demise, her choice between Biden and Palin left her no choice but to pick the Obama/Biden ticket. As I paid for my dinner, my only question was to ask if they were both of voting age. They said they had both turned 18 and had registered. Obviously Sarah Palin had not left a good impression on a young, impressionable female voter.
But this was one female in Kendall County. What about the rest of the country? MSNBC’s post-election Web poll revealed that a whopping 79 percent of voters said they felt that Sarah Palin was not qualified for the Vice President post. Palin’s description of Africa as a single country and not a continent; her knowledge of only one Supreme Court case (Roe vs. Wade) in the last 30 years; and her infamous comment about foreign relations experience due to the proximity of Alaska to Russia, did not help.
But is it fair to put the blame squarely on her shoulders. No, many other factors need to be considered, too.
As mentioned before, an ill-timed economic downturn, and several un-Republican spending decisions over the past 8 years played a significant role. So has an unpopular Iraq War that has been filled with tactical gaffes and public relations mistakes – The “Mission Accomplished” press conference on May1, 2003, for one. In fairness, let’s not forget McCain’s own inconsistent and ineffective campaign strategy.
Equally important occurrences that led to Obama’s promise of “change” that people bought into were manifest corruption in corporate America, gas price gouging, a collapsed housing market and runaway unemployment.
To put it mildly, McCain never had a chance.
Setting a new Republican course
So what needs to be fixed?
One conservative blogger suggested recently that Republicans “suck at selling.” Could it really be that simple? Is the difference between winning and losing a matter of defining a clearer message and finding the right people who know how to sell that message?
I think it goes a little deeper than that. The Republican Party needs to find people who can teach our principles in a manner that builds a waning Republican membership. A larger membership sustains votes over the long term. What we need to teach is what it means to be a Republican or to be a conservative. To be a conservative, in my opinion, is to be driven by a fundamental human impulse to preserve what one has and loves.
The point is that history suggests America is more likely to move toward something familiar on big questions of politics and culture than it is to enthusiastically embrace radical change. In times of danger, we stretch for that lifeline of continuity and familiarity.
So let’s begin by teaching to preserve what we have and what we love, and grow that membership.
