More on the Regional Party that is the GOP

I have written a few times, both before the election and since, about the relegation of the Republican Party to regional status -- either just in the South, or in the South plus the Farm Belt. Ron Brownstein tackles the subject, as well, in the latest issue of National Journal in a very interesting read:

That gamble [by Congressional Republicans to oppose the bailout of the auto industry] shows how the party's loss of regional and ideological equilibrium can reinforce itself. Because Republicans from swing and Democratic-leaning states now constitute such a distinct minority in the party caucus, they lack the numbers to prevent it from adopting positions unpopular with their voters. The caucus majority can impose a direction that solidifies the party where it is already strong but further endangers the minority.

This isn't the first time a party has fallen into this debilitating cycle. The classic example came after 1854 when Congress approved the Kansas-Nebraska Act, effectively repealing the Missouri Compromise that had limited slavery's spread in the territories. Until then, congressional Democrats were divided closely between Northern and Southern members. But the backlash against the Kansas-Nebraska Act destabilized that balance by provoking severe losses for Northern Democrats; as Southerners gained the advantage in the Democratic caucus, they repeatedly identified the party with pro-slavery policies that further undercut Northern Democrats already struggling against the emerging Republican Party. As the late David M. Potter recounted in his magisterial history of the 1850s, The Impending Crisis, the House's Northern Democrats didn't entirely recover until the New Deal.

Brownstein writes that this trend was also seen from the late-1960s through the early-1990s within the Democratic Party as the increasingly large contingent of Northerners, and thus the the increasingly liberal nature of Congressional Democrats, made it more difficult for the Democrats to attract the votes of Southern conservative voters, who had previously supported the Democratic Party. Thus the problem with a regional minority coming to dominate a party's caucus is that the party can become less responsive to the desires and needs of the rest of the country, and as a result less enticing to voters across the country. With regards to the Republicans' current conundrum, the extreme focus on Southern conservatism makes is significantly more difficult to win over moderate voters around the country -- a trend already visible in Barack Obama's 60 percent to 39 percent victory among moderate voters, a trend that will very possibly continue into the future as the GOP turns even more Southward in its focus.



Display:


Republicans are locked onto a destructive course (none / 0)

You can see it within the dwindling Republican Party of Iowa as well.

This summer social conservatives kicked out two long-serving RNC committee members from Iowa and replaced them with hard-core conservatives. One of the new RNC members was Kim Lehman, head of Iowa Right to Life. In October, Iowa Right to Life sent out a newsletter attacking the Republican candidate in IA-02, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, for supposedly not being pro-life (she is anti-choice but believes in exceptions for rape, incest and mother's health).

Now you and I know that Miller-Meeks had no chance in a D+7 district that includes Iowa City, not with Obama at the top of the ticket in Iowa. But the Iowa Republicans thought she had a real shot against Dave Loebsack, who is not as impressive as Bruce Braley in terms of results. In a close race, having Iowa Right to Life attack the Republican nominee shortly before the election could be fatal.

A bunch of Republican county officials from IA-02 pushed for the state central committee to remove Lehman after the election. (She never apologized for what happened, except to say that someone else wrote the e-mail about Miller-Meeks). The state central committee did censure Lehman on a secret ballot vote, but only by 8-7. The moderates are still ballistic. Seven members of the central committee that will choose a new party chairman didn't even think an RNC committeewoman should be censured (let alone removed) after the undermined the party's Congressional nominee.

Some of the longtime major donors to Iowa Republican candidates are socially moderate. They've supported a lot of pro-life candidates for statewide offices before, but most of those were winners. Now they're being asked to foot the bill for losers year after year, while social conservatives kick moderate candidates in the teeth.

How easy do you think the Iowa GOP's candidate recruitment will be in 2010 in those districts where they need moderates to have a shot?


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 03:44:27 PM EST

Re: More on the Regional Party that is the GOP (none / 0)

The election statistics confirm that even further.  Although Cook himself doesn't recognize this in his ratings, the dividing line between Democratic House districts and Republixan House districts is now a PVI of R+3 with Democrats having a majority at each rating up to R+3 and Republicans having the edge at R+4 or more.

If you define "in trouble" to include all Republican House districts where the winner got under 60% or the district has a score of R+3 or less, the regional totals are remarkable.

In the Northeast, 14 of the 17 Republican House seats are endangered.

In the Pacific, 15 out of 24 are endangered.

In the Great Lakes, 15 of 32 sre endangered.

Only in the Plains (5 out of 17), Mountains (3 out of 11), and South (23 out of 78) are Republicans relatively safe.  In the interim, the Rockies and Great Lakes have switched from majority Republican to majority Democratic in the House.  

Throwing away Ohio to placate Oklahoma amd Utah at the Presidential level is beyond stupid.  McCain, after all, sewed up hos party's nomination in March and had to continue running even further to the right yhrough November.  That workked out real good.

And moderates are more likely by far to retire rather than putting up with the endless Club Fpr Growth primaries and deliberately beiong ignored and downgraded within their Party's caucus.

Each new class makes the GOP smaller and more conservative.  In the last two elections, Republican gerrymanders in Ohio, PA, VA, and MI were all effectively defeated.  

With Republican spokes people in the war against the midwest all having southern addrsses (McConnell, Corker, Sessions) the point is obvious.


by David Kowalski on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 04:09:07 PM EST

Re: More on the Regional Party that is the GOP (none / 0)

I agreed they were in danger of becoming a Southern regional party rotted in social issues, but I didn't think it would happen so fast or on so many fronts.  

That is until I watched them on the Senate floor hypocritically chastising US automakers and relishing their demise, when they'll do anything to prop up the speculation-based economy and the South's own state subsidized, foreign owned auto industry.


by nintendofanboy on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 09:28:56 PM EST

Re: More on the Regional Party that is the GOP (none / 0)

I wish we could do more to help them on their way.

The Republic Party should not be allowed to survive the Bush Administration.


by Bush Bites on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 10:28:51 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.