Why Republicans Are Abandoning The GOP

Republican Elephant SC Why Republicans are Abandoning the GOP
While the topic of conservatives potentially abandoning the Republican Party remains on the front burner, a new study has been released that explains why some have already bolted.
The study, commissioned by a conservative market research group, applied “scientific methods of qualitative research” to find out why some Republican-leaning voters are abandoning the GOP. For example, Mitt Romney last year turned out fewer whites, Catholics, and evangelicals than even John McCain did in 2008, and did worse with Mormon voters than George W. Bush did in 2004. To compensate for the loss of a sizable chunk of his base and win the election, Romney would’ve needed an unattainable 72% of that Hispanic vote currently getting so much attention.

After researching a sample of disaffected Republican voters, the study drew four conclusions that were strangely missing from RNC Chairman Reince Priebus’ much-hyped “autopsy” that basically any MSNBC commentator could’ve written. I’m sure it was just an accidental oversight on Reince’s part.

1) Voters are tired of “voting for the lesser of two evils.” This was actually true of both conservatives and moderates. These voters were no longer persuaded that supporting a bad Republican candidate over any Democrat was the right thing to do.

2) Voters lost hope in the Republican Party and believe the party can no longer deliver on its promises because its leaders lack courage and integrity. According to Anne Sorock, the author of the study’s conclusive report, “the lack of perceived leadership by principle was strongly connected to this sense of loss.”

3) Voters now preferred what the report described as an “affiliation with a new community” that would pursue its principles – which was primarily the Tea Party.

4) Voters feel what the report characterized as a “perceived betrayal by the GOP establishment.” Specifically, Sorock says that when party leaders attacked a candidate they liked, these disaffected Republican voters across the ideological spectrum took it as a personal slight and felt that they weren’t welcome in the party.

To bring these crucial base voters back into the fold, the report concluded that Republicans should “strive to create a community around shared principles” rather than attacking grassroots candidates with “lesser of two evil” (i.e. electability) arguments.” The report went on to say that the GOP’s problems are not only, or even primarily, philosophical but with the party’s leadership itself.

That is spot on if you ask me.

For years, I believed the divide in the party was conservatives versus moderates. Then I thought it was social conservatives versus fiscal conservatives. Then I thought it was conservatives versus libertarians.

Then I realized that’s all a distraction.

The divide in the party isn’t ideological at all – it’s based purely on control. All the ideological debates among us are intended to keep us distracted from the real problem. Oh sure, I disagree with libertarians and other conservatives all the time. But out here in the grassroots, we actually agree on the primary purpose of the Republican Party—to advance the general principles in the party platform and offer the country a stark contrast to the statism offered by the Democrats.

However, there are those like Karl Rove who would rather lose elections than lose control of the party, and they’re against anyone who threatens their power base by empowering the grassroots. So they don’t like Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, or even a moderate like Rudy Giuliani when they run for president. Despite the fact all of these men have various issue and ideological differences. That’s also why they despise grassroots champions like Sarah Palin and barely tolerate conservative talk radio.

They understand that an empowered grassroots threatens their control of the party apparatus, and they need control of the party apparatus because there’s no more room at the Democrat Party Inn. So if they’re going to use gangster government to line their own and their crony capitalist buddies’ pockets, they’ve got to reverse the jersey and control Team GOP instead.

I don’t agree with a Giuliani-type moderate on a whole host of issues. In a national primary, I would work hard to beat him (and did). But while he’s my ideological opponent, he’s not my political enemy. A Giuliani would actually take the fight to the Democrats on an issue or two—like defeating radical Islam, for example. A Giuliani-type moderate may philosophically disagree with you on lots of other things, but he sees himself as part of a broader coalition. Therefore, he’s not going to use the party apparatus to thin his own herd, like the Romulans tried to do at the rules committee prior to the convention last year.

The GOP ruling class believes in nothing but themselves, which is why they’re more ruthless in primaries against their fellow Republican than they are in general elections against Democrats. This also explains why they’re hemorrhaging their own voters, and why they just don’t seem to care about it as they allegedly pursue all voters except those who might actually vote for them. It’s why they lie, shamelessly repeat often-debunked fallacies, and are more comfortable talking to George Stephanopoulos than they are talking to you.

These people would rather lose elections than lose control of the party, so they’ll ignore studies like this. They want you to stick around, provided you shut your hole and know your role—which is to shut up and vote for their approved candidates.

If you threaten to leave the party, they pay it no mind because you’re just a booty call to them. It’s not like they’re in this for any higher calling like preserving freedom and liberty. They’re flat-out gangsters, and gangsters produce gangster government like TARP and scamnesty.

You can’t affiliate, partner, or reason with gangsters like this. You either replace them or start your own gang.

 

(You can friend “Steve Deace” on Facebook or follow him on Twitter @SteveDeaceShow)

Video: Santorum: ‘Death Knell’ Of Marriage Approaching

Rick Santorum warns gay rights victories are paving the way for the “death knell” of marriage…

Video: Santorum: DOMA Ruling Threatens Freedom, ‘Craziness’

Rick Santorum says the Supreme Court’s decision striking down DOMA is a threat to freedom…

The “Electability” Myth

 

Karl Rove SC The “Electability” Myth

Much has been said and written regarding Karl Rove and the Republican Party establishment’s latest plan to go harder after conservatives than they ever would Democrats. And I’ve had much to say about it myself.

But I’ve yet to see anyone question the premise of the phony argument Rove is hiding behind to justify his crusade to purge the GOP of anybody who won’t grovel at the feet of the ruling class (which is what Rove’s pro-establishment Jihad is really all about). See, in Rove’s world, if you actually have principles and want to defeat Democrats and not just negotiate the terms of liberty’s surrender, you’re a “nutcase.”

Rove claims he’s out to find “electable” candidates. Well, who isn’t? Of course, all of us want to win elections. The candidate you’re supporting doesn’t get to act on any of the principles he’s running on if he doesn’t win. Nothing in politics is more crushing than losing on election night when you’ve spent your time, talent, and treasure on behalf of a candidate who’s a champion of your principles. So for Rove and the establishment to claim they’re the only ones concerned about “electability” is patronizing at best and disingenuous at worst.

Besides, how do we define “electability?” Furthermore, how come we allow the very people who oppose our ideas and principles to define who is and who isn’t “electable?” Should the General Manager of the Boston Red Sox consult with the New York Yankees front office on personnel decisions? Maybe Auburn’s new football coach should call Alabama’s Nick Saban and get his take on whom to recruit?

“Electability” is a ruling class fallacy, both on the right and the left. It’s essentially the political equivalent to Jim Crow laws, aimed at stifling the potential for upward mobility of those in the grassroots who would challenge the ruling class’ status quo. Despite all their public hand-wringing and pandering, they don’t really reach out to minorities for all the same reasons they don’t really reach out to their own base. They are adherents to the “Golden Rule,” which is he who has the gold gets to make all the rules. They may speak of a “big tent”; but really, they crave the small tent where they remain in charge of their own little fiefdom, crumbling infrastructure and all. Ironically, it’s been we in the base they hate that has diversified the GOP. Where did Ted Cruz, Allen West, and Tim Scott (just to name a few) come from?

Rove and his cronies are like modern day “old money” blue-bloods, condescendingly peering down their noses at the emerging “new money” entrepreneurs who weren’t born into the aristocracy as they were. That’s why they go after us harder than they go after them. We are a threat to their power base in a way they aren’t because we actually want to topple a spoils system both sides of the ruling class are profiteering from. The only argument Rove and his Boss Tweed-wannabes have with the Left is who the check with the people’s money gets written out to. They don’t see this as a clash of worldviews with the very survival of the Constitutional Republic at stake. They see this merely as a battle of dueling self-interests.

Thus, to allow Rove and those supporting his efforts by funding them or providing a platform for them to determine who is and who isn’t “electable” isn’t just dangerous; it’s also as foolish as allowing the liberal media to do it. In fact, you’ll notice that Rove and his cabal often draw the same conclusions about “electability” as the liberal media.

That’s not a coincidence.

Both sides have a mutual interest in not challenging the status quo. Both sides range from skeptical to hostile to our moral viewpoint. Then there’s simple economics. The media has lots of unsold ad inventory nowadays, and Rove and his kind of candidates can provide the revenue to purchase it. In this last election cycle, Rove’s cabal spent over $100 million on various establishment candidates, with just a 1% success rate. That means Rove and his acolytes are the perfect clientele for the liberal media. They help sell out their spot blocks and lose elections to Democrats at the same time.

The late P.T. Barnum would have a word for Rove and (especially) those underwriting his failed efforts—suckers.

I remember sharing a green room with Rick Santorum at the National Federation of Republican Assemblies conference about six weeks before the 2012 Iowa Caucuses. As we were each waiting for our opportunity to speak, Santorum shared with me his lament that his former employer, Fox News, didn’t think he was electable enough to send a reporter to cover his campaign. At that point, Santorum was mired in the low single digits in the polls.

Six weeks later, Santorum won the Iowa Caucuses and then went on to win 11 states during the 2012 Republican presidential primary campaign.

Again, who gets to determine who is and who isn’t “electable?” Is there an objective standard for “electability” as there is for many of the principles and causes we believe in? The answer is no, which is why Rove and the establishment like that subjective standard. It’s a moving target they can alter at their whim, aided and abetted by liberals who for different reasons want us defeated as well.

You can friend “Steve Deace” on Facebook or follow him on Twitter @SteveDeaceShow. 

Photo credit: National Constitution Center (Creative Commons)

Santorum Takes Up Fight Against Hagel Nomination

Rick Santorum speech 4 SC Santorum takes up fight against Hagel nomination

WASHINGTON (OfficialWire) — Republican opposition to Chuck Hagel as the next defense secretary swelled from inside and outside the Senate Thursday as a former Senate colleague launched a campaign to block his nomination.

Rick Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator who served for a decade with Hagel, said his grassroots organization, Patriot Voices, will lead a nationwide campaign to stop Hagel from succeeding Leon Panetta as head of the Pentagon.

“While I respect Sen. Hagel’s service to America, I cannot stand by and support his nomination,” Santorum said in a statement. “His anti-Israel, pro-Iran mindset makes him uniquely unqualified to serve as our Defense secretary.”

Hagel, nominated Monday by President Barack Obama, has faced criticism that he is soft on Iran and weak in his support for Israel. Pushing back in private meetings with defense officials, he has told them this week that he backs strong international sanctions against Iran and believes all options, including military action, should be on the table.

Read More at OfficialWire . By Donna Cassata.

Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore (Creative Commons)