Thus goes the belief that a subset of Republican voters hold. They want the party to nominate and the voters to support the candidates who stand the best chance of beating their Democratic counterparts. They believe that majority control of Congress and control of the White House in and of themselves are the path to stopping the government-run-amok trend. They aver that the actual beliefs and positions that those candidates hold are secondary to winning.
I’ve heard and read this position many times, usually in response to a declaration that someone won’t support Candidate X because he doesn’t hold the right views. It made an appearance in the recent Republican debate, when Donald Trump was asked if he’d support whomever the GOP nominated if he himself didn’t get the nod. It’s considered by those who espouse it as practical and pragmatic, and they will aggressively tell anyone that doesn’t share the sentiment that failure to support whomever the party nominates is tantamount to supporting and voting for the Democratic candidate. It’s competitive, tribal, bare-knuckle politics that sets aside issues, agendas and the future in favor of a final scoreboard and victory parade.
It’s also a lie. Interact with those winning is all that matters folks, and oftentimes you’ll find that their definition of compromise in furtherance of this goal is very much like Obama’s definition: “do what I want and I won’t call you names.” I’ve asked countless times whether these pragmatists are willing to “let go” of certain beliefs in pursuit of victory. I’ve asked whether they’re willing to subordinate the social conservative agenda to a single-issue it’s the economy message. I’ve asked what issues they’re willing to concede to non-traditional voters, including libertarians and moderates, in order to draw them into the GOP fold. Overwhelmingly, I’ve heard crickets in response.
We see the lie in the hyperventilation regarding the recent Supreme Court gay marriage ruling. Anyone who cares to open his eyes can see that the acceptance of gay marriage has been steadily growing, especially among younger people, and the Court ruling pretty much closes the door on those who’d ban gay marriage recognition, even at the state and local level. If any issue today calls for “letting it go,” it’s gay marriage. Instead, it’s been conflated with the issue of forced economic association/public accommodation e.g. bakers forced to bake gay wedding cakes. Whereas the latter can (and should) be a standalone matter and fight, it’s been tied to outrage over gay marriage itself, and so we find continued sturm und drang over gay marriage coming from the conservatives. What should voters who lean conservative on matters economic but also support gay marriage do? What if those voters are distressed by the economic and regulatory recklessness of the Democrats, but can’t stomach what they perceive to be anti-gay bigotry? Shouldn’t the winning is all that matters crowd look to court those votes by letting go of an issue that they’ve already lost, rather than demanding others compromise their own principles?
We also see the lie in the attitude and response towards Rand Paul, who, for months, consistently polled best among Republican hopefuls in head-to-head match ups against Hillary Clinton. Despite this, Paul has been steadily dismissed or vilified by the conservative/GOP core, including the winning crowd. And, with the recent drop in Paul’s head-to-head numbers to second place, after Jeb Bush, shouldn’t the winning crowd back Bush, rather than calling him a RINO or worse?
Then there’s Donald Trump. Trump is, to the dismay of many in the GOP and to the glee of the Left, polling way ahead of all the other GOP hopefuls. Concurrently, he is polling substantially worse in a head-to-head vs Hillary than the other front-runners. While I don’t know how large the intersection between the winning crowd and the Trump supporters is, the dismal showing that Trump has in a general election poll suggests that people should put their hopes and their votes elsewhere. Yet, Trump remains at the front of the pack.
The winning crowd certainly wants to win, but its members want to win on their terms. Sure, they will say that they’ll vote for whoever gets nominated by the GOP to run against the Democratic candidate, no matter how distasteful they may find that candidate, but they don’t actually embrace the winning mindset, at least not yet. No, what they want is for their guy to get the nomination and for everyone whose preferred candidate or hot-button issues lose out in the nomination process to capitulate. That’s not about winning, that’s about having your cake and eating it, too. And, it’s certainly not an approach that prioritizes victory.
I’ve shared a list of issues on which libertarians and conservatives disagree, and asked which of them the conservatives would concede to the libertarians in order to get libertarian votes. Here it is:
Fundamentally:
Militarism
Defense Spending
Immigration
Gay Marriage
Abortion*
The War on Drugs
Prostitution
Religion on Public Property
Gitmo
Militarization of Police
Drone Strikes
Domestic Surveillance
Protectionism
Racial Profiling
Death Penalty
Enhanced InterrogationDegree:
Government Spending
Social Security
Medicare
Monetary Policy
Public Education
Fourth Amendment Protections
Antitrust
Gambling
As I noted, I’ve overwhelmingly been met with silence. The few responses I’ve gotten were well, I agree with the libertarians on this, this and that, so I’ll concede those. It’s not concession if you already agree.
Loading ...
Active Comment Threads
Most Commented Posts
Universal Background Checks – A Back Door to Universal Registration
COVID Mask Follies
When Everything Is Illegal…
An Anti-Vax Inflection Point?
“Not In My Name”
The Great Social Media Crackup
War Comes Through The Overton Window
The First Rule of Italian Driving
Most Active Commenters