GOP Congressional Disasters: The "McCain Effect"
By Christopher Adamo (05/22/08)
For nearly the last four decades, a consistent pattern has been established
in the Republican political arena, whereby both good and bad fortunes can be
directly correlated to the overt conservatism, or the lack thereof, in the
party. The more conservative the party and its candidates are, the better
they do on election day. Conversely, as GOP members seek "common ground"
with liberal Democrat rivals, their prospects at the ballot box diminish.
Republicans ignore this relationship at their own peril. Yet it appears that
they are about to do so once again as they go into the 2008 general election
season. The two dismal defeats in the recent Alabama and Mississippi
congressional special elections should be construed as a warning sign, but
thus far, the party seems intent on critically misinterpreting them. So more
calamities are likely to follow.
That such a simple and reliable pattern of cause and effect can be so
casually refuted or ignored by the party hierarchy is a testimony to the
power of the liberal press to mischaracterize events, as well as a grim
reflection of the corrupting effects of the Washington environment where
truth, right, and reality are utterly flexible, to be defined by the latest
public opinion polls.
Having enjoyed past successes only in those situations where Republicans
have effectively contrasted their conservatism against the transparent
liberalism of the Democrats, some may wonder just why they would ever think
they could instead play by Democrat rules. In order to understand the
aspects of the political landscape that often spell doom for Republicans,
the inherent differences between the parties, their foundations, and their
current compositions need to be properly understood.
The structure of the current Democrat party is a conglomeration of numerous,
and often completely disparate special interest groups. It is of secondary
consequence that these groups may often conflict or even oppose each other,
since their political support from the Democrat Party most often manifests
itself as access to the public trough.
Thus, with few exceptions, the leadership of these organizations are chiefly
indifferent to the fact that another constituency within the party’s voting
base might be receiving largess even though its goals and purposes conflict
with the first. The government has plenty of pork to go around.
>From its inception, the Republican Party has fundamentally differed in this
respect. It instead coalesced its members around a series of principles and
ideals, interwoven into a complex “tapestry” that requires intellectual and
philosophical consistency in order to function or survive. Thus, the
Republican Party has far less latitude to pursue opposing courses if it is
to maintain any sense of coherence. And, every time its leaders lose touch
with this actuality, the party’s standing slips precipitously in the eyes of
the public.
As a result, while aspiring Democrat candidates can associate themselves
with their party leaders (even someone carrying as much political baggage as
Barack Obama), while still maintaining their own perceived identities on
issues of importance to their constituencies, Republicans are assumed to be
politically joined at the hip with their party leadership. Such a prospect
bodes particularly ill these days, given that the presumptive Republican
Presidential nominee and default “party leader,” is John McCain.
Congressional candidates Don Cazayoux (D.-LA) and Travis Childers (D.-MS)
could thus credibly present themselves to the voters as “conservatives”
despite enjoying close ties to Barack Obama. Both won their states’ special
election. Republicans, on the other hand, who attempt to ride McCain’s
tenuous “coattails” severely undermine their reputations as conservatives.
This is an option that they simply cannot choose without reaping a severe
backlash in the wake of every McCain gaffe and pander to the left. So stark
is the contrast between the operation of the two parties that unless GOP
candidates actually distance themselves from McCain (and few if any are
willing to do so) they will risk being tainted by every past and present
betrayal of conservatism by the Arizona Senator.
At this crucial time in the nation’s course, an ambiguous and diluted
platform from the Republican Party will serve no useful purpose, either for
the party’s sake, or that of the nation. Yet by the character of its
presumptive leader John McCain, the GOP appears to be stumbling into just
such a morass. Worst of all, as a result of the two recent losses,
Republican Party leaders are actually being cowed into believing the flawed
premise that their party’s candidates were dispatched for being overly
conservative.
Such a conclusion and reaction is altogether astounding, considering that in
both Congressional elections, the Democrat opponents were avowed
“conservatives,” and clearly connected with the voters on that basis. Yet
the signs that Republican Party bigwigs are now expressing their openness to
the idea of shifting the party even further left (the very action that
caused severe voter backlash in 2006, and the party’s current unpopularity),
are alarmingly numerous.
Just this past week, Republican Deputy Whip Eric Cantor suggested as much,
claiming that McCain “is a demonstrated vote getter among independents.”
House Minority Leader John Boehner erroneously concluded that McCain
“appeals to almost all Republicans,” suggesting a possibility that the rest
of the party may drift further from its conservative roots in order to
better align itself with McCain’s seeming appeal to the “middle.”
In truth, neither of the recent races prove any such thing. Rather, they
suggest that the American public, which was once inspired by the audacity of
a truly conservative message, has since concluded that the GOP will never
deliver on it. The prominence of John McCain and his message of acquiescence
and accommodation of the left only proves that a fight to put Republicans in
office will do little to further the conservative cause.
As was the case in 1992 when Bill Clinton took the White House with only
forty three percent of the vote, the current political winds suggest nothing
of a Democrat surge, so much as a total disillusionment with the “me too”
wing of the Republican Party.
In an ironic twist, McCain himself may yet prove to be immune to this effect
though he is the primary force motivating it. And this is not owing to any
political prowess on his part, but only to the obvious radicalism of his
likely Democrat opponent. Having now been revealed to the public for who he
really is, no amount of political posturing and backtracking can detach
Barack Obama from the far-left fringe of the Democrat Party.
Yet as defeated Republicans Woody Jenkins and Greg Davis learned in the two
special elections, one cannot count on every Democrat opponent carrying the
sort of baggage weighing down Obama. A believably “conservative” Democrat
poses a formidable rival to a Republican whose party has clouded and, to an
appalling degree, abandoned its once inspiring conservative message.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Christopher Adamo
