Disaffected Republicans?

[Griff]

Kevin Phillips hammers the Bush family in his new book. I run into the occasional conservative who is upset by the Bush presidency citing fiscal irresponsibility, protectionism, or war mongering. His numbers are still holding up but Is there any kind of a groundswell of discontent in the party?

Its interesting that Phillips used to defend the GOP on NPR but has been replaced by the neo-con nutball, Canadian speech writer David Frumm. I wonder who makes the call on that?

[Undertoad]

I think this is the case. Yesterday for example, Andrew Sullivan made this entry:

LET THE KIDS PAY FOR IT: I'm talking about this $170 billion foray into space. After all, the next generation will be paying for a collapsed social security system, a bankrupted Medicare program, soaring interest on the public debt, as well as coughing up far higher taxes to keep some semblance of a government in operation. But, hey, the president needed another major distraction the week before the Iowa caucuses, and since he won't be around to pick up the bill, why the hell not? Deficits don't matter, after all. And what's a few hundred billion dollars over the next few decades anyway? Chickenfeed for the big and bigger government now championed by the Republicans. This space initiative is, for me, the last fiscal straw. There comes a point at which the excuses for fiscal recklessness run out. The president campaigned in favor of the responsibility ethic. He has governed - in terms of guarding the nation's finances - according to the motto: "If it feels good, do it." I give up. Can't they even pretend to give a damn?

[Undertoad]

But it appears to be balanced by converts the other direction, aka Dennis Miller:

I've always been a pragmatist. If two gay guys want to get married, it's none of my business. I could care less. More power to them. I'm happy when people fall in love. But if some idiot foreign terrorist wants to blow up their wedding to make a political statement, I would rather kill him before he can do it, or have my country kill him before he can do it, instead of having him do it and punishing him after the fact. If that makes me a right-wing fanatic, I will bask in that assignation.

[Griff]

Its not like the disaffected have anywhere to go. It could suppress turn out a little but Republicans are pretty regimented on that civic duty stuff.

[Undertoad]

Well all this happens as many people feel it's the end of the swing voter era, and turning out the faithful is the right strategy for the future.

[Griff]

Originally posted by Undertoad
Well all this happens as many people feel it's the end of the swing voter era, and turning out the faithful is the right strategy for the future.

I guess the Dems may really be dead meat then. There seems to be no core constituency or belief system. The interests they repesented are too disparate. Hmmmmm... I wonder if a bunch of libertarians could get a foothold the donkey party by running against dopes like Sherwood, who the Dems don't even challenge anymore?

[headsplice]

The problem with mobilizing the core constituents is you don't have any flexibility (at least, no one has displayed much so far) once you gain office. For example, here in MN Pawlenty sided with the Minnesota Taxpayer's League (if that's wrong, Warch will you let me know?) who are fundamentally opposed to any tax increase. We had a multi-million dollar deficit. The Democrats proposed modest cuts and modest tax increases at the state level. The Republicans, as a result of the MTpL, wouldn't budge, so a bunch of social services (which MN is known for) got cut. The end result: increased taxes on homeowners in the areas most affected by the services cuts (i.e., NOT the Republicans districts). I'm afraid we are headed down the wrong path friends. Maybe we should start a third party that is solely committed to balancing out the lunatics on either side.

[Radar]

I liked Dennis Miller when he was still somewhat witty and funny. Sadly that was years ago. Now he seems like an idiot. Only an idiot would suggest killing people or even arresting people before they have committed a crime. Perhaps he has a crystal ball?

I for one am all for punishing those who have committed crimes (A crime has not been committed unless the person. rights, or property of another have been violated which excludes suicide, drug use or sales, prostitution, gambling, etc.), but I would never support a nightmare of punishing people who MIGHT commit crimes in the future. Anyone who has seen the movie "Minority Report" knows what I'm talking about.

What's next? Crimes against what people think about? Oops, I forgot we already have those. They're called "hate crimes legislation".

[russotto]

The Democrats have ALWAYS used the strategy of "turning out the faithful". Who are their faithful? For these purposes, mostly poor black inner-city voters, and union members (any color, usually urban). They have other core constituencies, but they aren't the subject of the "get out the vote" stuff.

[Undertoad]

Their core is everyone who isn't a white male. Only 20% of white males are Democrats.

[warch]

Bush's immigration/work plan has rattled some old white cages.
But it courts the Hispanic vote and small business.

His space announcement, although alarming those who fear the bills, teases those who know the value of scientific investment. And for Bush this is scientific investment that doesnt have messy alarms like genomic research.

Bush is courting some of those votes while Mars is the story. Lots of University money going to Dean. Bush is diversifying his campaign portfolio.

[Griff]

Seriously, small business is gettin done by both parties right now. The Dems make it difficult for anyone without a pocketful of lawyers to do business and the Reps make it difficult for anyone without a pocketful of lawyers to do business. Did I tell you guys the story about the Griffcousin who got used by his accountant yet? Its a beautiful thing when you need to hire somebody to handle your money cuz the gummint makes it impossible to hire help. Bush is no friend of the small businessman even if he didn't screw the Mexicans,.. this time.

[elSicomoro]

Rho and I have talked about this before...

It seems like people (as a whole) are incredibly complacent right now. Maybe it's like the Democrats of the 90s, who moved more towards the center with Clinton. "Well, things are going okay right now, so why not?"

[Undertoad]

On topic, generally righty Day by Day has this today.

[tw]

Originally posted by Griff
Kevin Phillips hammers the Bush family in his new book. I run into the occasional conservative who is upset by the Bush presidency citing fiscal irresponsibility, protectionism, or war mongering. His numbers are still holding up but Is there any kind of a groundswell of discontent in the party?

We once had another unethical president. Newspaper articles like this one would appear regularly. And yet 49 states voted for that president in a landslide. Maybe in part because we were in a war just like today. No matter the war was directly traceable to that president and a government that repeatedly denied the facts - even from their own people in the field. The point is that Nixon was that corrupt. Newspaper articles like this one appeared regularly and yet still many denied the president could be a crook. History can repeat itself. Nixon tried same thing using CIA, IRS, "Enemies List", etc:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4838889-110863,00.html