Ryan shines as GOP seeks vision

In the last blog, I talked about the fall op the Republican Party and the rise of a new one. I was asked at the time, who should run this party and I wasn’t quite sure? Then I found this article on Paul, a rising star of the GOP. Although he is conservative, he does tend to lean towards moderation, such as supporting federal legislation banning employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. There is more information on him in this article.

Bartels vs Frank

Although Thomas Frank seems to be a little bitter, I would definitely argue that he is right and Bartels is wrong. They both try to offer explanations for the “working class” voting Republican instead of their usual Democratic stance, but Bartels’ analysis is very narrow and close-minded.

The biggest problem with Bartels’ argument is his definition of the working class. As Frank’s rebuttal stated, Bartels’ definition of the working class is anyone with a household income below $35,000. This is not a good enough definition to make an analysis. What about the young professionals who are just starting out, or the people on disability or who are unemployed or who are retired or –hey!- who are students. To help refute Bartels’ definition, Frank goes on to explain that only one third of those he labels as “working class” are actually employed. Also, Bartels’ implies that when Frank considers the “working class” he is talking about whites only. And the fact that Bartels’ definition makes little sense completely discredits his entire argument.

As far as the 2008 election goes, this debate isn’t really salient anymore. The two debate why the poorer working class voted Republican. However, this past year, they leaned toward the Democratic Party, which basically makes the debate a moot point. Also, I do not think this switch in party partisanship is that shocking and monumental as is it portrayed. From election to election, what the people find most important changes. When the working class voted Republican, they were more concerned with moral decay, and the Republicans offered a better solution for them. This year, the main concerns were the economy, the environment, and the Iraq war, and the Democratic Party offered more enticing solutions. This switch in voting is something that has happened in the past and I presume, will continue to happen in the future.

Save the date: National tea party is September 12

This is a link I found from the Journal Sentinel to a blog that talks about the Republican Party’s effort to save the conservative cause through “tea parties.” They are an anti-tax, anti-Obama movement. The blog also includes links for more information.

New Party

If the Republican Party were to collapse, en entire part of the nation would go unrepresented and a new party would need to take it’s place, hopefully being able to appeal to even more voters.

I think the party would start out with an ambitious group of people. In 1960, JKF did not initially have the support of a party, he “built his own organization, developing lists of activists to approach, traveling the nation, and securing services of a great number of experts, the “best and the brightest,” to conjure up the national organization to win delegate support,” (Aldrich, 271). Because of this, I think the party would rise out a strong candidate running instead of forming the other way around.

As I stated, the collapse of the Republican Party would leave a lot of people with no representation and no one to turn to. Because of this, the new party would have to take on some more conservative stances, while trying to remain more moderate. It would have to appeal the religious and frequent church goers as well as the wealthy and small business owners. It will have to take on a more conservative stance on foreign policy and defense than the Democrats, but remain more moderate that the current Republican party. This party will be different and more moderate than the current, but it does have to keep a more conservative overtone to keep many people happy. By loosening the belt on conservatism however, it will able to appeal to more people than just the current conservatives.

One subject the new party needs to recognize is the environment. Going green is huge lately amongst many people, and not just liberals. If the new party can work environmental conservation into their new platform, along with a little more lenience on gay rights and more emphasis on minority voters, this party will eventually gain momentum and make it into Congress and the White House.

This party would probably grow out of the South, with many voters already leaning that way. It will still contain some of the older more conservative members of the current party, but the younger, more moderate members will be the new face of this party.

Ryan, GOP propose big tax cuts, spending curbs

Since we are talking about the decline of the Republican Party this week, I found an article about their opposition of the Stimulus Bill. Although it did not have much of a chance of passing, it shows that although the Republicans are a minority in Congress, they are still fighting to get their voice heard.

Republican's Minority

I definitely do not think the Republican Party is becoming obsolete. The Democratic Party has faced the same problem the Republicans are facing now, and even the Republicans have faced this problem before. And as they have in the past, they will fight to remain a force to be reckoned with. As the NYTIMES article, “A Once-United G.O.P. Emerges, in Identity Crisis” states, the Republican Party [faces] a fresh challenge — one it has not shied from in the past. We now live in an era of a two party system and I do not think the Republican or Democratic Parties are going to go away anytime soon.

The Republicans may be a minority right now, but there will be times when they are not. For what is going on in our country right now, more people identify with a liberal ideology. As time changes and the issues that face our nation change, so will the public’s preferences. I agree that we live in a more liberal time, but opinions change and so will the majority party.

As Aldrich stated, the lack of parties led to instability in Congress. Once we had two major parties, competition became more important and people actually started turning out to vote. Politics were a form of entertainment and people actually starting paying attention to what was going on. They realized that their vote could make a difference in which way the country goes. Without a two-party system, we would not have that sense of competition, making voter turnout low. Also, there would be a very large section of the country that would not be represented. Right now, the two party system that keeps voters mobilized and parties organized, consists of the Democrats and Republicans; and I do not see that changing anytime soon.