It is no longer possible to think of “the Republican Party” as a coherent political force. It is nothing of the sort — and the Donald Trump insurgency should be seen as a symptom, not the cause, of the party’s disintegration.That's what an emergent vision looks like. The Democrats, and I watched part of last night's debate, are reduced to quibbling over what "progressive" means, because there's broad agreement between Mrs Clinton and Mr Sanders on raising taxes on richer people and centralizing more control in the national government. That's what "comprehensive reform" inevitably turns into for Democrats.
The Republicans, on the other hand, might be pursuing a new governing coalition.
Once upon a time, the Republican Party’s position on a given issue usually dovetailed nicely with the views of business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But the chamber supports giving the undocumented a path to legal status. It also waxes rhapsodic about the benefits of free trade for U.S. firms and shareholders. Now, since Trump opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership pact (as does Mike Huckabee), other candidates have had to mumble about waiting to see the details before deciding pro or con.On the other hand, Democrats control the majority-minority cities, and both of their presidential hopefuls have also objected to the Trans-Pacific pact; party unity isn't what it used to be. Perhaps that's what's bothering Mr Robinson: he'll have to have an original thought, rather than recycling the usual talking points on the usual shows. "One of our two major political parties is factionalized and out of control. That should worry us all."
The GOP electorate has changed; it’s whiter, older, less educated and more blue-collar than it used to be. Many of today’s Republicans don’t see globalization as an investment opportunity; they see it as a malevolent force that has dimmed their prospects. They don’t see the shrinking of the white majority as natural demographic evolution; they see it as a threat.
Here are the editors of National Review explaining why the factionalization is necessary.
Republican voters are anxious about large-scale immigration and frustrated that the federal government repeatedly demonstrates no interest in doing anything about it. We strongly object to ham-fisted proposals, such as those of Donald Trump, to address these concerns, but it is clear that our thoughtless immigration policies have weakened, and continue to weaken, our economy, our social stability, and our security. Yet instead of responding to those concerns, Republicans sent the president a bill that will exacerbate them.That's a missed opportunity. The congressional majorities took office in January, but somehow never managed to pass clean appropriations bills, department by department, for Our President to sign or to veto, and, come December, comes another cram-for-finals "bipartisan" continuing resolution. And yet the wizards of smart act surprised that "we're being governed by stupid people" resonates?
Mike Needham of the Federalist extends the argument. "While political parties can exist as factions rather than ideological entities, conservatism cannot succeed as a factional constituency to a political party." But selling an idea (perhaps a package of ideas, there are several different strains to what the chin-pullers refer to as conservatism) requires understanding of facts on the ground, which is to say the lived experience of normal Americans.
Some concerned about the aggressively anti-Washington energy behind the outsider impulses in this year’s presidential field call it an ugly strain of thinking that pollutes the center-right movement. That’s not what is going on.The Democrats call that "issues the American people care about" or "kitchen-table issues." It's the failure of Democrats to deliver, in ways as telling as the sloppy roll-out of the health insurance website and as tragic as Detroit, or California, or the foreign policy reset, that's feeding the populist impulse. But "bipartisanship" and business as usual don't work. Thus Rush Limbaugh, also denouncing the continuing resolution as more fleecing of the electorate.
People are nervous about the economic, physical and moral security of our nation. They view Washington as complacent. They feel unheard by the process. The job of those involved in public policy—on both the inside and the outside—is to understand where this anxiety comes from and harness it towards a unifying, conservative reform agenda.
There is no Republican Party! You know, we don't even need a Republican Party if they're gonna do this. You know, just elect Democrats, disband the Republican Party, and let the Democrats run it, because that's what's happening anyway. And these same Republican leaders doing this can't, for the life of them, figure out why Donald Trump has all the support that he has? They really can't figure this out?That's what happens when Congress fails to take care of business, one departmental appropriation at the time. The crash compromise will not turn out well. "The Democrat leftist wet dream has just been paid for."
Repeated stabs in the back like this -- which have been going on for years -- combined with Obama's policy destruction of this country, is what has given rise to Donald Trump. If Donald Trump didn't exist and if the Republican Party actually does want to win someday, they'd have to invent him. It's just mind-boggling when you figure out everything that has been granted Obama. All the money, the tax increases, the Cadillac plans in Obamacare. All kinds of punitive things in Obamacare, delayed yet again so that people will not be made aware of the pain and suffering Obamacare's gonna cause.
Dear reader, here is the state of things three presidential elections ago.
The problem the Democrats face as an opposition is that they -- in an interesting inversion of thirty years ago -- give the impression of being nostalgic for a past of programs and institutions they created and managed that worked. The evidence is that those institutions did not work very well.The Republicans, meanwhile, appear to be grappling with those changing demographics, and with the economic interests of the wage class.