Maggie's Farm

Actually mudbug, the entire premise of the article is misplaced. The error is the author's assumption that the term, "republican" means the same thing as "conservative". They do not mean the same thing. Republicans, many of them, may actually like to believe they are conservative politically, but they still vote consistently for big government politicians and policies. They are not conservatives. So, there's that. Self-identifying oneself as conservative can mean almost anything. And polls asking questions using vague terminology are bound to be misleading. What is conservative? What does it mean? For some, it means being against abortion, late term abortion or morning after pills. For others, it means diminishing the growth rate of the federal government. Usually at the expense of some program(s) they themselves can live without. But hardly ever at the expense of some program(s) they benefit from. I would suggest that "conservative", at a basic level, means keeping it in your wallet unless you really need it and keeping it in your pants unless you get a blood test first. Asking random people if they are "conservative" is like asking them if they are frugal with their money and cautious about STD's. I would humbly suggest that most people would identify with those things. However, that doesn't mean a damn thing politically. When it comes to voting for more spending on goodies, both political parties are singing the same songs. And that ain't conservative in any language.

I completely agree that the republicans have no effective messengers. Nor do they have any message. About anything. Rand Paul is like a niche iconoclast at best and the rest of the national leadership are steaming turds of bloated self-satisfaction. Why are they satisfied? Because all the crazy spending wets their beaks also. They know they will get re-elected, so they don't give a damn. Look at them applaud politely while Obama took full credit for the increase in gas and oil production. In truth, Obama did everything in his power to obstruct all gas, oil and coal production including infrastructure and regulatory upgrades. And the republicans say nothing. The steaming turds. No message there, nothing to see. The best the republicans can say when asked about alternative plans to Obamacare is, "Duh, we are in the process of evaluating that and we believe we have better solutions." Total bullshit. No message there, nothing to see. Republicans have no reason to be optimistic. It is clear the leadership has given up since they aren't even trying. Heck, they aren't even pretending to be trying. Need a messenger? Yes, I agree that the republicans need an effective messenger. Someone who will tell the truth. Someone who can explain in simple terms why and how the conservative (not republican) way will work better for everyone. But there isn't one. And that is sad.

I'm not sure calling Rand Paul a niche iconoclast is a disparagement. As you said, he appeals to the libertarian segment of the GOP. Segment, niche, faction, whatever. Iconoclast is, to me, a complementary term. Insofar as Rand Paul is trying to overcome the failure platform of the GOP establishment, he is certainly an iconoclast. And bully for him. But, he has failed to garner enough popular support for a winning platform, so far. I'm not at all sure he even has a complete platform under his belt. Like Paul Ryan, he seems to specialize in one or two issues. Thus, he is not the messenger we may hope him to be. I do think Rand Paul may be legit. However, I cannot say the same for Cruz or Lee. As we have seen with Palin, I think they are mainly expert self-promoters looking to leverage the most publicity and turn it into book and TV deals. Like Palin, they have no gravitas and no particular expertise. They pull stunts, spout hyperbole, make headlines and accomplish nothing. Nothing but store up feathers for their nests. Like that democrat gal in Texas who lied about her past and held her own 20 minute filibuster to no effect. Now she can sell books and get a TV deal. As for Gingrich, I mostly agree with you. He put together a winning platform and accomplished something. Of course, he had more power and a president who was willing to make deals. In theory, if the GOP picks up more seats in the mid-terms and wins the senate, a leader could emerge who might do something positive. But I see no such leader on the horizon. Finally, I also agree with you and Pat Buchanan that the GOP has actively participated in the destruction of it's base. As a result, the Reagan majority no longer exists. As I indicated previously, I don't think the GOP has even one effective message. And, only a couple of decent specialist messengers. So, I can't share your optimistic outlook. Even on keystone and energy policy in general, they fail to enunciate effectively. And that should be the easiest message of all. Even with Paul Ryan and Rand Paul, expert budget and health care gurus, the GOP fails to broadcast a meaningful, understandable and winning policy. And with Obamacare failure, that should be easy to do and a major priority for the party. There are many such issues the GOP could turn into winning planks. I use the two most obvious ones as examples. They could take a stand against all the interminable, losing wars overseas. They could call for a comprehensive international space exploration effort. Maybe even a moon base. Such a project could even join us with India and China in a meaningful, peaceful manner. Just trying would impart a positive spin on the tarnished image we have earned overseas and lend the GOP an aura of optimism. The GOP could come up with some winning solutions to the fact that America imprisons more people per capita than any other nation on earth. Since most of those folks are in for drug offenses, we are locking up a ton of enterprising, risk taking potential business talent. The GOP could formulate a sensible immigration solution, a winning tax reform program and the list goes on. Want Hispanic support? How about a new Monroe doctrine for starters? A major diplomatic push for freedom for the enslaved people of Cuba. Strategic cooperation with Mexico against the cartels. Want less illegal immigrants? Help Mexico succeed. We are currently pissing away trillions of dollars and the blood of our best young people on the dark side of the moon in a futile effort to civilize cave men. Let's stop doing that kind of thing. Mexico is right next door to us and has a shared history and culture. How about more trade agreements with Central and South America? Controlled student and worker visas from our southern neighbors. Alas, the GOP is stuck on stupid.

Sorry I misinterpreted your hope as optimism, the nuances in chat are easily missed. It has been a pleasure chatting with you, especially since we seem to agree on the fundamentals. I agree that some of my plank proposals could wait or be replaced by better ones. Yes, the NSA intrusion and the IRS should be front and center. My main point would be for the GOP to formulate a platform that would be inclusive, outline practical solutions, shrink government, inspire hope and optimism and join different groups together. Right now, our society is segmented into a multitude of factions, each one grasping for power and money. Some of those divisions need to be bridged or bypassed to build a winning coalition. Wanna undercut the drug gangs and crime? Legalize pot nationally. Do you support same sex marriage or oppose it? It matters not, if you take government preferences out of it. At one stroke, you pull the teeth out of that whole issue since there would be no financial benefits to fight over. Want to 'marry' a tree? Go ahead on, just shut up about it. Again, there are many possible examples. Unfortunately, none of this will happen. The leaders of the GOP are too busy trying to give Obama more power than he already has. The Roman Republic went down the tubes in a similar manner.