Skip to comments.It Is Time to Throw the Social Conservatives Out of the GOP (Not)
Posted on 11/10/2012 8:05:19 PM PST by neverdem
It is time to throw the social conservatives out of the GOP. Look at what they got us Barack Obama. It was the social conservatives who did it. They insisted the GOP support real marriage and children. To hell with that.
I’m getting this, in various forms, from lots of tea party activists. The GOP establishment in Washington is whispering it to each other. They look at Todd Aiken and Richard Mourdock and conclude that they, not Tommy Thompson, Heather Wilson, George Allen, Scott Brown, etc. are the problem.
It is time to get rid of the social conservatives.
What’s really going on here is that the people who voted Republican, but who disagree with pro-lifers and defenders of marriage, have decided it must be those issues. They can’t see how what happened actually happened unless it happened because the issues on which they disagree with the base played a role.
This is a psychological avoidance of larger issues and does not stack up to the data.
Mitt Romney won about a quarter of the hispanic vote and a tenth of the black vote.
Those numbers may not sound like much, but in close elections they matter.
A sizable portion of those black and hispanic voters voted GOP despite disagreeing with the GOP on fiscal issues. But they are strongly social conservative and could not vote for the party of killing kids and gay marriage. So they voted GOP.
You throw out the social conservatives and you throw out those hispanic and black voters. Further, you make it harder to attract new hispanic voters who happen to be the most socially conservative voters in the country.
Next, you’ll also see a reduction of probably half the existing GOP base. You won’t make that up with Democrats who suddenly think that because their uterus is safe they can now vote Republican. Most of those people don’t like fiscal conservatism either often though claiming that they do.
If you really need to think through this, consider MItt Romney. He is perhaps the shiftiest person to ever run for President of the United States. He shifted his position on virtually every position except Romneycare. Of all the politicians to ever run for office, he’d be the one most likely to come out and, after the Republican convention, decide he’d changed his mind. He’d be okay with abortion and okay with gay marriage.
Had he done that, he’d have even less votes.
Several million evangelicals did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000. His campaign had to work to get them back in 2004.
You may mentally decide, to escape having to deal with the other implications of this election, that if only the GOP would abandon its social conservatism it would do better. But if you do, go find yourself a new coalition because you won’t have half the votes the GOP has now. Good luck with that. In fact, if the GOP really wanted to expand with minorities, it’d keep the social conservatism and throw out the fiscal conservatism.
Richard Mourdock was one of two of the poster children for abandoning social conservatives this year. He was beaten by a pro-life Democrat.
The problem is not social conservatism. The problem is social conservatives have gotten so used to thinking of themselves as the majority they’ve forgotten how to speak to those who are not and defend against those who accuse them of being fringe, most particularly the press. Couple that with Mitt Romney’s campaign making a conscious decision to not fight back on the cultural front and you have a bunch of Republicans convinced, despite the facts, that if only the social conservatives would go away all would be fine.
It’s not time to throw out social conservatives. It’s time to accept that without them the GOP would be even a smaller party even less able to reach out to the hispanic demographic all the smart people say they need to embrace. Addition through subtraction never really works well.
No... no... don’t throw us in that briar patch!
Aiken WAS part of the problem because he was stupid and arrogant, and ending up costing us a senate seat.
Mourdock seemed OK until his gaffe, Lugar wasn’t a prize to begin with.
I do think that Social Conservatism has a shrinking base among younger generations, and I don’t know how that is to be reversed.
The Republican Party needs to stick to Conservative principles and Conservative candidates.
If we begin to chase power and control at the price of our values, we are lost as a country and the Constitutional Republic has failed.
How many won’t read the article?
We can leave on our own, thank you very much. Have fun trying to win an election without your base, it’ll be fun to watch I bet.
A lot of that “younger generation” will grow up at some point
Nobody’s throwing me out, I’m leaving on my own accord... It’ll take ‘em thirty years to realize they can’t win without true conservatives...
It does have a shrinking baseat least the hardline positions do.
GOP doesn’t have to get rid of social conservatism entirely but it’s going to have to moderate stances on abortion, gay marriage, etc.
Come 2016,the GOP is looking at having won the popular vote ONCE (with George W Bush in 2004) since Bush SR. was elected in ‘88! And what too many on the GOP (willfully)forgot is that Bush won the popular vote AND the election in ‘04 in BIG part BECAUSE gay “marriage” was being voted down that same year in,I believe, eleven states! But the GOP has now abandoned the social conservatives....telling them the winning strategy is to just concentrate on fiscal issues......
afraid of appearing too extreme to the “moderates” and “undecideds”.(That they alienate a third of their base doing that seems to escape them!) Hasn’t THAT strategy worked out “great” these last two elections?
Painful to accept,I know,but we lost in ‘92 with Bush,lost in ‘96 with Dole,ALMOST lost with George W in ‘00,lost with McCain in ‘08,and now we lost with Romney!
As was proven in Massachusetts in 2010,when the republican candidate for governor Charlie Baker (who called himself to the left of Obama on social issues) lost to Deval Patrick,and again on Tuesday when Scott Brown lost to Lizzie Warren (after he had been bragging about how he voted to repeal DADT),YOU DON’T WIN AN ELECTION BY TURNING YOUR BACK ON A THIRD OF YOUR BASE TO KISS-UP TO PEOPLE THAT WILL NEVER VOTE FOR YOU ANYWAY!
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!! and AMEN!!!!!!!
I think it is going to be a race out of the door. Who leaves first...the Conservatives or the RINOs.
Scott Brown, who couldn’t wait to lick Kerry’s rear, and Heather Wilson? LOL
I sure hope so, otherwise I’m going to be rather ostracized 30 years from now!
Moderate. ? But you MEAN liberal. The Rockefeller Republicans were always in favor of abortion, and gay marriage is no big deal. Until Reagan came along, the party did not go firmly pro-life.
No it does not. That will lose them more support than it would ever gain.
Through education. And, realistically, ridicule. That is what it is going to take.
How has the left made social conservatism unpopular? Through ridicule.
How can we make social liberalism unpopular? Through ridicule.
As Governor, Romney was very pro-gay and pro-abortion
Can you convincingly advocate small government conservatism while mandating transvaginally probing American women’s vaginas? Folks that is a real question we have to answer. You are foolish if you believe it didn’t cost votes.