Skip to comments.Editorial: California Crushes Liberals
Posted on 10/08/2003 1:27:37 AM PDT by kattracks
The California recall election is a political earthquake. It is already shaping the political future not only in California but nationwide. The big losers in this election were California liberals, feminists, the politics of personal destruction, the myth that the press is not in bed with the Democrats and the image of Republicans as mean-spirited morality police. The Republican Party has suddenly become the big tent it has aspired to be but never quite achieved until now. According to exit polls 55 percent of independents and 18 percent of Democrats voted for Schwarzenegger despite the fact that the Democratic Party threw all its big guns into the state including all its presidential candidates, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Jesse Jackson. Thirty-nine percent of union households voted for the Republican and thirty percent of Hispanics despite the fact the Democrat Bustamante would have been the first Hispanic governor in history if he had won. Moreover, the turnout of Republicans themselves was also obviously large with the overwhelming majority of conservatives and an even larger majority of moderate Republicans coming out to vote for him.
In short, the new governor inspires passion in the Republican base and yet hope among those who are often put off by that base. In California, Arnold has created a new Republican coalition that has raised the Republican Party from the dead and produced an electoral landslide in the process. In a state which Republicans lost by a million votes in the last presidential election (without the Democrats having to spend a penny in the state) the combined Republican vote may have exceeded 60 percent -- an electoral landslide. This is what is meant by a political earthquake.
This earthquake is far more important than the Jesse Ventura miracle in Minnesota five years ago, and only partly because California is a state many times the size and importance of Minnesota. Ventura accomplished his feat as an independent, running against the major parties. Arnolds victory is a victory of the Republican Party with enormous potential for affecting Republican fortunes everywhere. The fact that in a special election he drew numbers of Republicans rivaling the presidential turnout is a marker for the Republican future. A charismatic Republican candidate who embodies the big tent aspirations of the Republican center but resonates with its conservative base can point the way to a Republican governing majority for the foreseeable American future. And thats something to think about.
David Horowitz is the author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son, which has been described as the first great autobiography of his generation, and which chronicles his odyssey from radical activism to the current positions he holds. Among his other books are The Politics of Bad Faith and The Art of Political War. The Art of Political War was described by White House political strategist Karl Rove as the perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield. Horowitzs latest book, Uncivil Wars, was published in January this year, and chronicles his crusade against intolerance and racial McCarthyism on college campuses last spring. Click here to read more about David
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
It is in the breaking news sidebar!
you can add to that substances that adults choose to put in thier bodies. Freedom and responsibility baby, thats what prinicples are all about.
As far as I am concerned, those folks are far more idologically akin to the Libs.
Maybe their sprific agenda goals differ, but their tactics and mindset are the same. And it is based on the thought of themselves as an elite, better conditioned or better positioned to see the truth, and that all the problems of the world are "due to the shortcomings of others".
And a tip of the hat to one of the greatest among us here in America, the incomparable Thomas Sowell.
Yes and no. Where as I do agree that freedom and responsibility need to go hand in hand. I must question the ability of an individual to maintain control over his/her level of personal reponsibility when under the influence of a control substance. I mean how do you insure that without placing a heavier burden on law enforcement agencies that need to make sure that the streets are safe from people that may decide to take the habit out on the road while still under the influence?
Agreed. Of course, what will work in California and what will work in Texas will not always be the same, especially with respect to the sociocultural issues.
Strategically, the key point is this: a much more powerful, broad-based and lasting coalition can be built nationally around free-market/small-government principles, than around the conservative/traditional sociocultural agenda.
Personally, I'd rather see culture and state kept separate. Not only is the depoliticization of sociocultural issues good policy, in California it's smart politics. It's also a way out of the looming trap caused by demographic trends that seers of the left foresee befalling Republicans.
The sore point remains abortion. Politically, it's up to those who feel that abortion is murder to convince a majority of the electorate to agree with them (I'm neutral.) Politicians have to get elected--otherwise, they don't get paid, and have to pursue some other line of work. In order to get elected, they can't be anti-abortion when clear majorities are strongly pro-choice.
The only way to change things is to change the majority opinion. Do that, and the elected politicians will follow (or else different politicians will get elected!) Most politicians are followers of public opinion, instead of shapers of public opinion. Public opinion is the lever. Learn how to shift it.
True, true, the majority is. But I'm not quite sure how that makes an arguement to the position that legislation of sexual behaviour amongest consenting adults is contradictory to conservative ideology?
I mean you must admit that there are many conservatives whom have taken the position which would absolutely not induce anyone in that demographic to find the conservative agenda appealing. These are people are well within their right of course not to pander to gays because I believe a persons morals are their own to decide as long as they don't infringe upon the rights of others. I'm just pointing out how I've always thought that legislation against the fact to be contradictory to a conservative ideology.
you just failed the test of principle: we are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves so we have to rely on others making decisions for us. But if we are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves, how is it possible to make decisions for others??
if drugs were relegalized the impact on the highways could very well be negligible: access to these drugs is fairly easy right now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.