Four Factions, No Favorite

The New York Times ^ | MARCH 8, 2014 | Ross Douthat

[x]

...

We’re accustomed to a narrative of Republican politics that pits the Tea Party against the establishment, the right against the center right. But that has always been an oversimplification, and in a wide-open presidential campaign, it’s likely to fit political reality more poorly than usual.

A better framework is suggested by Henry Olsen, writing in The National Interest, who argues that Republican presidential campaigns are usually defined by four factions rather than two.

One faction is centrist (think John McCain’s 2000 supporters, or Jon Huntsman’s rather smaller 2012 support), one is moderately conservative (think the typical Mitt Romney or Bob Dole voter), one is socially conservative (think Mike Huckabee or Rick Santorum backers), and one is very conservative but more secular (think Gingrich voters last time, or Steve Forbes voters much further back).

The moderately conservative faction holds the balance of power, which is why the party usually flirts with ideologues but settles down with a safer, establishment-endorsed choice. But different campaigns take very different paths to this result.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan basically worked from the right to the center, consolidating secular and religious conservatives and then wooing enough moderate conservatives to win.

In 1996, Bob Dole relied on moderate conservatives to fend off a centrist (Lamar Alexander), a social conservative (Pat Buchanan) and a secular conservative (Forbes).

In 2000, George W. Bush used support from moderate conservatives and religious conservatives to defeat both McCain’s centrist insurgency and Forbes’s lesser challenge from the right.

In 2008, McCain combined his original centrist base with enough moderate conservatives to win the nomination — a trick Romney basically imitated in 2012.

....

[x]

Interesting column that I didn't see posted. I'm not sure how large or how strong the McCain faction is, but the article does much to explain how Republican politics has worked in recent years. Douthat goes on to talk more about the prospective candidates in the next presidential election. The take-away (I guess) is that sometimes it's easier for the "moderate conservative" to ally with one of the more conservative factions (religious/social conservatives and more libertarian conservatives) -- and neutralize the small more liberal or "centrist" faction -- than it is for all of the religious/social conservatives and libertarian/economic conservatives to unite.

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[Cicero]

What Douthat and his pals call “centrist,” I would call leftist. McCain has been working with the Democrats for his entire career, and Jon Huntsman is a virtual Communist.

[Don Corleone]

G O P= Gangs of Progressives!

[Rodamala]

It’s clearly at the point that we need a candidate that, when it comes down to the reality of government machinations, will solidly refused to work with leftist traitors. The only viable candidates I will recognize are the ones with a solid record of refusing to compromise with the domestic enemies of the nation on either side of the aisle.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“The moderately conservative faction holds the balance of power, which is why the party usually flirts with ideologues but settles down with a safer, establishment-endorsed choice.”

Who then loses to the Rat because the MSM said the candidate was “too radical.”

[TBP]

“Centrist”=liberal.