We need someone with a vision, who is cheerful, optimistic and mindful of the
little guy. Someone with the political courage to take positions that might not
always be politically easy and to tell it like it is. Someone who is willing to
work with opponents both inside and outside his party and is friendly with
everyone.We need another Reagan. Easier said than done.
The GOP will win again in big numbers, and the Democrats will be having this
same argument in a few years. That's the way American politics have always
been. Just wait and see Mr. Gerson.
Only "imaginative" leadership can save the GOP, i.e. a bigot who
isn't bigoted. Yes, that does take some imagination to imagine.
The problem with the GOP is basically that they take reasonable conservative
ideas and ideology to unreasonable extremes.Lets abolish the IRS
says BachmannLets shut down the EPA and the FDA and, er, there is
another one too.No government program is acceptable and no tax rate
is low enough.And the vocal base loves the wackiness and they force
their potential candidates to espouse positions that are untenable to the
moderates in both parties.Everything does not need to be extreme.
It does not need to be all or nothing.
Will this leadership be found among the screaming people in funny hats
brandishing poorly written signs?
I agree with spring street in what a refreshing (and rarely articulated) essay
this is. But given the facts of gerrymandering and how most GOP
primaries are decided, I don’t see this happening until they lose a few
more elections. Making this particularly maddening is how difficult
gerrymandering has made it to lose the House, which provides a false sense of
the just how broad their appeal truly is.But since the President
holds veto power, and it is highly unlikely this current manifestation of the
GOP will ever have a veto proof Senate majority, losing a few more presidential
elections may just do the trick.
"....There is one combination that makes this transformation work at a
national level: a reform-minded Republican who has the sympathy of religious
might be describing William Jennings Bryan. Three times the Democratic nominee
for President and losing all three times, he nonetheless did more than anyone
else to give the Democratic Party the social conscience that came to define the
party in the 20th century. It sounds strange in our time to say that
evangelicals were once part of the base of the Democratic Party but they
were.The mistake Republicans have made is not in recognizing the
religious right as key to their hopes for revitalization. It has been in letting
them be the tail that wags the dog. Just ask John McCain or Mitt Romney.
They have no Imagination, they have ideals struck in stone, now an epitaph.You don't have to Imagine what has already been written, by their leaders
(norquist) that's why they are conservatives, they conserve some original
ideal of theirs, no matter how outdated, proven wrong or dangerous for
America's middle class.I mean really, the last presidential
election line up looked like a bad SNL skit, including Obama, he just looked
less ridiculous than the other choices, and I think was still the best out of
the group.The Republicans would do well to drop the neocon's
and their teaparty cheer team.Definition for con adv.In
opposition or disagreement; against: debated the issue pro and con.n.1. An argument or opinion against something.2. One who holds an opposing
opinion or view.
What a refreshing article. It is nice to see some thoughts that go beyond the
same old reframed of "we just got to get our message. Out," our
candidate didn't sale it right," and it's the democrats and every
one else. Keep speaking out please we need viable parties.