Matt Yglesias makes a good point here, no?
Rush’s defenders understand, I hope, that painting Rush as the all-powerful lord of conservatism before whom all else must submit was, in its origins, a political strategy devised by their enemies, right? So why are they jumping so quickly to prove that the argument is dead-on?
18 responses so far
1 balconesfault // May 13, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Rush has to sell over the top outrage, 5 days a week. That’s a pathway to ratings … not to good governance. Ironically, the shrinking Republican Party has been empowering Rush even more – his listeners aren’t drifting away from him, but they’re becoming a greater percentage of the Republican base. But is the RP past the “tipping point” where any elected official risks empowering a primary challenger if he takes Rush on in any substantive way?
2 sinz54 // May 13, 2009 at 1:36 pm
The GOP has to learn how to energize the base (which is what Limbaugh does) without scaring off the rest of the country that isn’t as far to the right.
The Dems finally figured out that putting Jesse Jackson on TV in prime-time wasn’t appealing to white voters. So Jesse Jackson can still speak to black voters, while other pols speak to white voters.
If Limbaugh is a spokesperson for the GOP base, then who in the GOP speaks for moderate and swing voters? For Hispanics and blacks? For suburban women?
I don’t want to get rid of Limbaugh. I want to find other, equally effective, spokespersons who can reach these other groups.
3 midcon // May 13, 2009 at 2:57 pm
In the latest ABS Washington Post poll the percentage of people that identified themselves as Republicans was 21%. Democrats: 35%. Independents: 38%. There is nothing left of the Republican Party. It barely even exists any longer. The only reason other parties have not come into more prominence is ballot access laws which serve to restrict the other parties from the ballot.
You notice there are more Independents than there are Republicans. If all the proclaimed “I”s got together and formed a party they would be larger than either the “D”s or the “R”s.
By the way, only 23% of the people identified themselves as liberal the rest were conservative or moderate. Even some of the convervatives (at 35%) apparently don’t identify themselves as Republicans.
The only questions are how low can the GOP numbers get? And what will take the place of the GOP given that conservatism is not dead and the Independents can’t get organized?
4 InTheMiddle12 // May 13, 2009 at 4:40 pm
The way it seems to be going is that President Obama has snatched the middle, contains the left and attracts more independents on a daily basis.
The GOP seems to have no where to go but to their base, and that is incredibly and strongly associated with the past 8 years and President Bush’s failed presidency.
I just don’t understand why the GOP doesn’t just go quiet for 6 months and only speak around actual legislation, since they don’t have power for anything else – as a matter of fact, everything else they do seems to be empty and only making them look worse.
5 mpolito // May 13, 2009 at 4:50 pm
An interesting and worthwhile question is why do 35% of Americans consider themselves conservative and only 21% are Republican? Is this not worth exploring? Where are they? Will slamming Rush get them to come on into the party?
6 greg_barton // May 13, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Why did they jump so quickly? It’s the “this isn’t a problem, this is an opportunity” reflex gone wrong, that’s why. It’s the failed strategy of, “Hah! So that’s what they want me to do? I’ll do it TEN TIMES AS MUCH! That’ll show ‘em!”
For years I studied the Japanese martial art Aikido. The basic idea of Aikido is that you unbalance your opponent while they’re attacking you, not by hitting them head on, but by redirecting their attack. The moment your opponent attacks you’ve won, because in attacking they give you an opportunity to unbalance them. That’s exactly what the Democrats are doing now because they know Republican’s only strategy is to attack, attack, attack. And that’s why they’ll always lose. Democrats have finally figured that out, and it’s about damn time.
7 cmhmd // May 13, 2009 at 6:03 pm
“An interesting and worthwhile question is why do 35% of Americans consider themselves conservative and only 21% are Republican?”
To paraphrase Inigo Montoya, “I do not think that word [conservative] means what you think it means.” And I guess maybe that applies to the word “Republican,” too.
And maybe that’s the point of the post and the whole site, for that matter…
8 Churl // May 14, 2009 at 3:10 am
Why not let Matthew Yglesias run the Republican Party? We already have a budding Hugo Chavez operating the government. Let’s just give up and be done with it.
9 sinz54 // May 14, 2009 at 9:53 am
senor: We used to have a talk-show host just like that in Boston: David Brudnoy.
Brudnoy was erudite, intellectual, libertarian on social issues (he was gay himself). He hated hockey and he didn’t care to discuss sports at all. And he was right-wing on other issues: He wanted small government and low taxes, he despised the Clintons, he strongly supported the War on Terror, and he thought that Massachusetts liberals had run the state into the ground. He made right-wing ideas palatable, even to a liberal state like Massachusetts.
Brudnoy passed away, and no one else since has filled his shoes.
The passage of intellectuals like Buckley and Brudnoy has left conservatism in the hands of Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. It now sounds like Ralph Kramden, Joe the Plumber, and Archie Bunker ranting in a bar over a few drinks.
10 jjv // May 14, 2009 at 1:12 pm
I tend to think Rush is normally right on issues. It is noteworthy however that even such as Rich Lowry and I think his view that nothing needs to change except to more clearly state Repbulicans are conservative is wrong. A Republican party without Rush or his audience is unthinkable. The question is how prominent he is. I tend to think Sean Hannity is neither clever nor informed, nor effective but that Rush is. Similiarly, Mark Levin is brilliant but uses his show to call people names. A chief problem with Republicans is their inability to talk to the general public. They could take a page from Rush on this. His role is not that of an elected official however and the distinction ought to be noted by office holders when asked this question as they now will be.
I will say this, Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney are highly unpopular but their articulate criticisms of the Obama administration are drawing blood. Obama picked a Cheney favorite for Afghanistan, stopped the publication of the photos of interrorgations, and sacked the “flyover” NY guy. Moreover, Republicans have again moved into the lead in the public mind on national security (for those of you who like polls). This occurred not because these men are popular, they are not, but because they know how to spot an issue and explain it to the American people. That is something Republicans better learn.
11 barker13 // May 14, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Re: Jjv; wrote 59 minutes ago –
“I tend to think Rush is normally right on issues.”
(*NOD*)
“A Republican party without Rush or his audience is unthinkable.”
(*NOD*)
“I tend to think Sean Hannity is neither clever nor informed…”
(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)
Exactly right.
“Similiarly, Mark Levin is brilliant but uses his show to call people names.”
(*SIGH*) (*NOD*)
Yep.
“A chief problem with Republicans is their inability to talk to the general public. They could take a page from Rush on this.”
DEAD ON! BRAVO! EXACTLY RIGHT!
I think there’s a lot of jealousy of Rush by those who… er… got picked last for their elementary school playground games.
(*SHRUG*)
Sure… Limbaugh is an entertainer – a brilliant entertainer – but he’s also an extremely bright guy intellectually speaking. If he wasn’t… I wouldn’t be saying he is. (*SMILE*)
“Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney are highly unpopular but their articulate criticisms of the Obama administration are drawing blood.”
Well… on the surface I’m not arguing… but to reiterate a point I’ve brought up on prior occasions, the vast majority of Rush’s “unpopularity” is based upon caricature, reflective partisanship, and most of all… ignorance.
Let’s put it this way: For the sake of argument let’s assume the “independent” broad center of American political/economic/social thought is roughly “center Right.” (For those who insist on arguing… substitute “just plain center” if it makes you feel better.)
Let’s say you took a representative sampling of “true” Independents, “Reagan Democrats” to “Obama Republicans.” Imagine a series of debates between Rush Limbaugh and… oh… say Al Franken… or Keith Olbermann…
Or… just imagine the test audience undertook to listen to a week’s worth of Rush Limbaugh (three hours a day) and the same for Franken or Olbermann.
(*SHRUG*)
How do you think Limbaugh’s negatives would test vs. Franken’s or Olbermann’s?
Of course it’s conjecture… but my guess is that in terms of shifting political opinion either “Right” or “Left,” Limbaugh would wipe the floor with either champion of the Left.
Anyway… excellent points, Jjv!
BILL
12 Dr. Tesla // May 14, 2009 at 3:35 pm
To me, the ironic thing is, nobody even knows who Frum is if Limbaugh had not occasionally criticized Frum’s liberal stances on most issues. If Frum was even close to a mainstream conservative, why didn’t National Review, Human Events, etc etc run his hateful anti-Rush article? He had to go Newsweek, a leftwing rag that even leftwingers dont’ read anymore.
We have a problem in the Republican party when liberal Republicans like Frum, a tiny minority in the party, want to dictate to the majority, the conservative base, who we should listen to and who we should not.
It would seem to me that Frum would go join the Democrat party…he seems to accept their entire agenda except for their dovish approach on national security. Frum isn’t even a fiscal conservative…he’s for carbon taxes and he seems opposed to tax cuts.
One big factor why Republicans lost the past election is the Iraq War, and Frum was for that war big time. Liberals see Frum as a warmonger neo-con, so I think if the Republican party is going to go left as Frum wishes, we may want to go with somebody that didn’t support the Iraq war.
13 Dr. Tesla // May 14, 2009 at 3:46 pm
I’m still trying to figure out how Rush’s politics are different from that of Reagans and Buckley’s, as Frum asserts.
Limbaugh was liked by both men….Frum uses them as a prop against Limbaugh, because they are dead and can’t refute Frum.
I don’t think Frum’s politics are even close to that of Buckley’s or Reagan’s. Nobody doubts Rush’s conservativism.
14 InTheMiddle12 // May 14, 2009 at 4:48 pm
barker: “Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney are highly unpopular but their articIulate criticisms of the Obama administration are drawing blood.”
The only blood I see Limbaugh and Cheney drawing is the continual spiraling of the GOP into a further tailspin of alienation from the majority electorate. It seems, like many in the base of the GOP movement, you don’t seem to see the continual writing on the wall. As long as Rush and Cheney are the face of the Republican Party, it will continue to be a minority party. If you’re happy with that, then that’s fine.
15 Dr. Tesla // May 14, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I notice all liberals keep saying the Republican party is in a continual tailspain into irrelevance. Why do you have to keep saying it if we are no longer relevant? Just like stating the obvious? It’s not rational to beat a dead horse if the horse is dead, would you agree?
Cheney blew away Edwards in their debate in 2004. There is no doubt among people that Cheney is extremely intelligent. When he says Obama is a disaster on national security, people do listen. That’s why liberals are bitching about him and telling him to shut up. As Limbaugh pointed out, why tell the man to shut up if he’s so unpopular and hurts the Republican cause?
Nancy Pelosi seems to be one in a tailspin these days. Seems like she’s bit of a torture freak. She and Cheney may have something in common.
16 cmhmd // May 14, 2009 at 7:04 pm
>>We have a problem in the Republican party when liberal Republicans like Frum, a tiny minority in the party, want to dictate to the majority, the conservative base, who we should listen to and who we should not.< <
this is just tooooo funny. A tiny minority of a now tiny minority. You tell ‘em! Good luck parlaying that 20% voter registration into a majority anytime soon.
17 Dr. Tesla // May 14, 2009 at 10:51 pm
I think polls show the generic ballot for Congress in 2010 a dead heat between Republicans and Democrats.
It appears the new Democrat mantra is that the Republican party is a minority party.
If Obama can’t get the economy turned around soon, he will get bounced in 2012, or he really is the Messiah.
18 barker13 // May 15, 2009 at 8:16 am
Re: InTheMiddle12; 4:48 PM –
“The only blood I see…”
You need to see an Opthamologist!
(*GRIN*) (Com’on… that was funny…) (*CHUCKLE*)
BILL
You must log in to post a comment.