United Liberty
The Republican Party’s Choice: Glenn Beck vs. Joe Scarborough
Mon, 11/16/2009 - 5:12pm | posted by Doug Mataconis
Joe Harvey writes at Red State that the GOP’s future course can go in two directions, laid out by two very different talk show hosts:
Two markedly different paths forward have emerged for Republicans as they decide how to rebuild and compete in the 2010 elections. These divergent paths have been characterized by the politically similar, Glenn Beck and Joe Scarborough.
Both pundits have an affable personality, but their styles are far apart. Beck makes emotional appeals and frequently embraces conspiracy theories. Scarborough focuses on reason and practical policy solutions. There is a place for emotional appeals but there must be more for a party to move forward. Practical communication of conservative principles, in Scarborough’s style, is the key to the rebirth of the Republican brand.
(…)
Beck attempts to appeal to the public as a likeable ordinary guy. This style will lead to a doomsday for Republicans and will squander an opportunity because it fights against the President’s primary strength, likeability. Scarborough attempts to shape the debate by putting forth practical policy suggestions. This style is a winner because it emphasizes the President’s weakness in shaping the policy debate.
(…)
Beck’s style has the ability to emotionally galvanize red states but it isn’t enough to win national elections. Scarborough’s even-handed style, with its practical application of conservative principles, can appeal to moderate blue and red states. For the GOP to capitalize on the President’s declining popularity, adopting Scarborough’s style is their last best hope at speaking truth to power and pointing out that the emperor has no clothes. Conveniently, the Nobel Peace Prize winner is supplying them with ample material.
Unfortunately for the GOP, the Beck crowd seems to be winning the internal rhetorical debate.
Which could mean that, come 2012, Republicans will turn would could be a certain victory into an equally certain defeat.
And this is a bad thing? I want to see Republicans for once act within their core principles—the Democrats always do.
As Dick Armey has said many times, when Republicans act like conservatives they win but when they act like Democrats they lose.
I see nothing wrong with forcing out the mushy moderates who like to undercut conservatives on crucial votes in the name of perceived electability or currying favor with the media as a “maverick” (And yes, that means the McCains, the Grahams, and the Cornyns need to be shown the door for pissing off the real base voters).
Furthermore, I understand the value of being pragmatic as to who you support as some personality qualities and positions play better in some places as opposed to others.
However, I also believe that candidates who support the ideas of small government, fiscal responsibility, and individual liberty can win regardless of where they run.
I’m very optimistic about 2010 (and 2012) because the grassroots candidates that are coming forward are of the 1994 mold and won’t readily turn away from championing liberty because the zeitgeist says the American people want a steady diet of socialism.
Post new comment