The growing analysis of a permanent Republican split
There seems to be a burgeoning line of analysis that the splits within the GOP field represent the baseline fractures within the Republican coalition. Huckabee represents the religious, Romney the business, Thompson the low taxers, Giuliani and McCain the national defense.
I don't know that I fully buy the premise that these fractures are as deep or as longstanding as some of these analyses tend to present, but the splits are certainly more evident than they have been in the recent past which I would credit it to a party under pressure, each segment trying to reclaim their slice of "the Reagan legacy" as the core of reenergizing their party.
But what none of them seem to recognize is that Reagan is dead.
I don't know that I fully buy the premise that these fractures are as deep or as longstanding as some of these analyses tend to present, but the splits are certainly more evident than they have been in the recent past which I would credit it to a party under pressure, each segment trying to reclaim their slice of "the Reagan legacy" as the core of reenergizing their party.
But what none of them seem to recognize is that Reagan is dead.
posted by mikevotes at
6:31 AM
5 Comments:
What is the Reagan Legacy? What was/is the Reagan mystique?
Reagan is a folk hero to many. A bit of a Will Rogers, known for pithy one-liners and patriotic, feel-good bravado. In short, he's become a myth. No one really looks at his policies. It's all about image. Truthiness. Reagan was great because made Republicans feel good. Republicans stuff words into the dead man's mouth and claim they were his own. Much the same way they treat Jesus. You can turn black into white, control into liberty, and wrong into right, as long as you can wrap it in the the right package.
I think the Republican party is split between a fascist wing and a libertarian wing. Fundamentalists of all stripes -- religious, capitalist, militant, anarchist -- lap into both camps. However, I do feel that the Religious Right (as opposed to merely "people of faith") is a phenomenon unto itself that fits squarely into the fascist wing.
By
-epm, at 9:01 AM
Well, let's start with the idea that Reagan was the last popular Republican president.
Personally, I think alot of the Reagan pull comes from the baby boomers transition to grownups in the 80's. They view the profits from their movement into management as part of Reagan as opposed to a broader function of age.
Reagan has become a jesus-like symbolic catchall. I think that's a really good point.
By
mikevotes, at 10:44 AM
Interesting observation about boomers transferring their economic/career mobility onto the shoulders of Reagan rather than the more mundane byproduct of their own age and increased experience and skills.
Reagan's win in 1980 probably had as much to do about America's recent past and his persona -- his feel good vibe -- as it did with his political policies. Maybe more. Yes? No?
If so, I wonder if Obama is perhaps the Democrats Reagan. More than any policy statement, he exudes a vibe of, yes, hope for a better America at the sunset of some very dark times. He has that same broad appeal with independents and even moderate Republicans that Reagan had with conservative Dems.
Hmm. I wonder...
By
-epm, at 11:18 AM
The Reagan "feel good" is essential to the money side of the party. It was the last time they felt "proud" about being Republican.
I tend to fear that Obama is more a JFK. Big movement, changed the country, hugely influential, but not an altogether great president.
By
mikevotes, at 1:19 PM
JFK didn't have that cross-party and independent support that Obama seems to have. But I see what you're talking about.
By
-epm, at 4:05 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home