There is a group out there called the Ripon Society. Among its six main goals are “a more equitable tax system” and “social tolerance,” and “conservation of natural resources.” It is also a subset, oddly enough, of the primary institution that has worked against those three goals for the past 25 years – the Republican party.
The Ripon Society used to be a significant force in our society, whether you’ve heard of it or not. Named after
I think, unfortunately, it may be too late for the Ripon Society. I suspect the Republican party has turned too many of the Ripon Society’s would be adherents into independents and Democrats. I fear that a the majority of the GOP will believe it when Rush and his cohorts on talk radio claim that the Republicans lost because they just weren’t conservative enough, and will accept the labeling of moderate Republicans as “RINOs” (Republicans In Name Only). The party that practiced the “majority of the majority” when it was in control of congress will split that even further, driving out a new layer of relative moderates with each schism, and leaving us, at least temporarily, with almost a one party system. That’s not good for democracy, it’s not good for the
Mind you, Susan Collins and the Ripon Society and all the other GOP “moderates” have much to answer for. For too long have they been willing to cast a vote to give the wingnuts power. Collins, and Snowe, and yes, McCain, should have started signaling their willingness to vote for impeachment at least as far back as 2005, and they would have save their party and the nation much grief. At that point, they could have even done it without putting a Democrat into the White House. But it is enough that they will have to settle for “Ranking Member” instead of “Committee Chairperson.” 150 electoral votes will have to do for John McCain, who could have served his country but chose to serve his party instead, this election, and has ended up helping neither.
Somehow, though, for the sake of the country, I hope they manage to scrabble their way back to relevance – and this time, hopefully, without bringing a bunch of dittoheads with them.
4 comments:
I vacillate from day to day on whether the Republican brand can — or should — be saved. Which is not to say that there aren't Republicans with good ideas, just that those good ideas have been eclipsed by absolutely horrid ones.
Since they promote ideas like homophobia and mixing religion with politics, I haven't voted for a Republican in years. And since the GOP has mostly written Maryland off, they're not very interested in promoting ideas that might get my vote, such as balanced budgets, civil liberties, and the notion that the 1st and 4th amendments are at least as important as the 2nd.
So it would be a good idea if the Ripon Society manages to become relevant again. They might force the Democrats to compete for my vote, instead of taking me for granted. (Then again, the people I know who live in swing states tend to dread elections, so that would be a mixed blessing at best.)
The next question is whether Republicans will be able to salvage their brand, or whether the moderates will have to tear themselves away and start a new party.
I was reading a comment by Grover Norquist today, made some time ago, which basically implied that the Republicans had counted states, and they got to 30 red and 20 blue and figured... screw the 20, they can elect all the Dems they want, we'll still bury them. So yeah, they have been letting the Dems take you for granted.
The good news is that it didn't work.
If a new party does arise to challenge the Reps and Dems, though, I don't think it can or will come from the "grass roots" or the "net roots." It will be a few Senators, sitting in a room, and deciding that forming their own party is the only solution. Only the presence of elected national figures is going to cause a new party/third party to become viable.
I don't think it can or will come from the "grass roots" or the "net roots." It will be a few Senators, sitting in a room
Maybe. One of the reasons I vacillate is that on one hand, it seems that the way to bring about a major change like the rebirth of the Republican party is to make a clean break and just walk away from the old party. On the other hand, that means abandoning the entire GOP support infrastructure: networks of contacts, regional offices, and so forth.
At times I think that the way for a small third party to become visible is to concentrate its efforts on one area and build from there. E.g., instead of diluting the Green party's efforts across a thousand races across the country, concentrate on getting a Green candidate elected to the House in Missouri or something.
Or maybe I'm completely wrong. It's not as if Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman have precipitated an avalanche of independent and third-party politicians being elected.
At times I think that the way for a small third party to become visible is to concentrate its efforts on one area and build from there.
Neither Bernie nor Lieberman have tried, really, to turn their independence into a movement. The whole purpose of being independent, for Sanders, I think, is to avoid being beholden, so a party affiliation would just get in the way. Vermont would seem to be a place where that kind of party could get going, though.
The various Dixiecrat parties of Wallace and Thurmond were local, but even they coalesced around a handful of already elected officials. Ultimately, the were co-opted by the Republican party... or they co-opted it. Either way, they're the closest thing to success in the last 70 years.
The Federated Farmer Labor Parties, with something of a regional appeal (rust belt & prairie states) collapsed, essentially, when they lost the backing of La Follette, a sitting Republican who gave them their legitimacy. They're also constructive because they schismed before they got anywhere, which I think is the inevitable fate of a third party that doesn't have a solid base from inception. See also Jesse Ventura's splitting with the Reform party, and the ever splintering Green party.
It's really hard for a third party to claim that there's no reasonable other place to go, which is the idea that keeps the GOP and Dems together.
Post a Comment