Former Republican Congressman and 2004 U.S. Senate candidate George Nethercutt has an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal editorial page: "Pelosi's No Gingrich: Is it 1994 all over again? Not just yet".
His point is that in order for the Democrats to capitalize on voter disillusionment with the current Republican-led Congress, Pelosi & Co. would need to do more than be the anti-Republicans, they need to present a compelling agenda, ala Gingrich's 1994 Contract with America. And so far, they have not done so. But Nethercutt also warns that the Republicans could lose their majority in 2008:
If Republicans can't muster a spirited and substantive agenda of specific ideas to unite this party--based on common sense and sound principles of fiscal discipline, government accountability, free markets and a safe, well-educated populace--they will likely surrender their majorities, and probably the White House, by default.Read the whole thing Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 19, 2006 04:58 PM | Email This
The national Republican "agenda of specific ideas" seems to be precisely the opposite of what Nethercutt suggests. There is no common sense, no fiscal discipline, no government accountability and no idea about what to do with education. There is a lot of embryos, flag desecration and gay marriage. If Nethercutt wishes to concentrate on a substantive agenda perhaps he should quit the Republican party and form one of his own.
Posted by: Sstarr on July 19, 2006 05:58 PMI have become disillusioned with a number of Republicans and have given up on a vast majority of Democrats. There is too much polarization is not healthy for politics of the USA. A third party would decrease the polarization and provide more viable options and maybe even lessen the apathy - whenever it happens. First step is overhaul the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance reform - a bad idea and will continue to discourage any candidates who are not wealthy - who often speak more for the people. Not holding my breath...
Posted by: KS on July 19, 2006 07:05 PMYou are both right on the mark. If history tells us anything it is that political polarization will led to new alliances. On July 6th 1854 in Jackson Michigan, the Republican Party was born, out of the split in the Wig Party. This new, Republican Party, established with abolition of the slavery as their main platform (think about that Rev. Jessie Jackson).
Maybe its time for a true third party to come forth and unite the reasonable people for the betterment of us all.
Fortunately for those of us who would remain, formerly "moderate" Republicans wouldn't know fiscal conservatism if it put nine Initiatives on the Washington State Ballot and passed seven of them. If they were suddenly alone politically in their own version of the "middle" - who would they compromise with? What store would they give away? What principles would they have left to desecrate? And wouldn't their new "base" be the people who had no idea what they think about anything? Would those people be drawn to equally clueless candidates?
But, alas, it can't happen. They're running too much of the GOP, now. But that's temporary. I'm afraid their fate is to form the new Democrat Party after actual Republicans have become so dominant that the old Karl Marx/Larry Flynt Democrat coalition collapses and the GOP "moderates" are political refugees looking for a new home. GOP "moderates" are the New Left.