Time for a new Republican Party
The Republican Party — which, by the way lost women to President Obama by 12 points — needs to run away from its archaic stance. Yes, object to abortion. Yes, work to make it rare. But move on: Abortion is here to stay. (And while you’re at it, GOP, it might just be time also to abandon that vaunted “abstinence-only” policy that has been such a dismal failure.)
Second, gay marriage. On this, simply — who cares? America 2012 has enormous problems. Is this really an issue that matters to — anyone? Christians, two men getting married doesn’t affect your marriage in any way. Get over it. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history on this issue, and Mr. Obama swept in millions of young voters by his tolerance. It’s time to walk away.
On both issues, the GOP can make a clean break: As the party of individual freedom, the GOP can simply say it now sees that Americans — especially women — do have the right to choose their own path. In fact, the party espouses the freedoms enshrined in the Constitution, always has, so the turnabout won’t even raise an eyebrow.
Such a recalibration would allow the millions of Americans who believe in the core Republican tenets to give the party a real evaluation at election time.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Yeah, Stoic, we had excellent prospects in 2012 too… in the end the anti-Romney turned into a battle between Santorum and Gingrich – hardly the purest of choices. Maybe together they could have beaten Romney (unproven) but they couldn’t figure out how to do that. We’ll see if your excellent prospects don’t self-destruct as well.
On point 3… would you ever imagine the Senate would get away with not passing a budget – with no consequencers? What makes you think the wouldn’t get away with blocking judges, again? History – doomed to repeat it.
rhombus on November 12, 2012 at 10:37 AM
Now see, if more were arguing for this it’s something I could probably get behind. Instead, we have militant libertarians saying we either have to agree with abortion and gay marriage or GTFO.
eforhan on November 12, 2012 at 10:38 AM
Democrats won the Presidency. We’re defending twice the amount of contest able seats in the Senate, yet won them all and GAINED seats in the Senate taking them from Republicans(some of whom were upstarts who primaried seasoned election winning republican veterans, won, and then stuck their foot in their mouths on social issues, btw). Yes, the Republicans still have a majority in the House of Representatives, the lowest body of the federal government, but democrats GAINED seats in the house as well. Marijuana was legalized in two states outright, and on the ballot. Others approved medical marijuana laws. Gay marriage was legalized in three states outright, and on the ballot, the one thing social conservatives have said people never do when given the opportunity to vote on it. And other states defeated attempts to alter their state constitutions banning gay marriage.
Yeah, I’d say the modern Republican party’s general ideas got defeated and rejected. And at a time when republicans had for years to be loud and let the American people hear them, and they did.
Genuine on November 12, 2012 at 10:42 AM
There isn’t much you can say to people that still actually think access to abortion is still up for debate in America.
And, it’s going to be banned, and it’s going to disappear.
Single-issue, uneducated people.
Moesart on November 12, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Now see, if more were arguing for this it’s something I could probably get behind. Instead, we have militant libertarians saying we either have to agree with abortion and gay marriage or GTFO.
eforhan on November 12, 2012 at 10:38 AM
I’m not going to speak for others, but my point is that if the GOP embraced liberty it doesn’t mean acceptance – it just means that we believe that others have the right to live their lives as they see fit. I don’t under stand how a man can be with another dude but what I disagree with more is the force of government telling others how to live their lives. Because government someday – such as today – might try and tell me how to live my life…like telling me I have to buy health insurance, or that I can’t buy raw milk, or that i must submit to molestation by a government agent in order to move free about the country via air travel.
MoreLiberty on November 12, 2012 at 10:45 AM
There also isn’t much you can say to people who think the slaughter of millions of human beings every year should not be of concern to anyone but “uneducated” people, and that we should treat it as any other political issue and say “oh well, gotta look at the big picture.”
Shump on November 12, 2012 at 10:46 AM
And yeah, the Republicans are finally being pulled toward the Libertarians agenda. Which, while being correct is also a total winner.
Let the socons go start their own party. They talk about it all the time anyway.
What the Republicans lose they more then pick up with moderate voters and Democrats disgusted with how far left the Democrats are now.
Moesart on November 12, 2012 at 10:47 AM
Nobody appointed you baby saver. Mind your own damn business.
Moesart on November 12, 2012 at 10:48 AM
we also get voters that will be tired of the dem rule. in the end many of those hard headed socons will vote for the gop anyway.
nathor on November 12, 2012 at 10:50 AM
Well the idea is to be more encompassing. Bring all into the fold by explaining that social conservatives have every right to their opinions, but all people have their rights as well. You can be socially conservative and still think that gay marriage is wrong, but as a conservative you shouldn’t agree that the government can force people to act certain ways.
MoreLiberty on November 12, 2012 at 10:51 AM
very reasonable, but they will come up with some speech of how our “weakened” values will weaken america or something…
nathor on November 12, 2012 at 10:55 AM
Of course. However,the end state within the United States should be towards individual liberty – not the union. People should want to come to America for our freedoms, not our prohibitions.
MoreLiberty on November 12, 2012 at 10:59 AM
Of course, socons have the right to their opinions. No one should be silenced.
They don’t have the right to shove it down our throats, though. Left wing crazy, right wing crazy, what’s the difference? Same kind of crazy.
Moesart on November 12, 2012 at 10:59 AM
That’s what your side said about slavery up until about November 1860.
joe_doufu on November 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM
You fake con chumps are going to go along with the republican party no matter what they do. Sit down and shut up and let your R party get some of that obama stash because that is what this talk of moderation is all about.
BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 11:04 AM
Funny. That’s what the Whigs said on the issue of slavery.
AH_C on November 12, 2012 at 11:06 AM
Can anyone name any countries where abortion has been legalized and then subsequently re-criminalized?
I’m thinking its somewhere between very rare and unprecedented.
cool breeze on November 12, 2012 at 11:06 AM
The republican party is OUT OF STEP with the rest of the world on gov health. The majority of under 30s and blacks and Hispanics want Obamacare. Republicans need to wake up,get with the program and support universal health care.
And forget about repeal. Like MOesart said, cab you think of a country that ever repealed gov health after it was instituted. Time to wake up republicans. You can only win if you pol test every message.
BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 11:16 AM
cool breeze not MOesart
BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 11:17 AM
I’m down.
BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM
The United States ranks 120th of the 169 countries for which data exists on voter turnout. 40% of eligible Americans don’t vote
I was called crazy on a thread for posting this information but it’s TRUE.
Evidently , A lot of low info voters are right here on HA and they are usually the moderates.
The conclusion SMART people draw is that 40% of potential voters are not moved by the message of either party. My guess is that many of those 40% are socially conservative but politically cynical. IE 1/2the voters think our politicians are fake crooks not that they are too far to the right.
BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 11:29 AM
That’s because there really is no difference between how they act. What we get – in the end – is more debt, an increase in the power and size of government, more foreign entanglements, and less individual liberty. The establishment are crooks, the majority of Americans are simply serfs that the statists need to produce and consume in a sense.
MoreLiberty on November 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM
Neuter social issues with the following:
Reporter- Mr. XXXX do you support a women’s right to choose?
Candidate- The abortion issue should be one left to it’s proper place, the state governments. There, citizens of each respective state better decide how policies should reflect their values. As a candidate for federal office I will push as many issues to be decided by the states as possible including gay marriage in order to keep us in line with our federalist roots from which we have departed. Next question.
Meat Fighter on November 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM
If you want universal health care then have at it at the state level. You will soon find that everyone will be universally covered with piss poor “health care.” I suppose you already know this and it is the reason you must capture everyone in a federal system.
Meat Fighter on November 12, 2012 at 11:37 AM
Agreed
MoreLiberty on November 12, 2012 at 11:37 AM
The forced sterilization of the “mentally unfit” was here to stay as well. The progressives loved it. Now they get rid of the “mentally unfit” before birth. The idea is the same. Eugenics and social engineering.
That’s what justice Ginsburg said about Roe v. Wade in 2009:
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.”
It’s the same as it was with slavery. Just because the majority supports it or says “I would never own a slave myself but I don’t mind other people being slaveholders” doesn’t mean we should give up fighting against it.
Gelsomina on November 12, 2012 at 11:41 AM
End women’s suffrage and watch the country get more conservative overnight.
SirGawain on November 12, 2012 at 11:41 AM
I agree also. But that answer is still waaaaay to scocon for the moderates and libertarians on this board.
BoxHead1 on November 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM
There are 3 reliable votes to overturn Roe on the current bench – Thomas, Scalia, Alito. Any votes by Roberts now that side with conservatives have to be taken as unexpected surprises, so I’d say we are a long way from having this issue sent back to the states.
IamDA on November 12, 2012 at 11:43 AM
Abortion does violate someone else’s liberty.
Gelsomina on November 12, 2012 at 11:48 AM
The Democrats’ stance on abortion is much more radical than the Republicans’. I didn’t support Gingrich in the primaries, but he was the only one who made that clear. That’s how it should be done.
Gelsomina on November 12, 2012 at 11:57 AM
At some point it does, and as I’ve stated I don’t support abortion at later stages, via rape or if the mothers life is in danger.
MoreLiberty on November 12, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Then caveat that answer with, “my personal belief is inconsequential to the matter. I am running for President of these United States and the powers vested to that office, which have absolutely nothing to do with a whole host of issues that constitutionally are left to the states.”
I agree and abhor abortion, but in the end I believe technology and science will ultimately vindicate the pro-life position. I believe abortion will be looked at in the way “esteemed” and “progressive” science of eugenics is. it was once cutting edge science and accepted to a certain degree, now we look back with disgrace.
The only solution left is to save as many of the unborn in states that reflect the people’s view that life begins at conception. We will never achieve this fighting over control at the federal level. Neuter the issue for federal office and make the left defend their barbarian policies at the state level.
Meat Fighter on November 12, 2012 at 11:58 AM
I absolutely agree that Newt was correct, however the media and pop culture control the narrative whether we like it or not and the low info voter in the end will just “feel” that pro-choice is cool.
Neuter the issue at the federal level and save as many unborn in the states that reflect these values. Science and time will solve the rest.
Meat Fighter on November 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM
That was American and Egyptian slavery.
Other forms of slavery exist where you own the other person’s wealth creation.
Social Security is one of them.
astonerii on November 12, 2012 at 1:39 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3