Thought experiment: we win a huge victory in November

[Cary]

The only language "conservatives" are going to understand is if the nation's voters give them a good thumping in November. Suppose, for the purposes of this experiment, that happens and "conservatives" actually hit bottom. They realize that their policies suck. They realize, finally, that their salvation is not a further radicalization. I mean how much further to the right can they go?

Suppose they actually hit bottom and realize that it isn't about being right, ideologically. No, it's about actually solving people's problems and helping people. They finally realize that can't be hyped, or faked.

What do they do? Do they turn on the top 1%?

I suppose we can look to the 1940s to the 1980s when we got "We're all Keynesians now?"

I am having trouble visualizing this. Not trying to count chickens before they're hatched (although I may be doing some of that). I'm just trying to think several moves ahead. Any thoughts?

I would appreciate other thoughts on other scenarios. I am in a denial of the inverse, but of course that too is always possible. What do we do if we get our butts whipped?

[a geek named Bob]

1. When we win in November (knoock wood)

I'm throwing a party.

On Jan 20, I'll throw ANOTHER party.

Also, I'll have to keep those promises I made...

[Cary]

3. We won big in 2008

I got some things I didn't expect. Specifically, I got a backlash from lefties.

Do you think I should expect that again? I really hope not. We have some huge problems to solve.

[a geek named Bob]

10. At times, it really seems like a number of people on "the left" are either permenantly

cranky, or they are pushing for that big "uprising" some keep talking about.

Personally, I think Obama's done a pretty good job, with what he was given to work with.

Either way, I'll make fun of certain cranky leftists. ( I'm left handed, so I avoid calling the professional pop-marxies as lefties).

[Waltons_Mtn]

6. When Prez. Obama seats 2 or 3 Supremes is when I will throw a party.

[Cary]

9. Excellent! n/t

[a geek named Bob]

12. My wife has already placed a size restriction on the BBQ pit...

nothing over 36 square feet.

[Laurajr]

2. if the republicans became reasonable

and thought about the people living in the country instead of the donors. If the light bulb came on and they decided to solve people's problems then I would become an independant again.

[Cary]

5. Is that even possible?

I don't see them ever being that enlightened.

[Laurajr]

15. agreed so I guess I won't become an independant anytime soon

[Cary]

17. Funny

I want so badly to hope for their recovery but it hurts my brain to ponder how it could be possible. The only thing that keeps coming back, when I throw it against my mind, is that they become liberals.

And I don't really want them.

[Duer 157099]

4. You are trying to unscrew the inscrutable

Trying to apply any sort of logic to "those people" is futile, I'm sorry to say.

If they had any functioning reasoning ability, they wouldn't believe what they believe.

[Cary]

8. Understood

But how far down the rabbit hole can they go? My theory is that they like addicts only their drug of choice is their mind numbing ideology. Addiction is a primary disease. They hit bottom and either they recover or they die.

I don't mind seeing them die but something has to step back into that vacuum.

[warrior1]

7. They will go

further to the right.

[Cary]

11. Frightening.

As I see it they're already fascists. I can't imagine your scenario. Do you have any details?

[Waltons_Mtn]

13. How do they go further right?

A human head can only go so far up one's own ass!

[Cary]

14. Something else along these lines to consider

[Proud Public Servant]

16. They'll get beaten, not whipped. They can't be.

And neither can we.

Increasingly, it seems to me, the thing to understand about the election is how stable the electoral map is. They have their states, we have ours, and only a handful are up for grabs.

A "huge victory" is Reagan 1984 or Nixon 1972. Does that even seem possible anymore -- that one party would run away with 49 states? Even Johnson 1964 no longer seems possible. The GOP has a 170-180 electoral vote floor; even Bachmann would have started this race with 170 EVs in the bag, and would have kept them.

Still, to the GOP -- which was so certain it couldn't possibly lose this election -- it will feel like 1964, if not 1984 in reverse (instead of 2004 in reverse, which is what I think it is). So if we do win at strong-if-not-quite-2008 levels -- say, 5% and 345 EVs -- what happens? I think history shows us two different paths, and it will be interesting to see which one the GOP takes:

1) Goldwater 1964 -- the right wing of the party doubles down and gets more organized, and its doubling-down efforts pay off in 10-15 years; or

2) Mondale 1984 -- the more centrist, establishment wing of the party reasserts itself a la the DLC, and its efforts pay off in 4-8 years.

I think it'll be #2. And I think the tack they'll take is affirming the social safety net and compromising on immigration, all in the name of winning the Hispanic vote (which is actually the only thing that can save them).

[Cary]

18. One word: demographics

If trends continue Texas could turn blue, perhaps even as soon as 2016.

Rove and Bush tried, with some success to win the Hispanic vote. So maybe you're right?

[Proud Public Servant]

19. This is why I think they have no choice

but to go after the Hispanic vote. If they can't win over Hispanics, they're toast: Texas, Florida, and Arizona turn blue and that's the ballgame. On the other hand, if they find a way to reach Hispanics, they can turn reclaim FL, VA, and NM and maybe even turn CA into a swing state. It's their only hope. But only their establishment wing can lead them there.

[Cary]

20. I still can't visualize them finding a way to appeal to Hispanics

Or, for that matter, women. Yet a surprising number of women vote Republican.

[Arugula Latte]

21. It seems like it's set in stone, but things do change.

I mean, look at this from Carter vs. Ford in 1976. It's unthinkable today. Texas voted for the Democrat. California up through Washington were Republican, and even freakin' Vermont was still Republican. The South? A sea of blue.

It would have been truly bizarre then to think about New Mexico and Colorado being Democratic one day, but yet they flipped.

[Proud Public Servant]

24. True, but it takes a while

1976 may seem like yesterday to me, but it's more than a generation ago.

It's also interesting to speculate what could, eventually, change the map on that scale. The change from 1976 until now is largely the by-product of ideological realignment -- as the parties moved apart, it no longer became viable for states to be liberal but red (New England) or conservative but blue (the South). The rise of the Hispanic vote is probably the next big game-changer, but even that won't change the map as dramatically.

[TheKentuckian]

25. The problem with them going #2 (at least as you describe) is that not even

their corporate establishment wing is even safety net neutral.
Being against safety nets is wired into their DNA, what they would like to do is probably get to the left of the current Democratic compromise position on immigration (something that Reagan could do i.e. amnesty) and back away from the crazy and semi-theocratic social conservative positions but are hard pressed to actually make moves that could open up new voters because they have cornered themselves into be wholly dependent on such voters for much of their electoral energy and a significant chunk of their voting block.

Even during the New Deal era when they tolerated, gave lip service, or even gave votes for the safety nets, ever were they plotting to undo them and that was the corporate establishment wing moving those events and sucking in the theocrats, racists, and fearful as allies in attacking above all that function of government.

They do seek to reinvent themselves somewhat but it won't be on economics except maybe on trade if Democrats push right enough and that only temporarily to re-gain power.

They want to forget about abortion, bashing gays, and at least slow down the anti-immigration shit down enough to exploit the cheap labor and by doing so gain enough votes to destroy all labor protections so that Americans are treated about the same as an unauthorized migrant.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. If the ultra-right takes over there'll be a lot of new DLC/3rd Way Democrats in our party.

And, "Not as Bad" and "The lesser of two evils" will be easier to sell.

[ieoeja]

23. Romney is viewed by the mainstream as being moderate.

They will blame this loss on not going far enough Right, and on religious bigotry.

[TheKentuckian]

26. Of course they will

He was able to paint himself as such enough to be Governor of Massachusetts.

He is the Grandpapi of ObamaCare.

He has a whole mess of positions. Many of them pretty damn liberal in our politics.

It is inarguable that the Anti-Weird WilLIARd side was actually easily the majority of the TeaPubliKlan electorate and only failed to ever get behind a single candidate and as dim as the TeaPubliKlan hard Reich is, they will figure that out.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt, they know Weird WiLIARd is the establishment wing candidate. They have known that the whole way.

I sincerely doubt that the idea that Weird WiLIARd was pushed to extreme positions by the base is going to get traction, when the establishment wing can be blamed for forcing their guy on Reich wingers and going on to failure.

It also is not firmly grasped that the establishment wing hasn't "hit bottom" themselves to allow any kind of turn around. In fact, they are triumphant because the Democratic establishment is pretty much completely playing on their side of the field which means we are negotiating the terms of surrender to corporatism.

There will be no Turd Way in the TeaPubliKlan party, the one in ours will expand, the left will be driven out, and the center of political gravity in American politics will be somewhere between Joe Lieberman and Louie Gohmert.

The "mainstream" and "moderate" will continue to push further to the right and before any of those that wrap themselves in such labels realize that self-determination and broad prosperity are extinct which would prevent the natural outcome of the Democratic party splitting two or three ways and creating new divisions before it is too late for elections to matter in steering the society.

The vacuum worriers are about crazy, the TeaPubliKlan party could blow away like dust in the wind and neocons, racists, granny starvers, economic royalists, and all the riff-raff would have plenty of representation. The vacuum is on the left not the right.
I do not even grasp the concern that TeaPubliKlans create any political balance. Our party no longer has anything like a liberal (American) dominant ideology at all.

[Cary]

28. What about the law of diminishing returns?

Will they realize that their money spent on political ads can take them only so far?

[Bake]

27. They will never admit defeat, never admit they're WRONG.

They'll tell themselves we stole the election. Massive voter fraud. Whatever.

But will they change? Nahhhhhh.

Bake

[Nye Bevan]

29. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Republican party splinter.

The economic conservatives who don't give a shit about the nutty religious right stuff like banning abortion, restricting birth control, and abolishing gay marriage, are going to be more and more pissed off. And the major wealthy campaign contributors are much more interested in lower taxes and less regulation than in the war on women. I'm envisaging the party splintering into (1) a party whose main thrust is the religious right, wants to overturn Roe v Wade etc., and (2) a party that is center-right economically, wants to privatize Social Security and so on, but does not oppose gay marriage and is not interested in a war on women, much along the lines of the UK Conservatives.

[Cary]

30. That would be wonderful

Nothing like a third party in a majority system. They would never win another election, which would certainly please me.

They are not fit to govern.

[hay rick]

31. Their belief system isn't based on reality.

It's "faith" based- in a bad way. Real world events can be discounted or explained away. These people are really dug in- I can't see them learning anything at all from experience.

It's sad, not for their sakes but for ours. It means that they can be easily manipulated and will likely throw enough sand in the gears to keep our democracy from functioning efficiently.