In light of last night’s election results in Mississippi, there is one question every conservative should be asking: how much longer can a party survive when its leadership is inexorably against the ethos of its base?
While Democrats harness their base supporters to advance the party’s liberal agenda, the Republican establishment works to undermine and disenfranchise its own base the minute they have pocketed their support in the general election. Now, after actively campaigning for Democrat votes in order to win against conservative Chris McDaniel in Mississippi, the GOP establishment has reached a new low in their treachery against those who embody the heart and soul of the party.
Based on the preliminary election results, it appears that the well-oiled campaign by the NRSC and Haley Barbour to turn out Democrat votes was more than enough to make the difference in last night’s primary. With roughly 60,000 more votes cast in the runoff than the primary, and an unprecedented surge in Democrat counties and precincts, it is almost certain that Chris McDaniel won the GOP vote while losing overall by about 6,400 votes.
Campaigning openly for Democrat votes in a GOP primary using issues and arguments contrary to the party platform is one thing. But the fact that they played the race card and ran mailers and robo calls in African American areas accusing their own party of being racist is downright despicable.
Hence, the NRSC and the GOP establishment essentially marshalled Democrat support to beat conservative voters in order to reelect an ineffective incumbent who is barely lucid and will very possibly never serve out his term.
Ironically, the establishment treachery on the campaign trail in Mississippi is merely a reflection of what they do in Washington. The GOP-controlled House has whipped Democrat votes to undermine and disenfranchise the GOP majority on numerous occasions over the past few years. Senate Republican leaders stood shoulder to shoulder with their Democrat colleagues and denounced conservative supporters of defunding Obamacare both on the Senate floor and in the media. They have clearly grown comfortable allying with their fellow career politicians in the Democrat Party than with those who in their own party who want government to work for the people again.
Throughout the primary season, GOP elites have accused the conservative base of helping Democrats by challenging Republicans in primaries. The reality is that we are challenging these people precisely because they work in tandem with Democrat and empower them in growing government. Yet, despite the acerbic differences and acrimony, the conservative base had always soldiered on and supported the Republican establishment candidate in the general election. Conservative were quick to do so with Mitch McConnell in Kentucky.
Now, the establishment has openly and unabashedly empowered Democrats to disenfranchise Republican voters in Mississippi by running on a platform of big government and playing the race card.
They may have the ability to continue fighting their base in the short-run, but no party can be at war with its base forever and succeed. It’s unclear whether the Republican Party will remain viable in the long term. But either way, these people will eventually be left without a home. At some point the base will either reassert itself or start a new party, and Democrats will not be there to help them in a general election. Live by the Democrats; die by the Democrats.
Tag Archives: Democratic Party
by Whitney Pitcher
Today marks the 92nd anniversary of the day when Tennessee became the thirty-sixth state to ratify the 19th amendment. With this, women were granted the right to vote–a right fought for by many from Abigail Adams in her letters to the Constitutional Convention to pioneers like Susan B.Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
The right to vote is indeed an honor granted by the democratic processes of our Republic outlined in the Constitution. It seems though that in the years that have followed since women were granted suffrage that this great opportunity has been diminished–not that opportunities to vote have diminished, but that more and more it has been viewed as collective statement, rather than an individual’s opportunity.
Last weekend, I visited the Illinois State Fair and decided to pop into the Illinois Democratic Party tent. It was pretty much your standard political tent with flags, politicians’ photos and literature, but one of the pieces of literature stood out to me– the Illinois Democratic Women’s flyer seen below:
To be sure, any literature from a political party is going to be partisan by default, but I was a bit surprised by the line, “when women vote Democrats win”. With the exception of the 2010 election, the majority of women have voted Democratic in elections. However, there are two things wrong with this type of message: 1) it’s about party power not about improving the state 2) it tries to make a statement about how women vote as a collective–thus diminishing the individual woman.
I don’t particularly identify with any political party. Both parties have made government too big and too full of cronyism and corruption. I grew up in a conservative home, but I’ve voted Republican, Green Party, and Democrat in various elections in the past ten years–even for Barack Obama when he ran for Senate in 2004 (I was in college–youthful indiscretion). In the last few years, my political ideology has solidified as some conservatarian hybrid. Nonetheless, regardless of whether or not I, as a woman (or as an American in general) identify with a party, I’m sick of how the Democratic party projects their beliefs onto all women as if we’re all supposed to walk in lock step. Why did the Illinois Democratic Women assume that women all women vote Democratic? In their laughable attempt to win female votes, why did the Obama campaign’s graphic artist depict “Julia” without a mouth?
Is that because President Obama speaks for her, and she’s not allowed to speak for herself? Additionally, why does the Obama campaign call Paul Ryan bad for women? For a party that prides itself on “female empowerment”, it is certainly hypocritical for them to support the idea that taxpayers should pay for a woman’s divorce between sex and personal responsibility. Why does Code Pink think that dressing up as vaginas will help their cause? Are they simply trying to show which organ they will vote with rather than their brains? All of these are examples of projection of party ideology onto individual women.
Women vote across all party lines, and all parties indeed want their vote. However, far too often the Democratic party gives their collectivist answer without asking the question–what do women want? They assume that women want the government to do things for them, rather than to stop doing things to them. In this “war on women”, too often women have become the grenades. This is true of both major parties. The Democrats raised money off of Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Sandra Fluke, and the Romney campaign raised money off of Hilary Rosen’s comments about Ann Romney–both in attempts to win the “women’s vote”. There’s no such thing as the “women’s vote”. There is a woman’s vote; there are tens of millions of these across the country–each with a different perspective and different priorities. I’m so thankful to live in a country where I have the opportunity to vote as a woman. As I wrote this past spring:
The voice of women has made a huge impact at the ballot box, but the “women’s vote” is not a collective declaration. Rather, the “women’s vote” is a collection of individual women’s decisions based upon their priorities. A CNN poll performed late last month indicated that 54% of women saw the economy as the most important issue with 16% and 14% of women stating that the federal budget deficit and healthcare were the most important issues respectively. The remaining 16% of women thought that either the situation in Afghanistan, illegal immigration, terrorism, or gay and lesbian policies were the most important issues. Suffice it to say, each women has a unique set of priorities when it comes to how they vote, and women’s opinions on how these priorities should be as a means of policy fall all along the political spectrum.
While the Democratic party wish to project their views onto all women, it an individual woman’s choice to cast her vote how she chooses–just as it is for a man. It’s not the women’s vote; it’s a woman’s vote.