“No modern precedent exists for the revival of a party so badly defeated, so intensely discredited, and so essentially split as the Republican Party is today.”
Taken from “The Party That Lost Its Head” (1966) by Bruce Chapman and George Gilder, this excerpt, about Barry Goldwater’s defeat in 1964, led Thursday’s column by E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post.
Dionne is warning what could happen if the GOP perpetrates the political atrocity of nominating Donald Trump.
For weeks now, the Post‘s editorial page has sermonized about the “moral” obligation of all righteous Republicans to repudiate Trump.
The Post‘s solicitude for the well-being of the Republican Party is the stuff of legend. Yet it is a bit jarring to see these champions of abortion on demand, same-sex marriage, and visitation rights for cross-dressers in the girls’ room, standing in a pulpit lecturing on morality.
Yet, there was something off about that Chapman-Gilder quote.
First, both were members of the Harvard-based, Rockefeller-backed, liberal Ripon Society. Second, their prognosis of the party’s future proved to be spectacularly wrong.
The year, 1966, their book on the headless GOP appeared, to press hosannas, Richard Nixon led the party to its greatest off-year victory since 1946, adding 47 new seats in the House.
Two years later, Nixon won the presidency, inaugurating an era in which Republicans won five out of six presidential contests, two by 49-state landslides.
Out of Goldwater’s defeat came the New Majority and Reagan Revolution. And Chapman and Gilder moved rightward to serve with distinction in that revolution.
The prodigal sons were welcomed home, and Gilder would recant:
“The far Right—the same men I dismissed as extremists in my youth—turned out to know far more than I did. At least the ‘right-wing extremists,’ as I confidently called them, were right on almost every major policy issue from welfare to Vietnam to Keynesian economics and defense…”[Why I am Not a Neo- Conservative, NR, March 5, 1982]
While the Goldwater campaign, as an insurgency of outsiders, bears comparison with Trump’s, in other ways it does not.
Goldwater never compiled anything near the vote that Trump did. At this point in 1964, Goldwater was behind Johnson 79-18 in the Gallup poll. Trump is behind Hillary Clinton by single digits. New polls have him running even in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania.
Now, consider the issues comparison with 1964.
In July 1964, Johnson signed the popular Civil Rights Act that Goldwater had opposed. The GOP Convention in San Francisco revealed a deeply divided party, subject to the charge, validated by the rule-or-ruin Rockefeller- Romney faction, that it was receptive to right-wing radicals.
Lyndon Johnson’s decision to bomb North Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin incident made him a war leader, and Americans rally to presidents in a time of war.
In 2016, however, Trump holds a fistful of face cards. After eight years of President Obama, he is the candidate of change in 2016, and Clinton is the candidate of same.
Trump may bring more excitement than some folks can handle.
But Clinton has become a crashing bore, until she gets agitated, and then the voice rises to where she sounds like the siren on the hook-and-ladder in “Chicago Fire.”
Other than that she would be the first woman president, what is there about her or her agenda that has popular appeal? That lack of appeal explains why her crowds are a fraction of Bernie Sanders’.
The Clinton of 2016 is not the Clinton of 2008.
As for the issues dividing Trump and Speaker Paul Ryan, Trump appears to have won the argument, if the debate is decided by voter preferences rather than Beltway preferences.
Trump’s denunciation of NAFTA and other “free-trade” deals Ryan supports is echoed by Sanders, who opposed those deals when they were up for a vote. Hillary Clinton no longer rhapsodizes over husband Bill’s NAFTA, and signals she will not support Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership in a lame-duck session.
Ryan professes to be a man of principle. Why does he not then stand by his principles, as Goldwater did, and bring up TPP for a vote?
Is Paul Ryan’s “immigration reform” package as popular inside his party as Trump’s tough line? It would seem not. The longer the primaries went on, the closer the other GOP candidates moved toward Trump. And if Ryan believes in it on principle, why not bring it up?
Ryan voted for the Iraq War that Trump calls a disaster. The people seem now to agree with Trump that the war was misconceived.
Thursday’s Post reported that, five years ago, Ryan stood on the House floor to declare, “This is our defining moment.”
And what was Ryan’s defining moment?
“On that day in 2011,” said the Post, “the House’s new GOP majority approved Ryan’s budget plan—which …called for cuts in a government program that voters knew and loved: Medicare.
“Ryan … wanted eventually to turn the massive health-benefit program over to private insurers.”
Come to think of it, Barry Goldwater wanted to turn Social Security over to private enterprise. How did that one work out?
#1: BobCeleste To: nativist nationalist (#0)
Ryan equals the old rule of power, the Washington Elite, the ruling political class, their masters in the donor class and all of those raping the middle class.
Donald Trump, Like George Washington, represents those who want to work and get ahead.
Right now the nations is at a cross roads, the cross road is freedom thru the ballot of freedom thru the bullet. If Donald Trump can prevail and get his agenda thru, it is freedom thru the ballot, if ryan and his ilk prevail it will be Freedom thru the gullet.
BobCeleste posted on 2016-05-13 08:47:28 Reply Private Reply
#2: misterwhite To: nativist nationalist (#0)
It's almost private already.
There are three major components to Medicare -- Part A (Hospital costs), Part B (Doctor and clinic costs), and Part D (Prescriptions). The federal government only pays for Part A. Parts B and D are optional and private insurance companies charge for this coverage.
Some private insurance companies, in order to entice you to sign up with them for Parts B and D, will offer a total insurance package that includes Parts A, B, and D (the government reimburses them for Part A). This is called Medicare Advantage.
misterwhite posted on 2016-05-13 09:00:46 Reply Private Reply
#3: sneakypete To: nativist nationalist (#0)
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-13 16:07:04 Reply Private Reply
#4: sneakypete To: BobCeleste (#1)
Bob,you have seriously lost your grip on reality if you are comparing the idiot with the orange hair and skin to George Washington.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-13 16:08:36 Reply Private Reply
#5: nolu chan To: nativist nationalist (#0)
Ryan obtained his positions (Congressman/Speaker) by the votes in a single district in Wisconsin and by a few hundred congressmen in D.C.
Trump obtained his position (presumptive Candidate) by millions of votes cast across the United States.
Ryan speaks for the Beltway power brokers of the party.
Trump speaks for the millions who cast their votes in the primaries. Trump will be the voice of the party from now to the election, and then the election will decide if he continues.
nolu chan posted on 2016-05-13 17:18:40 Reply Private Reply
#6: BobCeleste To: sneakypete (#4)
George Washington and Donald Trump have a lot in common.
Both were extremely Rich and used their own money.
George Washington as leader of the Revolution and then as President, gave us liberty, freedom, and the Republic.
Donald John Trump will, as president or, if necessary leader of the Revolution, restore Liberty, Freedom, and The Republic.
And most important both men were supported, to the point of death, by the hard working freedom loving men and women of the Nation, the men and women that were and are willing to accept the risk and responsibilities, in exchange for the rights and privileges of our Constitution and of being a Free Republican Society.
BobCeleste posted on 2016-05-13 20:31:25 Reply Private Reply
#7: A K A Stone To: sneakypete (#4)
Says the loser who lives in a junk yard. You're a leftist turd. Flush.
A K A Stone posted on 2016-05-13 20:47:04 Reply Private Reply
#8: sneakypete To: A K A Stone (#7)
Yeah,you just keep thinking that,bubba. My "junk" is probably worth more than everything you are making payments on,and I only owe 3 months income on it at this point.
And you?
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-13 20:53:43 Reply Private Reply
#9: sneakypete To: BobCeleste (#6)
There is no other way to put it,you are mentally ill if you really believe that nonsense. This isn't political support,it's cult leader worship.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-13 20:56:13 Reply Private Reply
#10: A K A Stone To: sneakypete (#8)
Well Trumps is worth a million or two million times what yours is worth. So by your definition you're an idiot. You're a loser compared to Trump.
A K A Stone posted on 2016-05-13 21:02:49 Reply Private Reply
#11: A K A Stone To: sneakypete (#9)
You're in a cult that worships faggots. You put their perversion above the constitution. That is a sick cult you're in.
A K A Stone posted on 2016-05-13 21:03:56 Reply Private Reply
#12: sneakypete To: A K A Stone (#10)
Trump inherited his,dummy. In FACT,he now owns less than what was given to him just for being born. AND.......,*I* have never declared bankruptcy and left my creditors swinging in the breeze while putting people out of work.
When you consider that Trump STARTED with around 220 million and I started with a trip to the army recruiter and a bus ticket,I am doing better than him and never stole a dime from or cheated anyone.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 04:06:08 Reply Private Reply
#13: sneakypete To: A K A Stone (#11)
You need to see a shrink to try to get your obsession with homosexuals under control.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 04:07:14 Reply Private Reply
#14: A K A Stone To: sneakypete (#12)
Your numbers are imaginary.
At least you served your country. Hats off to you for that one.
A K A Stone posted on 2016-05-14 09:32:59 Reply Private Reply
#15: A K A Stone To: sneakypete (#13)
It is just whenever I see you criticize someone, say Bob this time. Call them a cult member. Or something else.
I just think who is this faggot marriage supporter to criticize anyone. Comes back to that because your position is pure evil and against nature.
Then I think about how you lie and say the founders were for it and put it in the constitution.
It will always come back to that because I don't like your sicko view.
That is why I said you will end up banned.
Then I think you do have some redeeming values and can make some good points. So I don't pull the trigger.
A K A Stone posted on 2016-05-14 09:36:37 Reply Private Reply
#16: sneakypete To: A K A Stone (#15)
Point to ONE post I made that makes the claim that the Founding Fathers were pro-homosexuality.
Or pro-ANY sort of sexuality,as far as that goes.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 09:51:24 Reply Private Reply
#17: A K A Stone To: sneakypete (#16)
You said they put it int the constitution you senile old kook.
Do you believe in a "living" constitution that changes meaning over time kook?
A K A Stone posted on 2016-05-14 09:57:30 Reply Private Reply
#18: BobCeleste To: sneakypete (#9)
BobCeleste posted on 2016-05-14 10:04:15 Reply Private Reply
#19: no gnu taxes To: sneakypete (#12)
Started out with Gubmint checks early and often, did ya?
Well, gotta stick with what you know.
no gnu taxes posted on 2016-05-14 10:32:20 Reply Private Reply
#20: sneakypete To: A K A Stone (#17)
YOU are the one that is senile. Go ahead,post a quote of mine where I made the claim the Founding Fathers or the US Constitution make any mention at all homosexuals,negative OR positive.
You can't because I never made any such claim.
What *I* AND the Founding Fathers wrote is that ALL Americans have the same RIGHTS and FREEDOMS.
YOU,and your obsession with homosexuality is what causes you to read that as "special rights for homos".
Do NOT blame ME for YOUR ignorance.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 12:20:15 Reply Private Reply
#21: sneakypete To: BobCeleste (#18)
What the HELL does a historic record of court cases about citizenship have to do with the prima donna with orange hair and skin that is pretending to be conservative?
And I will NOT apologize for calling you delusional in your almost Christ-like worship of that posing pack of shit.
IF American is so unfortunate his ego gets in the way of him dropping out and he wins,I want you to remember the warnings,and to repent.
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 12:23:50 Reply Private Reply
#22: sneakypete To: no gnu taxes (#19)
You couldn't be more pathetic if you actually tried.
Why WOULDN'T the government pay for my bus ticket to the induction center to be sworn into the US Army?
If there are any parasites around here,it is YOU and the other posers who refuse to do anything for anyone but yourselves.
Or maybe I am wrong,and you just avoided military service because you are a coward?
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 12:26:06 Reply Private Reply
#23: no gnu taxes To: sneakypete (#22)
USAF 83-88
So I had some gubmint checks for a while, too.
But I got over it.
no gnu taxes posted on 2016-05-14 15:50:13 Reply Private Reply
#24: buckeroo To: no gnu taxes (#23)
buckeroo posted on 2016-05-14 15:58:33 Reply Private Reply
#25: sneakypete To: no gnu taxes (#23)
No paper cuts to qualify you for disability,or did you try that and have it refused?
sneakypete posted on 2016-05-14 21:06:28 Reply Private Reply