Here’s an idea: somebody with a facility at putting together graphic representations should get together with Karl and others who’d be willing to do so to make a chart comparing the Republican candidates’ positions on all the major issues (including those candidates who’ve since dropped out), and then juxtapose their findings against the positions staked out both in the Reagan revolution and the Contract with America. And not just the candidates stated positions, either. But rather their actual record on such issues, including some underreported (but significant) flip-flopping.
Let’s see — graphically, with a color-coded clarity — just how statist the frontrunners for the National GOP have become. Let’s see — in pretty little pie slices or bar graphs — just how far away from the tenets of classical liberalism the Republican party has strayed. Mike Huckabee a conservative? Maybe with respect to the culture wars. But in sum, he’s like the unholy (and scientifically improbable) love child of Jimmy Carter and James Dobson.* And McCain — well, again, anyone who believes he knows better than the Constitution, and is willing to justify legislation that expressly circumvents the intent of the founders, is more “progressive” than he is conservative, even if his progressive streak leads him to adopt certain conservative positions.
Once we’ve finished our graphic representation, we can then look to primaries being gamed by crossover voters (with help from the media) as a force for driving GOP nominees. And in so doing, we can see how much influence the “media” in aggregate has on defining the “center” of the political spectrum.
From there, t-shirts!
Here’s mine: “John McCain Got The GOP Nomination, and all I got was this lousy t-shirt. And, of course, 8-years of Democratic governance that will culminate with Uncle Sam on ‘Oprah,’ getting self-esteem advice from Doctor Phil.”
Oh, I could do that, though not right this second.
In the meantime, you might be slightly cheered by the fact that a number of the Super-Duper Tuesday states are closed primaries and caucuses, which cuts down on the crossover vote.
“From there, t-shirts!”
MEXICO CAN WAIT, WE NEED A FENCE AROUND ARKANSAS!
How about a comparison of the democratic field to the work of JFK? That’s a name they love to toss around.
And with Thompson out….
Anyone who’s ever worked for a software development company would point out that the t-shirts come first…
It was the grafting of the entirely Progressive positions that are called “social conservatism” (with the odd exception of abortion, because it’s…odd) — variants of temperance, basically, using the state as a bulwark against the corruptible inferiority of those people — onto classical liberalism that made post-WWII Republican “conservatism” an impossible-to-sustain thing.
Reagan was a fluke, a personality, and he didn’t accomplish as much as he’s reputed to have done. The goverment was unchanged. The Gingrich gang talked a good game and didn’t do a single damn thing. The “the unholy love child of Jimmy Carter and Fred Dobson” is a coherent beast: Bizarro Milton Friedman, basically. And he lives. He’s Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Huck, Romney, Rudy, McCain…
His opposite might make it, too. He had a good, short run c. 1780. But no lightninged-together FrankenParty can survive. The GOP as it is today is that gasping tumor-dog-dude thing from the end of The Fly II. And that movie fucking sucked.
At least it’s almost over.
Jeff,
If I embark on this project, I would need to know how you would like me to deal with the flip-flop factor.
Romney’s detractors will ceratinly question whether his current positions hsould be accepted in light of his past record. Same with Mccain, who claims he has not changed his position on immigration, while most would say his campaign rhetoric does not square with his actual position.
In this regard, I would note that in the GOP debates, there has been talk of Reagan’s positions as Gov. of CA not squaring with his positions in 1980. That was probably Romney making the point, so I shoud add that Romney detractors will point out that Romney distanced himself from Reagan in the 1980s.
psycho,
I think it is fair to say that you are greatly exaggerating your case. Particularly when you consider that the Dem coalition held together for longer with factions at least as incompatible as one finds in today’s GOP.
Karl – FWIW, I would give people the position that they have acted upon, when applicable. For example, taxes. When Huck and Romney run around claiming to be right on taxes, they should only get partial credit for that. They should receive full credit for their actions when governing. The same with legislators. Votes and actions count much more that campaign season rhetoric, unless they claim to have had an epiphany, and renounced their prior positions altogether.
“Romney’s detractors will ceratinly question whether his current positions hsould be accepted in light of his past record. Same with Mccain, who claims he has not changed his position on immigration…”
On issues of immigration I might cut governors and mayors some slack on conflicted past stances, as Rudy once pointed out, there are limits to what a mayor can do, he pretty much has to play the hand the Feds deal him. A Senator couldn’t make that excuse.
Um… Dr. James Dobson? Focus on the Family? That makes more sense and increases the chuckle factor, although I’m not anxious to become the All-Things-Christian-Related editor for PW.
I’d rather make up silly songs with alpuccino and happyfeet and torment JD with visions of homicidal dwarf clowns.
And giggle at McGehee’s big head…
JD and B Moe raise good points, but I think we may be beginning to see the difficulty of converting that degree of nuance into a bar chart.
I myself have begun the long process of healing that our nation can be expected to undergo once we elect our new Nanny State Overlord. I’ve already thrown out all of the sharp pointy things in my house, all three of my sports trophies are gone so as not to challenge any youngsters self-esteem, and I’ve begun to drown myself in Chomsky readings so I can better understand just why being a white guy in the US is so evil. I’ve begun looking at night classes in womes studies to see if there are any thoughts of masculinity left unchallenged in my psyche.
Trust me, it’s easier to peel the band aid off quickly folks. Saves time and trouble.
BECAUSE OF THE PUSSIFICATION!!!!
I agree that the nuance is difficult to quantify. There has to be a way to weigh the positions with action taking a greater weight than rhetoric.
BJ, you better watch it. According to IJS, I am a violent person. lol
I have water pouring from my light fixtures in about 2500 square feet of my home right now, so I have to go. This is going to be a long fucking night. I blame IJS. And Halliburton. And Bush.
And, Kyoto.
Here is a site that doesn’t do exactly what Jeff is requesting, but it does help voters determine where they stack up vis-a-vis the various candidates on a wide range of issues. There are about 28 questions total, so don’t stop after the first ten.
Quite interesting.
http://www.votehelp.com
Jeff/Karl–
I’m up for helping with the graphics.
This could be like a huge open-souce research project. Warmonger style.
Is Huckabee still running?
I don’t really care, I’m just wondering.
“JD and B Moe raise good points, but I think we may be beginning to see the difficulty of converting that degree of nuance into a bar chart.”
Or you could just have a special category for positions too slippery to define. Make the bar look like a streak of owl shit, what I would do.
oh yeah, real helpful pvrwc. #1 for me? Fred Thompson. *sob* #2? Rudy. um, I guess we’ll see if he makes it. that’s probably the kiss of death for him right there.
oh well, it’s better than the one that put Huckabee first for me. I was all, “WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?” I’ve got to go remind RTO to get some razor blades to take the Fred ’08 sticker off his car now…..
I think one good thing to come out of all this is it has helped me define my view of contemporary American politics. I have long been disgusted with the labels in currently in popular use: liberal, conservative, progressive, etc. really seem meaningless to me, what vague sense of definition they have doesn’t make sense in a rationally coherent way to me. I have come to see things in the sense of populist and individualist. Their is far too much populism on both sides for me to be comfortable.
Off-opic, but on and sure to be dismissed: Are you saying that one is not a statist if one advocates the wiretapping of Americans without warrants, that the President has the power to hold American citizens without trial and without counsel, and that, in practice, the President is above the law (millions of emails lost in violation of federal statutes is the latest)? I’m trying to understand the distinction between statist and authoritarian grab for power supported by you. Seems so far the difference is money: arresting an American citizen and holding him without trial is not as bad as taking my money and giving it to someone else.
Is there a distinction I missed. The Conservatives and libertarians I knew would be outraged by government usurping any power. In this instance, not many of the readers seem to care. That strikes me as strange.
Maggie,
My #1 and #2 were the same as yours the first time I did the poll. Given the small differences between most of the GOP candidates, a lot of it comes down to how you weight each of the individual issues.
When I left all the Importance rankings at “average” I got a different result.
Interesting nonetheless……
Fred #1 for me, McCain #2. The thing’s obviously broken.
I think the distinction you missed is that the NSA program takes place in the service of a war, with none of the “wiretappings” admissible in court unless a warrant is obtained, and FISA followed. Or, to put it another way, the CiC acting as CiC against an enemy known for infiltrating and entrenching itself in the very societies it wishes to attack is different than, say, putting regulatory chips inside people’s thermostats.
And of course, the idea the the NSA overstepped its authority is one that is debatable, making the “authoritarian power grab” rhetoric a bit of question begging.
Or, if you prefer, a rhetorical canard.
Yeah, I said it.
The Get Offa My Lawn! Party: Now, more than ever.
And of course, the idea the the NSA overstepped its authority is one that is debatable, making the “authoritarian power grab†rhetoric a bit of question begging.
Interesting; the Europe the lefties so adore wiretaps like this with abandon, no warrant needed, with nary a peep from the left. Actually, they wiretap their own citizens commonly on very thin pretenses and almost no oversight.
Nothing to see here. Move along!
Since nobody in this thread said anything remotely resembling that rant, timmy, it might help if you identified just whose mouth you are putting words in.
If it weren’t for fact that were fighting a long existential threat from determined theofascists, I’d almost welcome Hill or Barry into the White House. It would be great fun to see cretins like Timmah’s head explode from the cognitive dissonance when either of them used the same techniques Bush has been using to track terrorists. You know, like Bill Clinton did. Or see either of their veeps as hot for rendition as Al Gore once was. Or hear their SoS tell everyone how dangerous Saddam was…wait, check that last one.
Jeff, would you care to pull a location on our inane little friend and see if it reasonably matches someone with your bootprint on his ass and the drizzle of Perfesser Caric on his chin?
I’m just sayin’, is all.
Actually, they wiretap their own citizens commonly on very thin pretenses and almost no oversight.
Nothing to see here. Move along!
Just need some audio to go with all that video they love so much .
Jeff,
Yes, but you used the word “canard” correctly.
Context is everything with words like “canard.”
…but proper linking is even more important, sometimes.
Or not. No Wikipedia links, I guess.
This’n’s a Texan, Pablo.
advocates the wiretapping of Americans without warrants
Gross and deceitful simplification, asshat.
authoritarian grab for power supported by you
How many voices are there in your head? Do you argue with all of them, or only the one that has conservative caricature painted on its forehead?
One might think that they would get embarassed posting this kind of inanity on these here innertubes. I guess that is why IJS is ashamed to attach an actual name to the comments. I would be embarassed too. IJS, sadly, no.
IJS – I apologize for assuming you were that fucktard timmah. It is not something to aspire to, but you have managed to re-create the same tone, condescension, and overall pedantic nature of that goat-fucker. I guess if you put a million monkeys in a room with typewriters for eternity, it was inevitable that another one would surface.
Jeff G – Good to see you around again. Hope all goes well with the thingie in your back. You are in our prayers. If I write guest columns for you on the MMA site about GSP would be the best MMA fighter of all time if he wasn’t French Canadian, do you think I could write off all of the PPV’s too? If not, that little Asian chick in my house is going to kill me.
I’d a ho once. She was my own private ho. When my wife found out, I had to give her back. Having your own private ho is a good goal in life, Jeff. It gives you something to look forward to, sort of like shingles.
And the obsession. Don’t forget that. A mirror fucking image, I tell ya. How frightening is that?
Thanks, Jeff.
More nuance-y questions:
What approach for federalism, e.g., Frederalism on abotion, RP on all sorts of issues, including gay marriage?
How far down do we drill? For example, what about a candidate who is pro-fence on immigration, but then doesn’t vote for the money to build it? Note that this causes comparison problems again for legislators vs. non-legislators.
Also, how wide a net?
Example: JG mentions the Contract For America, so should I be looking for Romney’s position on term limits? I’m somewhat certain Ric Locke would be interested, but there hasn’t been a lot of buzz around the issue in recent cycles.
Great to see you again, Jeff, and you are in my prayers as well.
“The Conservatives and libertarians I knew would be outraged by government usurping any power.”
Wasting your time, sir.
Only CLASSIC Liberals inhabit this domain
There is a difference. But it’s not like PW is exclusionary, the proof of which is that the likes cleo and IJS are free to comment.
likes of
I see some things haven’t changed. Like Semanticleo still not understanding classical liberalism. I’ve linked to discussions of it several times, but each time, it’s as if I never did, and so the same indictments are flung with the same ineffectual results.
The government is not “usurping” any power in the case of CiC acting on behalf of a country at war. Again, you can argue the finer points of the power of the President under AUF, or the Constitutionality of FISA, etc. But to pretend that the Executive under Bush has done anything other than try to TAKE BACK some of the powers that were its bailiwick, before other branches started coopting those powers, is laughable.
Incidentally, cleo’s belief that comments like his/hers are a waste of time would seems to make it unanimous. So glad to have cleo areeing with everyone else here.
BTW Jeff,
sent you an e-mail re the index.
Well crap, I was a Thompson guy too (96.4%).
Oh well, I could live with Romney OK (93.3%).
What surprised me was that I matched Clinton @ 67.4%. But then she lies…
You might find ontheissues.org an interesting jumpping off place for this sort of a project, although their charts are a bit overly granular and some of their conclusions are perhaps debatable.
Also illuminating would be to see how far left of the DNC’s own platform all of the major Democratic candidates are.
Me, I’m considering a career teaching women’s studies (post-colonialism, post-modernism or even native American studies). Or I may open a small French bakery and truffle shop. I’ve tried corporate America. The stench of white male power and the masculine language used around the water cooler made that whole scene unbearable. I need to work for change, or with my hands, just something green, that’s for sure. Mother earth is calling for me to follow her rainbows. I’ll find something. Out there, somewhere, there’s a revolution with my name on it. And I’m looking to happen.
I’m thinking we could do charts with ratings in ‘Dillos (positive) or Weasels (negative)….
It’s just one idea. I’ve got lots.
honest
Would they be gender-nuetral Dillos and Weasels? Would these animal figurines represent positive change and universiality? Would the charts incorporate the primary colors found in rainbows?
If so, I’m onboard.
See I get on a plane and when I get off the plane I am in a world where Fred quits like a big girl but he keeps my moneys and Heath is dead and the stock market is happy. Well I’m not happy. It’s all so sad. John McCain was never meant to outlive Heath. Oh. Well me neither I guess. You either, thor. But John McCain for sure. But Fred at least stopped Huckabee. President McCain. Give me a goddamn break.
Also I went to dinner from the airport and then drinks after I didn’t really fly all this time but the point is it’s all so sad is all.
happy is away from the computer and the world goes all to hell.
It feels like that. I have to go to bed cause they start early tomorrow but man, this is all kinds of wrong.
I feel a causal linkage, and suggest that is something that we should look into, ie. A) happyfeet has to travel, which results in B) really bad shit happening throughout the world.
JD – It’s sort of like wherever Al Gore goes, it gets cold. Strange that.
so, notsohappyfeet? hmmmm.
bittersfeet, perhaps.
bittersweetfeet
tragicfeet
Insulting the next great President of the United States of America while taking the good Lord’s name in vain. No need to drop and give 20 right now, you’ll be doing extra push-ups in hell.
I never saw that movie by the way. The one about the Idaho. I just know the song but I’m not sure what it means really. The song peoples come from where B Moe is from. But my point is that as metaphors go I think the private Idaho thing captures a lot really how a lot of the election talk or I guess viewpoints I’ve been taking in have been almost willfully divorced from an apprehension of the overwhelming gaming of the process so far by the media. We are all living in post-Katrina New Orleans really still, and I think it’s only not-McCain that can represent a defiance against a very undemocratic will-to-power media that’s not just contrarian or skeptical but in pursuit of a very explicit agenda. What this election is doing is ratifying the assertion that the global economy meaning mostly ours really should be completely refashioned along carbon-friendly parameters. It has nothing to do with stopping global warming, it has to do with fashioning a tool and a framework that will compromise sovereignty. Everything else is just yammer I think, so I guess I’m not big on the charting idea cause I think really there’s just that one thinger that needs charting cause the rest – immigration – healthcare – earmarks – what have you – this is all just sort of falling under the heading of shiny objects focus groups show responses to.
I never saw that movie by the way. The one about the Idaho.
One word: Don’t.
It’s the individualists not associated with Jim Henley’s type of libertarianism that will protect sovereignty, happyfeet.
Plus, he called me a despicable human being, so fuck him. Now that he’s becoming a Reason regular, I’m letting my subscription lapse. Because seriously, how far behind can Mona and Greenwald be?
In some respects, she’s almost pulled a reverse Groucho Marx on him. If she were any closer, she’d be in front of him.
hey, thx for getting the title right, Jeff.
I said “My Private Idaho” in another post.
but I saw the movie…a very sad but well made movie.
I note that you didn’t say you won’t vote for Mr. Romney. He looks like the likely nominee. I assume that you will?