Skip to content

What Will Remain Of The Republican Party Philosophy?

March 22, 2016

Far be it for me to defend the current Republican Party.    I can not abide their actions or intent most of the time.

But when it comes to the purpose of a political party and who should control its platform and messaging there are many folks like myself from the other side of the aisle who can legitimately weigh in and offer a word or two.

Every party desires new voters and robust energy.  But what can not be abided is a wholesale take-over of a party by interlopers who have no real desire to make the party better or even understand the basic reasoning for the party in the first place.  While it is true that in time interlopers can become members and a party can develop into something different there should be no tolerance for the hijacking of a party.

I have issues with how Bernie Sanders found the Democratic Party just in time to run for president.  The whole nation is paying attention to how Donald Trump is placing his fingerprint and those of his clueless followers onto the party of Lincoln.     No one can be comfortable with the angry ones who seem to think they have a right to the keys to the party just because they have some steam to blow off in 2106.  That is not what those who have worked in the trenches of party politics for decades know to be the way things are done.

Today Gerald Seib hits a homer in his Wall Street Journal column.

Yet the charge by Mr. Trump and his supporters isn’t merely an attempt to win the nomination; it’s also an effort to change what the party is about. It represents an attempt at a hostile takeover that, if successful, would change not only who leads the GOP, but also what it means to be a Republican.

How, for example, would a party that traditionally has stood for free trade alter its position if its nominee has espoused punitive tariffs on imports from China? How does a party whose members have declared religious liberty a core issue square that belief with a nominee who has called for surveillance of mosques?

And how does a party whose business wing has called for expanded use of H-1B visas for skilled workers square that position with a nominee who has called for reducing the program?

These positions would require re-evaluation of some basic Republican doctrines. They represent changes that, as Mr. Trump has been saying, could draw new members into the Republican Party—but also could drive away some Republicans who can’t abide the new direction.

One Comment leave one →
  1. March 23, 2016 8:08 AM

    There are only two questions to ask any Republican Candidate for Office. First, had you been a member of Congress in 1983 would you have supported a Declaration of War Against Iran after Iran murdered 241 Marines in the Lebanon Barracks Bombing of 10/23/83? Also, would you have voted to impeach President Reagan when his administration sold weapons to the Murderers of these Marines in 1985? The Barracks Bombing Case is Before the Supreme Court this 2016 Term.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: