Besides coming to grips with the lukewarm presidential candidacy of Sen. John McCain, there are few questions roiling the online Right more than what the future holds.
Get the average conservative or libertarian talking, and you'll hear a variety of explanations for what went wrong. For the most part, most discussants seem to break down into two camps, one believing things are bad because allegedly conservative politicians have gone astray following the siren call of big government.
The other group blames the current state of affairs on technological ineptitude.
Both have some reason to their arguments, and yet both get it wrong. During the Bush era, the Republican Party at both the presidential and congressional levels seems to have acted less conservatively than before. This has been a great disappointment to many on the right. Unfortunately, they draw the incorrect conclusion that the sole reason the GOP's electoral fortunes look dim is because it hasn't been sufficiently conservative.
This is a tempting conclusion to reach, but it requires that one ignore that liberals have co-opted this argument for their party. Ask almost any liberal blogger, and they'll tell you the reason Democrats lost elections prior to 2006 was that they weren't liberal enough.
Both arguments cannot always be true. Each side does have its own ideological core of support. Appealing exclusively to that base is not a good long-term strategy, however - especially at the presidential level.
It is also slightly problematic to hear conservatives on the one hand reject the ability of politicians to effect "change" on a societal level and then at the same time to see the right put its faith in the ability of different politicians to keep themselves in line.
While more conservatism does not necessarily equal victory, it is also true that better technology does not, either. Superior technology never saved a bad candidate, as Presidents Howard Dean and Ron Paul can attest. Observing their losses, however, many on the right have drawn the wrong conclusion, thinking that the failure of either candidate to acquire the traction they needed was because engaging the Internet is not useful (beyond raising money) or that it only appeals to young people who don't vote.
—Matthew Sheffield is the creator and editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
My 2 cents
July 24, 2008 - 13:23 ET by jay_1975As a former Republican and current Independent, I have my own opinion. What drove me away was the blind following of the party line over personal values. The many mistakes made about Iraq and not high lighting the many successes there as well. The expansion of government and the endless spending of our money on needless programs. The failure to get bin Laden and expecting the Pakistani's to do the job for us. The weakening of our military on endless rotations and the lack of care for our wounded vets. The price of oil going up while the dollar goes down. These things drove me away. Is it all Bush's fault? No, but he has done little to fix it.
Matthew Sheffield - Are You Really A Conservative?
July 24, 2008 - 17:37 ET by zeestephenMatthew writes: "It's time for the Right to step up to the plate and forcefully articulate an agenda that addresses not only foreign policy and other traditional Right-friendly topics, but also issues like the environment, education, high-technology and government reform.....We'll have to do it eventually. Why not start now?"
Matthew, Conservatives have ALWAYS forcefully articulated an agenda on each of the issues you raise.
On the environment, America's air, waterways, and forests are cleaner and healthier than Europe's.
What exactly is it you think needs more attention or protection?
As to man-made global warming, Conservatives speak with almost one voice: "Where is the science?"
On education, America has had the highest level of spending in the world for at least 30 years.
Where and why should we spend more money?
Conservatives almost speak with one voice on education, too:
Vouchers, private schools, school choice, and home schooling.
You say Conservatives must address the "high-technology" issue.
I have no idea what that means.
Can you name one prominent Conservative who opposes high technology?
America has led the entire world in taxpayer funded Research and Development for 70 years.
Do you want more government R&D?
Do you want more government subsidies for unproved technologies?
Finally, you call for Conservatives to address the issue of "Government Reform."
We did that in 1994, and we won back the House and Senate in the greatest political upset since Truman beat Dewey in 1948.
I find it astonishing that you can make a list of the most important issues for Conservatives and not mention Social Security and Health Care.
These twin mega-disasters have obsessed Conservatives for decades.
A rock solid majority of Conservatives believe Social Security should be privatized, and that health care should be privatized to the greatest extent possible.
Most amazing of all, you make no mention of religious faith.
I am not a man of faith myself.
However, I completely understand that Conservatism is built on a foundation of Judeo-Christian beliefs.
If you ignore those beliefs, or if you short change them, then Conservatism cannot survive.
Matthew, to my eye, you are a secular Democrat by instinct.
Although you clearly reject the pacifism, anti-Americanism, and anti-business attitudes that are so visible in the Democratic Party, I see nothing in your essay that indicates you are comfortable with Movement Conservatives, either.
zeestephen
July 28, 2008 - 04:25 ET by Rush FanThank you for the excellent post. Mr. Sheffield obviously does not listen to Rush Limbaugh's radio program, something I would recommend for him to do if he wants to understand what conservatives believe. You accurately outlined the conservative viewpoint. Rush has mentioned NewsBusters on his program, and I believe he would be disappointed, as I was, in Mr. Sheffield's post.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"They are actively promoting the decline of America." ~ Rush Limbaugh on liberals and Democrats
It's the right overall message
July 29, 2008 - 18:36 ET by Matthew Sheffieldbut the wrong specific message.
We need to fill the gap with positive messages on these areas rather than simply saying the left is wrong. A mostly negative message will always fail as the candidacies of Al Gore, John Kerry, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole have shown.
Matthew
July 29, 2008 - 20:02 ET by Rush FanNow that I can agree wholeheartedly with you.
Let me take this opportunity to thank you for providing a forum for those of us who have been frustrated for many years with the state of the ‘old media’. It is especially important now that the far-left appears to have co-opted control of the Democratic party and the ‘old media’ has finally come out of their liberal closet into the open.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is no longer a media in this country. There is simply an established propaganda arm for the Democrat Party and any and all who relate to it in any way, elected and unelected." ~ Rush Limbaugh
its stll lack of
July 24, 2008 - 13:28 ET by TruthMongerits stll lack of conservatism plain and simple but thanks for playing matt
Lack of a strong defining conservative message
July 24, 2008 - 13:50 ET by buzzbeeThe last 8 years have been very dissapointing for me, as a conservative. Missing are the clearly defined goals of a conservative agenda and no one to lead.
As a college student attending the liberal University of Colorado, The Contract With America was very inspiring and something one could point to and say this is what Republicans will do, this is what they stand for. Now there is no central message and the Republicans let the Democrats define the message and lack the courage to stand up to them.
Drill here, Drill Now!
Just because the Libs said
July 24, 2008 - 14:56 ET by mattmJust because the Libs said their Democrat candidates weren't Liberal enough doesn't mean conservatives are wrong to say Republicans weren't conservative enough.
This is exactly what went wrong, and it's been going on since 1990 at least. But it's only part of the picture. The conservative philosophy doesn't lend itself to "mass" propaganda the way Liberalism does, because it's based on individual rights and responsibilities.
Conservatives also have a harder time getting their message out because the Libs control 90% of the media, the schools and every other information source, and also because the conservative philosophy is not monolithic, and is therefore tougher to package in a neat little bundle.
If the media and the schools had been at 50/50 Lib v. Cons. all along and the GOP kept to their conservative platform, America would be a Right leaning country, and would be much better in all aspects.
If the GOP wants conservative votes, they should be conservatives.
The 70's
July 24, 2008 - 16:27 ET by JDWConservatism in college during the 70's, no. I do not know if Gore had invented the internet yet but it was not there for us. There were no radio programs, all news media, and nightly news. The WSJ was about the only non-leftist outlet. A few in the house subscribed.
People must fight for their independence and prosperity in life. Yielding to the liberal philosophy negates any opportunity of achievement. Whatever schools teach, whatever the news media front pages, only you can get yourself there. And if you are on the track, why permit anyone or anything to get in your way?
JDW
SAPPY NEWS
DAILY WAVE
First, it is hard to believe
July 24, 2008 - 16:06 ET by toucheFirst, it is hard to believe that conservative positions would not have improved the Republicans standing to this point. The evidence I see is that the liberal democrats have been in power for two years and they have totally failed to push one liberal item forward. Meaning the conservative positions on all of the issues of the day have carried the real water. The people are not letting the dems win the day when it comes it actually enacting any of their non-sense. So why would wouldn't the Repubs benefit by actually pushing the conservative positions forward??? that is why many of us believe the repubs are losing support because they are runing from the winning positions...on everything.....
Somehow republican
July 24, 2008 - 16:32 ET by mattmSomehow republican politicians believe that they can lean left and gain votes, but they forget (like idiots- since the evidence is everywhere) that for every Lib voter they gain, they lose at least one conservative voter, maybe more...
Any Republican who sticks to his guns, is ridiculed and demonized. Very few people can take it, so they knuckle under...
In the first place,
July 24, 2008 - 16:27 ET by robert108In the first place, conservatives are not "the Right"; that would be the Black Muslims and the NeoNazis, for instance. Unless you regard the Constitution and the Founding Principles as "right-wing", of course. Eighteenth Century monarchs would find that humorous, I think.
Republicans cannot outdo the Left by absorbing principles...
July 24, 2008 - 16:37 ET by ThalpyRepublicans cannot outdo the Left by absorbing principles of the Left. I believe the Republicans are being crushed for two reasons: First, they have allowed their party to morph, for whatever reasons, into a party that is almost indistinguishable from their opponent, and second, when there is a battle worth fighting, Republicans are wimps. In politics and in life we must fight for what we hold dear. Republicans don't seem to hold much dear, and they can't or won't fight.
Conservative principles should draw support. After all, the Democrats are socialists.
For Better or Worse
July 24, 2008 - 16:50 ET by third eyeIts far easier path for a political party to simply oppose all the ideas presented by their rivals, than it is to think up new creative measures to improve and secure America. Sometimes the new policies work, and sometimes they don't. Such is the luck of the draw.
But Id rather be on the side that creates.
Great Post
July 24, 2008 - 17:07 ET by schmiettThe reason i left the party is Plain and simple Social "Conservatives" are not Conservatives. Social Conservatives Want a Bigger Government that will enforce there morals and relgion as law. To me they are no different then the Dems. The dems want the government to Regulate Business and the Enviroment. Social Conservatives want a bigger government to Regulate Peoples Private Lives. But both want Bigger Government. Plain and simple. I agree with a lot of values social conservatives fight for i just dont think the Government is the way to get it. Turning to the government is What the dems do it is what Communist do. Not True Conservatives. Conservatives think of Solutions outside the governmental Box. Take abortion for instance what would happen if all the time and money people had spent on trying to get the government to Ban abortion had been spent on Making our adoption Agencies the best in the world??? Beacons of hope, where distraught Parents would never have to worry about there kids ending up in the night mare which is foster homes. This is where The party lost it's way it let the communist social conservatives turn it into a Big Government Will help fix all our problems party.
I think you're confused by
July 24, 2008 - 17:55 ET by robert108I think you're confused by leftie propaganda: conservatives believe govt should not be involved in social goals; that should be left to independent individuals. Conservatives oppose social spending. While individual conservatives may support some social causes as individuals, they don't favor govt intervention. In reality, the dichotomy of "social" and "fiscal" conservatives is a false one. Conservatism is conservatism, period.
Not sure you are
July 25, 2008 - 11:10 ET by schmiettAre you telling me that Social Conservatives are not passing Bans on Gay rights? Or trying to stack the court to ban abortions? Trying to take over school boards so they can teach Creationism as science? It seems like Social conservatives grassroots is all about trying to get more government in peoples lives. But you are saying that is ok because it is your Values. That is why you are not a Conservative but a hypocrate. You want a bigger government as long as it enforces your values. You only have a problem with the Libs big Socialist government. I have a problem with all big government. They need to stay the hell out of peoples lives, period.
"wacky ideology" (of the Founders)
July 29, 2008 - 06:51 ET by sarcasmoSince we're going to go that route despite the evidence of inflation noted elsewhere, I think it's appropriate that the man (who, in the process of supposedly advocating the total disarmament of the USA if Matthew's article is to be believed, voted to go after Osama in Afghanistan) rebut. Or what would someone from that stupid ol' Wharton School of Business know? Everything's just fine in borrow & spend vs tax & spend land.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.