Republicans are Declining in Numbers
Written by Sam on August 13th, 2006I’m not the least bit surprised by this. This is what happens when a party loses its way.
Perhaps more precisely, the nation appears to be trending away from Republicans. During the month of July, Just 32.8% of Americans identified themselves as Republicans. That’s down from 33.5% the month before and just a tenth-of-a-point above the lowest level recorded over the past two-and-a-half years. These results come from Rasmussen Reports tracking surveys of 15,000 voters per month and have a margin of sampling error smaller than a percentage point.
The number of Democrats remained essentially stable—36.8% in July compared to 37.0% in June. The ranks of the unaffiliated grew to 30.4%. That’s the second highest figure since January 2004.
The number of Democrats has been consistent all year. The total range has been less than a single percentage point from a low of 36.1% in January to a high of 37.0% in June.
Republicans have suffered a loss of 1.7 percentage points since the beginning of the year.
The Republican Party has proven for several years now they only give lip service to the causes they supposedly support. There is no limited government under today’s GOP. Spending and debt have increased to historical levels. Billions of dollars have been thrown away into a failed MediCare system, the No Child Left Behind Act which is not the answer to solving America’s education woes, and to abuses of post Hurricane Katrina funds.
Bush promised to fix the solvency of Social Security to avoid its inevitable collapse, and yet, today we hear nothing. Bush promised to fix the tax code and make it simpler for all Americans, and yet, we have seen nothing. Amendment after amendment have been put up in the Congress by the few true Republicans that are still around to cut out the wasteful pork spending and they have been defeated overwhelmingly by a Republican controlled Congress. While North Korea and Iran get stronger and more of a threat every day the Republican administration does a song and dance, fearing any action that would not be PC. Yet, they wasted little time tearing through Iraq, a country that is certainly not a threat on the level of the Iranian regime.
To try and take peoples’ minds off of their indescretions, they shamelessly pander to the people with Constitutional amendments that would prevent homosexual marriage and flag burning, issues that are minor problems in our country and whose timing is nothing more than sucking up to the base. If only they went after the aforementioned problems with the same fierociousness.
People respect those who stand solidly on principles and are of an honest character. You may not agree with where they stand, but you will respect their honest convictions. The Republicans are no longer an honest party and their future vitality depends on those who believe in their true message to save it.
13
PM
Instead of offering the flag burning and gay marriage amendments that they know won’t pass Republicans should be working on lobbying reform and earmark reform.
They need to give people a reason to vote for them besides “Democrats are liberal.” Hopefully Hastert will retire soon and make way for some new leadership.
13
PM
People understand the Republicans are more controversial because of the war and unsure of our future success, that is the cause of the decline. We need to work harder to spread the message of progress in Iraq and talk about the US’s continuing economic strength, as well as the millions in jobs creation that President Bush hasn’t been getting credit for.
The decline will become worse if we lose the midterm elections, my friends. We need to work, hard.
13
PM
And Sam, you are tone deaf on the gay marriage issue. The radical homosexual agenda has enlisted Clinton appointees all over this country. In Massachusetts, the courts and the Democratic legislatures are doing everything they can to prevent the issue from actually reaching voters.
In Georgia just this past May, a judge overturned the 2004 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, a ban that received 76 percent of the electorate. 76 percent of the electorate.
In Nebraska last May, a federal judge struck down Nebraska’s ban on same-sex marriages.
In Utah, Governor Jon Huntsman is proposing marriage-like benefits to all same-sex couples in the state. It lost the first round by eight votes in the legislature but he’s bringing the issue back and lobbying for it consistently. To make matters worse, Huntsman is a Republican.
In Washington State, a superior court judge overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriages in 2004.
There are numerous examples all over the place, including many instances which were eventually overturned because we conservatives (like President Bush) mobilized on the issue and took the fight to voters.
13
PM
What makes you think lobbying or spending reform would do any better than flag burning or gay marriage amendments?
13
PM
So McCarthy, should be motto of the Republican Party be, “vote for us, lest you feel the wrath of liberal decline”? The Party has become nothing but a bunch of empty promises. Economic growth is great. Entitlement growth, out-of-control spending, no reform of any kind for anything, et al are not great. You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.
I for one am much more concerned with the size of the government and runaway spending than gay marriage.
13
PM
Here’s the challenge. A governing party needs to have positions on the issues. We can’t just say, we’re going to cut spending. Everyone says that in every campaign. As Republicans, we need to take specific positions on specific items. President Bush believes in the NCLB act for education and in the Medicare prescription drug plan, two plans that have many opponents. This was something W’ did in Texas and he wanted to take it nationally. It is something believes.
The question you need to ask is, is it something you believe in? If you oppose it, then fine. If you support it, then fine. The question either way is, how are we going to cut spending? Indicting Republicans on higher spending can only be possible if you yourself have a better agenda than they do. Do you support the House’s version of the spending bills? Do you want to cut farther? That’s the sort of thinking we need.
13
PM
You can support both the Medicare bill and NCLB and still find ways to cut spending. That’s what Bush wants to do. If it weren’t for the Democratic presence in the Senate, we would have a stronger hand in controlling spending right now. The House leadership is producing very nice bills.
14
AM
I think the decline in both parties is due to the overwhelming polarization in this country. Whether we want to admit it or not, many people are not hard liners on either side. That is why the McCains and Giulianis of the world garner soo much broad support with the masses.
I experienced this quite a bit during college. Students were actually scared to let you know they were affiliated with one Party or the other because they felt they would be ostracized by their peers. That was part of the reason why I created the Reagan Freedom Society. We can and will win on the issues. I don’t think we win by shoving “I’m a Republican” down peoples’ throat.
14
AM
The House leadership is producing very nice bills? You mean like the one combining a reduction in the Death Tax (when the House has always supported full elimination of it) with a raise in the minimum wage of over $2?
You can’t support the Medicare and NCLB bills and be a true conservative at the same time. It’s called the Constitution - read it sometime. Education is a reserved power for the states. Healthcare is not the government’s responsibility. Neither is socialist wage-setting. What part of “limited government” doesn’t the national Party understand?
14
PM
Yes, I mean the House leadership is producing very nice bills. They have been keeping spending under control. You raise the issue of the Death Tax. Do tell, how do you plan to repeal it? They have a plan.
Langley, about your #2 paragraph: do you believe you can win a presidential election with that platform? We can’t run on a platform if we can’t win on it.
14
PM
We can’t win with that platform? Tell that to the Reagan administration. Tell that to the House Class of ‘94 who ran with the downsize/elimination of the Dept. of Education as an issue.
So what are you saying? Are you in agreement with the likes of Arlen Specter, who proudly pronounces that the Republican Party is now a “liberal” party? If you don’t want to even acknowledge true Conservative causes, exactly what are you suggesting? More of the same? More big government “conservatism”? Why don’t you just flat out say it - you don’t believe in conservative efforts, because the Party’s electoral successes are more important.
Yes, I do believe that we can win with a platform (and actions) that follow true conservative beliefs. Your lack of spine, and willingness to just accept the norm, is disturbing and says a lot about the direction of the national party. With attitudes like that, no wonder the Republican party is getting smaller. Voters would rather vote Democrat and at least know exactly what they are getting, rather than follow the smoke and mirrors that the Chafee-embracing national party has seen fit to put forth in recent election cycles.
Elections don’t mean jack if you don’t govern based on the principles you run on. It’s that simple. Quit excusing big gov’t “conservatism” and see it for what it is - a mockery of true conservative beliefs.
15
PM
But Langley, you’re not arguing that NCLB or the Medicare bill should be rolled back. You’re dismissing them as big government and saying “that’s bad.” Well, maybe it is bad - to you. Tell us why it is bad. Tell the voters why Medicare should be rolled back. I have argued it is simply costing too much money and we need to throttle back on the expense issue.
That’s not what you’re doing. You, having been disillusioned by Republicans in Congress, want to simply “primary” them and run persons more in-tune with your views. Guess what? That’s not an electoral strategy. An electoral strategy of this sort *must* provide an argument to the American people. We need to make a case before they elect us. Republicans are right on the issues, but that is not enough to win an election.
15
PM
Let’s talk about Rhode Island. I would love to see Mayor Laffey become a U.S. Senator. It’s not gonna happen. Democrats have like a 3:1 voter registration advantage. He doesn’t have the money or the name ID to pull this off.
So what happens if the RINO loses? Lincoln Chafee is a bad example of this because he’s just useless, but the state GOP, county organizations, the RICRs, every conservative organization in the state will lose the confidence of donors in the state. Conservative organizations won’t be able to raise money. The College Democrats will have more, the College Republicans will have less. After all, why should anyone donate? They just lost every statewide race in Rhode Island! If you donated to help someone win, why are you going to donate if you think they’re gonna lose next time?
It can paralyze conservatives in that state for years. I can’t stand Specter. A Democrat would be worse because his liberal interest groups would flourish while conservative organizations would have no financial potency. Bottom line: there is more at stake in elections than a symbolic victory/defeat for each side. It actually makes a difference for the grassroots, on the ground, every day thereafter.
22
AM
the last comment I made didn’t get there. Censored?