Which Side of the Tent Should You Be On?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

I have been thinking about the RI GOP situation for a while. I’m one of those people who agree that it would probably be better if the Republicans were a stronger party, that they could actually threaten the Democratic agenda in the state, etc., etc. A problem, I think, is that there are plenty of people who feel this way, but simply would never vote for a Republican. And they’re not wrong to do that (despite what Republicans might say). A great number of Rhode Island voters legitimately dislike Republican policies. Believing in multiparty democracy won’t change that.

Combined with this are perpetual complaints that Rhode Island voters are too unthinkingly partisan, pulling the master lever (metaphorically) the moment they see “Democratic Party”. We also have John Loughlin pointing out that Democrats like Arthur Corvese would be Republicans in any other state; essentially saying they can’t overcome Democratic inertia in the state. Likewise, there are plenty of Democratic voters who point out that Democratic success in RI has led to more than a few Democrats-In-Name-Only. I’m sure the accused Democrats would beg to differ.

Anyhow, if the RI GOP legitimately believes this is the case, I have a proposal for the Republicans: disband and become Democrats.

By adhering to this philosophy of entryism, Republicans would achieve all of their current aims. They would gain more power by being able to ally with conservative Democrats. They would gain the ability to check Democratic policy. They would functionally remove the master lever as a political evil. Essentially, they’d make the Democratic Party a nonpartisan political party. Yes, the primary would become the election, but it pretty much has been anyway, with the battle between the left and right wings of the Democratic Party.

Who knows, they might actually get one of their own made Speaker or Senate President.

Here’s the issue at heart: do Republicans care more about their party or more about their ideals? If they care more about their party, they’ll remain Republicans, essentially declaring tribal identity superior to principles. If they care more about their principles, they’ll do what it takes to win. They’ve tried the separate party thing, and it failed.

Liberals learned the same lesson in 2000. Since that point, liberals and progressives have eschewed third party politics in favor of primary battles for control of the Democratic Party. RI Republicans could use the same tactic.

Another way to look at this is as the “Andrew Jackson” strategy. RI Republicans could be described as ascribing to a “Rhody Reagan” strategy, in which a true conservative arrives to lead them to glory. But a Jackson strategy, forcing a split within the single dominant party based on ideology might be more successful; much as Andrew Jackson did with the Democratic-Republican Party, leading to the formation of the Democratic and Whig Parties.

At the end of the day, it’s about where you’d rather be in the political world: inside the tent pissing out, or outside the tent getting pissed on.

Rhode Island Republicans Want To Lose Elections


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

After the shellacking on November 6th, political voices across the ideological spectrum called on the Republican Party of Rhode Island to adapt or die. Words like “moderate,” “women,” and “Latinos” were thrown around, often with reckless disregard for their meanings. Appeal to these voters, so the story goes, and the Republicans will regain competitiveness.

Now, maybe the Republicans can swallow their revulsion towards immigrants, slap some lipstick on that elephant, and somehow pretend they’re alright with government helping people out and not mandating what can and cannot be done in the bedroom; but I really doubt it. That’s just too much change.

Americans got the Full Monty of Republican radicalism in 2012. And they straight up rejected it. Todd Akin’s “legitimate rape” comment wasn’t something new; Republican candidates have been using pseudo-science for years to justify their positions. Same with Mitt Romney’s 47% speech. One doesn’t have to look very far to find that kind of thinking; if you don’t watch Fox News, read the comments on the Providence Journal or GoLocalProv.

The other thing is that the RI GOP has a great hatred of Rhode Island and its people. Certainly, most of their candidates tend to know better than to express that outright. But I guarantee you the nativist comments on the Journal‘s site aren’t coming from Democrats. I’ve scrolled through enough comments to know that insulting Rhode Islanders’ intelligence is probably what passes for sport among these Republican commenters. That’s if they’re not actively encourage us to flee our homes.

“Surely Sam, these are the worst elements of the Party, on a medium with virtually no filters,” you might protest. That’s probably true, I’m sure most Republicans are good-hearted folks who just want the best for everyone. But here’s the problem: I’m not seeing those good-hearted folks. I’m reading horrible words written by really terrible people. That’s the Republican Party I see every day.

Not “moderate,” “women,” or “Latinos.” As if you can compete solely on those voters. “Blacks,” “the poor,” “young people.” All won by Democrats by significant margins, but ignored by Republicans. In fact, Republican commentator Travis Rowley asserts that Republicans don’t have to appeal to any of the former types of voters at all! Latino and women voters will magically fall in line with Republican values.

Could that be more delusional? Latinos have been in this country since Texas was annexed (probably before), and the Mexican-American War added thousands more. The point being, it’s been about 170 years. And women have been voting for nearly a century. You’d think they would’ve come around by now. You’d think Republicans would be gaining their votes, not shedding them.

Perhaps so few Republicans ran in RI because they felt that competing in the democratic process was beneath them. Those filthy, stupid citizens of this state get to vote? The nerve of them!

Kidding aside, Republicans have spent years denigrating community organizers and even longer denigrating union organizers. Those people don’t sit idly by every election. They take time off, and they go work for candidates who will help them. Their jobs are to organize some of the most difficult people to organize, and/or in the most hostile of conditions. They ain’t idiots when it comes to getting people to turnout for things. But since Republicans have written off unions, and organizing in general, they wouldn’t know that organizing really does matter.

What does the party of privilege know about organizing? What does a party so hostile to the very concept understand about it? The lessons of 2008 permeated nearly every campaign for every Democratic candidate across America. Look for 2012’s lessons to likewise be applied. Democratic campaigns are going to get more sophisticated.

But there conservatives go, telling themselves it was because Mr. Romney was too moderate. Or, laughably, it was because he was “progressive”. Or Democratic “lies”. Not that the GOP is becoming increasingly unpopular and increasingly outdone on the electoral ground game.

American conservatives are starting to parallel German conservatives in the 1920s; unable to fathom their loss in World War I, they made up excuses for how the German Empire could’ve been defeated rather than re-evaluating the ideals and policies that led to that defeat. Likewise, Republicans have a handy set of excuses for their defeats, born of the alternate reality they created during the campaign, and are showing an unwillingness to re-evaluate the ideals and policies that brought them to this mess.

I don’t think the RI GOP can change. I don’t think they have it in them. I think they’re content to lose.

Rhode Island Republican Party On Life-Support


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
No Republicans Button
Apparently, Rhode Islanders don’t let Rhode Islanders vote Republican, either.

On Election Day 2012, there were 786 candidates for all offices across Rhode Island, from U.S. Senator to Town Sergeant. According to a list provided by the Secretary of State’s office, the make-up was such:

  • 301 Democrats
  • 209 Republicans
  • 116 Independents
  • 4 Moderates
  • 1 Libertarian (Independent)
  • 1 Vigilant Fox (Independent)
  • 154 candidates for nonpartisan offices

In evaluating partisan strength, we need to put aside the 154 nonpartisan candidates and the offices they ran for, merely because nonpartisan offices don’t identify party affiliation. Including the federal offices contested (not including the U.S. Presidency), there were 373 partisan officials elected in 2012 (not all offices are contested in a given election year, the total number of offices in this state is at least 505 and the 1992 Census of Governments by the US Census Bureau put the total number of elected offices at 1186).

How did the parties do? Well, of the 301 candidates put up by the Democrats, 244 of them were elected; a win rate of 81.06% per candidate. The Republicans? Of their 209 candidates, just 96 of them made it to elective office, a win rate of 45.93%. Political independents placed 33 candidates, winning 28.45% of the time. The Moderates (and everyone else) had a win rate of 0%.

Basically, with no organization behind them, political independents did about half as well as the Republicans, despite that party’s over-hyped “Strike Force”, their poorly-constructed/conceived “Rhode Island sucks” website, and chairman Mark Zaccaria’s “less-is-more” strategy (which I criticized back in June). Deep organizational/strategic thinking or cheap gimmicks?

The answer is clear from the results: Republicans in Rhode Island were crushed in 2012. With only 11 members in the General Assembly, it is no longer tenable to think of Rhode Island as having two major parties with minor parties like the Moderates and Greens. Instead, we need to think of Rhode Island has having a primary party, the Democratic Party; a secondary party, the Republican Party; and tertiary parties like the Moderates.

Despite the insight to the RI GOP’s issues provided here by Patrick Laverty (running inexperienced candidates for statewide office), he misses the deeper structural problem for Republicans: they’ve largely ceded much of the state to Democrats and independents (a problem exacerbated under Mr. Zaccaria’s time as chair). If you lived in all but one of Pawtucket’s six city council wards or House District 46, after you completed the federal office section of your ballot there wasn’t a single Republican anywhere down ticket.

Republicans may feel strong in towns like East Greenwich, West Greenwich, and Scituate (towns where the majority of voters voted straight Republican for President, U.S. Senator, and U.S. Representative), but even in these towns, Democrats contested town-wide offices and majorities of voters voted for the occasional Democratic Assembly candidate (in East Greenwich, they picked Mark Schwager; West Greenwich went with Leo Raptakis and Lisa Tomasso; and Scituate returned Michael Marcello).

A strategic problem for the Republicans is that they don’t appear to have a plan to actually fix Rhode Island’s problems, and the only ideas they’ve expressed are an anathema to the majority of Rhode Island’s voters. Without an appealing plan or vision, Democrats will continue to accrue the state’s new talent and fresh blood in politics, while the Republicans will remain a party adrift and rudderless. The only question is whether the party will finally drown under a tide of blue, or find a way to reform and provide a serious challenge. It’s a project that will take decades.

 

CORRECTIONS: An earlier version of this article missed that there were four expressly partisan Moderate Party candidate. It also failed to give a justification for not counting nonpartisan offices. Thank you, Ted Nesi.

An earlier version also incorrectly referred to Rep. Michael Marcello as “Phil Marcello”.