-
Putting Heritage in DeMint Condition
May 10, 2013 | 57 comments
-
Military Might, Out of the Wilderness
May 8, 2013 | 115 comments
-
Not Wanting to Write About Nothing Good
April 30, 2013 | 126 comments
-
Perez Abomination Grows
April 23, 2013 | 81 comments
-
Tea Partiers for Freedom
April 16, 2013 | 12 comments
Streetcar Line
Policy Proposals Promised for President
Figuring who is worthy to carry the message.
I swear I have the winning strategy for a presidential candidate, if he’ll just call me. I have the issues — highly original issue proposals — all ready to go. I can advise somebody on the types of things to do to win Iowa, even though I’ve only visited Iowa once. For various reasons, I know New Hampshire a lot better than the average Joe, although as a native New Orleanian my affinity for the Granite State might seem a little out of place. South Carolina is eminently doable. Finally, defeating Barack Obama will be neither as easy as some conservatives seem to imagine nor as difficult as many Beltway pundits seem to think. It will be a hard task, but I can see the way clear to accomplishing it.
Keeping the mutually reinforcing, Reaganite, conservative coalition together really isn’t as hard as so many people make it out to be. Traditional values are not necessarily at odds with libertarian economic policies or with constitutionally guaranteed liberties. A strong defense in the national interest is neither some sort of “neocon” apostasy nor is it unaffordable.
Communicating American conservative principles isn’t rocket science. (Frank Luntz can tell you that!) But it can’t be done unless the communicator is sincerely and deeply a conservative (in modern terms, which really means a Madisonian liberal). If he isn’t a conservative, he needs to vamoose anyway: He (or she) is “not welcome here no more.”
To be clear, a conservative isn’t an ideologue. Conservatism stands opposed to hard-line ideologies. It’s a philosophy, not an ideology — which is not a “distinction without a difference.” (Please read Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer if you don’t know what I’m talking about.) Conservatism is a philosophy of practical application of timeless principles — with emphasis both on “principles” and on “practical.” Human nature does not readily lend itself to perfection, and our Madisonian Constitution does not readily lend itself to rapid political change without a few compromises along the way. Anybody who demands all or nothing in this system will end up getting nothing — and is not a conservative in the first place, because a conservative recognizes that no man and no man’s political creed is infallible, including his own. Of course some things are non-negotiable. Yet it is profoundly unconservative to fail to make constant attempts to figure out which few things are indeed non-negotiable, and to separate those from the many things that are semi-negotiable-but-worth-fighting-really-hard-for.
Any presidential candidate who doesn’t understand this should get lost. So should any activists who don’t understand these things. Such activists aren’t conservatives; they are radicals.
All of that said, there is nothing wrong with pushing the envelope on policy proposals, or on fighting hard for one’s political desires. It’s not the clarity of, or insistence on, the principles that is wrong; what is wrong is the “my way or the highway” attitude toward implementing those principles.
Here’s why all of this is important: because most voters sense whether candidates, at the core of their beings, understand the differences between principles and mere bullheadedness, between reasonableness and weakness, between clear policy preferences and mere political calculation. The right candidate will embody the better choices from among each of those above options. That candidate will exude those qualities without having to think about them, because he (or she) will genuinely live and breathe those qualities. And if he does, the voters will respond well. They responded to Reagan for just those reasons: because they rightly sensed that he combined firm adherence to principle with a reasonableness in pursuing it — that he was a man who didn’t mind taking some risks for deeply held beliefs, but who wasn’t going to lead us all off a cliff.
It is only such a man who could get away with the policy proposals I will advocate — because nobody else will be able to get beyond the initial conventional-wisdom response that the proposals are just too extreme. What I will propose is no more extreme — actually less extreme — than the Reagan-Kemp-Roth tax cut proposals appeared to be when they were first floated in the late 1970s and in 1980. But only the right candidate can sell them.
Yes, there is a way to enact major tax reforms, improve the financing of entitlements, stimulate the economy, and move towards a balanced budget, all in almost one fell swoop. Only the right candidate can sell it, but it is indeed eminently sellable in a political campaign.
Sorry to leave y’all hanging, in terms of what the actual substance is. But I haven’t been convinced I’ve seen the right candidate yet, although a few of the potential candidates might prove worthy. And if the wrong candidate tries to run with these ideas, they’ll be discredited and become useless. Mystery is therefore needed right now — but take heart, and hope: The answers are out there, and they are achievable.
About the Author
Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom. Follow him on Twitter @QuinHillyer.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (24) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Quin Hillyer
More Articles From Streetcar Line
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/24/policy-proposals-promised-for
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Hannah and Her Friends
- Of Wizards and Weapons
- The End of the Castros?
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
dave | 3.24.11 @ 7:15AM
In contrast, world Libertarians are working to abolish taxation and other projects, see http://www.Libertarian-International.org
Alan Brooks| 3.24.11 @ 10:14AM
Libertarians are fratricidal, they can't even get to first base. Here's my joke: how many libertarians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? one to call the other a statist, the other to smash the bulb and stalk out. Tell us this, how many libertarians in are in office, and how much have they reduced the size of govt? not too good, is it! But keep trying... knock yourselves out.
Alan Brooks| 3.24.11 @ 10:18AM
Libertarians are like Christians, waiting for Jesus to come back. however some day, some day, your price will come, a libertarian prince will arrive to save you and lead you to the New Jersusalem of Minarchy. Look at the sky, and your prince may Cometh.
Oldefarte| 3.24.11 @ 11:11AM
Shazam, geewillakers, gadzooks, that's about as funny AS A SCREEN DOOR IN A SUBMARINE!!!!
Oldefarte| 3.24.11 @ 11:16AM
Our prince/Jesus is already here.....and he goes by the name of Barry, right?????????
Alan Brooks| 3.24.11 @ 6:28PM
I as a muslim of course await Allah. I especially an excited about the other part of the 72 virgin equation. The 28 pre-teen boys, many non-muslims do not know this but allah supports faggotry in the after life and that is why I signed up.
Alan Brooks| 3.25.11 @ 11:19AM
Clint, if you keep doing ID theft, you can be traced by IPO.
Spoonman| 3.24.11 @ 7:15AM
Sounds like Newt should be running - this is his opportunity..
Ken (Old Texican)| 3.24.11 @ 7:46AM
Quin,
smarty-pants. (grin)
Seriously, I do understand what you are saying and agree wholeheartedly.
We need someone real, and we need someone right, (as in correct).
Perhaps more than anything, we need someone who can and will hammer the "nails" flush.
One of the most exciting things that has occurred recently in my opinion, is Sarah going to visit with India, and Israel...on their ground...to get their viewpoints. She did that quietly, across a coffee table with them.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.24.11 @ 9:01AM
We've had 50 years of liberal's "My way or the highway" and suddenly when real courage is needed, it's not appropriate, it would be too radical. Yeah, like that will work.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.24.11 @ 10:01AM
Here's what you get when you don't want to appear radical:
"Protecting nearly $5 billion in earmarks from cuts sends the wrong message," says Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
Even so, a congressional report shows they left $4.8 billion in earmarks untouched — and critics of congressional pork say they should go after it.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/w.....4_ST_N.htm
ncatty| 3.24.11 @ 9:34AM
"...but take heart and hope.." Where I have heard that before?
Mimi| 3.24.11 @ 9:39AM
Quinn...Yea, most of us feel like you, that..." We are not convinced we've seen the right candidate yet"
I'm hoping that more will take the plunge ...or some after things get going sound like.."THE ONE"
What I'm sure of is that OBAMA can certainly be defeated! People will go into that booth, Nov 2012 and some secretly HONOR their country and defeat him in MASSIVE NUMBERS !!!
Bob Miller| 3.24.11 @ 9:42AM
Above all, let's not be pulled into wrong thinking about our people and ideas because of incessant attacks by the leftist media. If we treat any potential candidate attacked enough by the media to be damaged goods, all our best prospects will be made into damaged goods---guaranteed!
George True| 3.24.11 @ 4:56PM
You hit the nail on the head, Bob. The reason Sarah Palin does not poll higher at this point is that the mainstream-leftist media conducted a fairly successful long-term character assassination job on her. As a follow-on campaign, they have now convinced many people who are still somewhat favorably disposed towards her (even a lot of Republicans) that she cannot win because she is now damaged goods because of the media smear job.
Rest assured, the left will do the same to ANY conservative candidate who looks like they might be getting the upper hand on the nomination. Regardless whether it is Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Herman Cain, Donald Trump, or whoever, the leftist fifth column MSM will orchestrate a relentless smear job on them. They want to pick our nominee for us, just as they did in 2008.
Oldefarte| 3.24.11 @ 11:18AM
As GWB's billboard proclaims, MISS ME YET?????
rightasrain| 3.24.11 @ 11:25AM
And I have all the answers to the secrets of life and I'm not telling either. You'll just have to take my word for it. Really, Quin, our indulgence only goes so far.
Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 2:42PM
Oh boy, Hillyer's been hanging around the preening peacocks of Washington for so long, he's developed a full flush of feathers.
Next thing we know, Hillyer will give up on finding the right candidate and simply announce his presidential run.
Isn't that what your mirror is really telling you Quin?
Sorry pal, Washington has many mirrors similar to yours.
Zbigniew Mazurak | 3.24.11 @ 5:02PM
This is a good article. Mr Hillyer hasn't given the specifics, but I shall.
The three key issues which will likely dominate the 2012 presidential campaign be: socialized medicine (as instituted by Obama), energy, and fiscal affairs. The vast majority of the electorate disagrees with Obama on these issues, even if, as liberals continually claim, Obama remains personally popular. These three issues are Obama's Achilles Heels. They can help the GOP win the White House. Only Republicans can remove these three issues from the table - by nominating one of the liberal Republicans approved by James Antle.
To use these issues against Obama credibly, Republicans need a candidate who favors conservative, workable solutions on these issues (e.g. drilling in the OCS and the ANWR), and who has credibly and consistently opposed Obama's policies on these issues. There is one candidate who meets these criteria: Sarah Palin.
Occam's Tool| 3.25.11 @ 12:05AM
Palin, West, Bachmann, Bolton. 4 candidates.
Kingofthenet| 3.24.11 @ 7:26PM
You see the PROBLEM for ANY Conservative running is this, you have to actually have a plan for what you are going to do when you get elected. The standard Rethug ideas SOUND terrible on the stump, it goes something like this: To the Seniors i promise to cut ALL your Entitlements, to the Young people, no School aid for you, to the Poor, Yup, i am going to cut all your stuff too.To the Middle Class, you will work more and bring home less. To the Union Worker, I HATE you and your good paying job and benefits. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.
WRJonas| 3.24.11 @ 7:47PM
Sarah appeared with Greta last night and seemed pretty much unfazed by the left wing attack against her. I cannot understand why Fox thinks replaying Bill Marer HBO attacks is a credible newsworthy policy. They should be treated just like the used toilet paper they are.
I think Sarah and Marco Rubio as VP would be a national winner.
sharon| 3.24.11 @ 9:52PM
Glad you see the way, the truth and the light...we sure need it! Thanks for the encouragement - need that too. Looking forward to seeing the right person capture the support of 'We the People' and right our ship!
Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 11:27PM
is good