One objection I’ve encountered to my
column arguing that the growing DeMint caucus in the Senate is
a good thing: if Republicans have fewer than 60 votes (a virtual
certainty) a group of particularly uncompromising conservatives
could make the perfect the enemy of the good and empower John
McCain to cut deals with liberal Democrats.
My first reaction is that Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz were
not nominated in a vacuum. They defeated Republicans who were too
willing to compromise with Democrats and who were not sufficiently
strict constitutionalists. And in many cases, the establishment
Republicans they beat in their primaries would have been considered
conservative enough as recently as when George W. Bush was
president. So where is the center of gravity in the party?
If you are Lindsey Graham and you face a possible primary
challenge in South Carolina in 2014, would you rather side with Jim
DeMint and Rand Paul? Or would you rather vote with your buddy John
McCain and some liberal Democrats? Graham’s preferences may be the
latter, but his political interests are strongly aligned with the
former. If you are President Romney, is it in your interest to have
a McCain-Kerry policy agenda or one that is broadly supported by
the conservatives in your party? Again, Romney’s preferences may be
less important than his political incentives.
One area where a bipartisan moderates and McCain coalition could
carry the day is on the federal budget. (This scenario assumes a
President Romney.) The House-passed budget will almost certainly be
a version of Paul Ryan’s plan, perhaps nudged slightly to the left
for Romney’s benefit. This year five mostly moderate Republicans
voted against Ryan, but many conservatives expressed concern that
his plan didn’t cut spending or balance the budget fast enough.
But McCain voted for the Ryan budget. Rand Paul was the only the
only senator who voted against it on purely conservative grounds.
Whatever their concerns, DeMint and Lee voted for it. So did Pat
Toomey. And remember the 2012 debate happened when there was no
chance a Democratic Senate and president would ever have allowed
the Ryan budget to become law. Next year, if Romney is president,
the debate will be less theoretical.
Even here, having conservatives who won’t simply vote for
whatever budget is cobbled together by Romney and the Republican
leadership is helpful. The only way to get the most conservative
deal possible is to have at least some conservatives be a realistic
no vote if the GOP wants to spend too much. There is a risk of
allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good, but let’s face
it: the recent party’s recent track record on spending when
Republicans hold power hasn’t been close to good.
Libertyinfinite| 8.3.12 @ 1:39PM
Personally, I do not think that the republican party can be saved anymore. & we are only making things worse when we try to save it. It is too far gone, example A:Mitt Romney, & B: John Boehner.
We need to get rid of the republicans in D.C.. But here is the problem, most republicans in other lower governments are still very good.
But we won't survive if we continue to cling to republicans are they destroy us with liberalism, & somehow hope that us not doing anything will make them automatically do the right thing.
America will not survive much longer if we do not get a civil rebellion against the tyranny of both sides. We need to rise as a free people would, & tell them that they are finished. We need a Tea Party ticket, or America is done.
Why doesn't anyone remember 2008, & 2010? John McCain? & we are running a guy substantially lamer than him. How about our 2010 republican majority house? How it handed everything to the left, that the left asked for. & that was such a tough job, right? I bet Boehner & all of the other liberals know exactly what they are doing, & they will do it for as long as we let them.
We the people need to act like freedom matters. & know that we get as much out of freedom as we put into it. In a nation of marxist indoctrinated slaves, we need to rise, & tell them no they can no longer take everything they want, because we will be there. (not really gonna happen, but whatever)
Libertyinfinite| 8.3.12 @ 1:48PM
The right goes about recovering freedom wholly wrong. They always look to the people that can never help us, the ones in our government to help.
If the right can't learn that only the American People can recover a free civil society, then there is no hope for a viable future. It's not in them, freedom living or dying in in the American People, in us.
Bob Grant| 8.3.12 @ 8:07PM
"There is a risk of allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good"
---
So what happens when the "good" is the enemy of true conservatism?
"the good" was what got Bush and others in trouble.
Our economy is so screwed up - thanks in large part to Bush, the "good" - there's no room BUT FOR the perfect.
Anything less and we are FUBAR, if not already.