Ace of Spades, Conservative Blogger of the Year, on the repeated assertions that social conservatives are a net political liability to the GOP:
Libertarians/social liberals sometimes insist that all we need to do is ditch the values program of the conservative agenda and then we start winning. This is asserted time and time again, even when, say, Prop 8 wins in socially-liberal California. Oddly, it is asserted that running on a plank that commands 53% support even in a socially-liberal state is a losing proposition.<
I’m going to single out Ryan Sager as Johnny Nonsensical One-Note on this point, because he keeps writing the same column over and over, with the same massive hole in logic that is never filled.
It’s clear that Ryan Sager is a libertarian/social liberal — he never tires of informing us so — and it is therefore quite clear that he’d prefer a dream party that perfectly tracked his own policy impulses. What he always seeks to prove, however, and always fails at so doing, is that it is electorally plausible to follow his prescriptions.
This goes back more than 40 years to Phyllis Schlafly urging Republicans to offer America “a choice, not an echo.” If the Democratic Party is liberal (and it is) and if liberalism results in bad policy (and it does), then clearly opposing liberalism is the GOP’s best long-term strategy even if such opposition is unpopular in the short term.
But by all means let’s keep ignoring a winning issue because some “moderates” want the NYT to like them. I mean, we have so many winning issues at the moment, we can afford to be choosy.
As Casey Stengel said, can’t anybody here play this game?