Addressing the problems of the GOP

Two unnamed Republican pollsters/strategists talk to Charlie Cook.
They make two points which to me make sense. First, there's this:

"...[Harming the Republican brand has been] the shallowness of our policies. Republicans are a whole lot better at being against things than at being for things. That's a problem if you're in the majority. On topics that the center really cares about, such as education and health care, we do one of two things. We either avoid them like the plague and are scared to talk about them or, if we say anything at all, it is to propose a tax cut or a tax credit."

So what do we do? Our strategist goes on to say this:
"Here is another point from the post-election data: People really don't want to pay higher taxes. So, on the one hand, they want to have government address their problems and on the other hand they don't want to pay for it. This should be our niche: find solutions to problems like education and health care that spend government funds more efficiently, without spending more. That sounds much more like a winning strategy to me."

Makes sense. Another strategist, though, then goes on to make a point with which I disagree. He argues that Republicans should:

"...stop being [misguided] on immigration. We are alienating huge parts of the electorate, we are turning our primaries into single issue 'hate' contests and ignoring the single fastest growing bloc of voters in the country."

Wrong. Illegal immigration remains an important issue to a lot of people. It's only going to become a bigger issue in the years to come, as I'm certain that the Obama administration will relax enforcement of our immigration laws, and thus we'll have even bigger influxes of illegals into this country. And the fact is--and even recent, legal immigrants can be gotten to understand this--that a country must control its borders, that people must obey a country's laws, and that it isn't good for wages and it isn't good for our job situation to have persons here illegally making those situations worse. We must not demonize those here illegally or speak unduly harshly of them. We must find solutions to this problem that involve both enforcement of our laws and humane solutions. But we can't simply abandon the illegal immigration issue or abandon the principle that we must control our borders. We'd look ridiculous in doing so.

Conservatives seek to re-energize

Another article today, originating from the NY Times, about how Republicans and conservatives seek to map a way forward after the recent election.

Some quick reaction: first, moving left in any way can't be the answer. As I've said many times, people won't vote for Republican-democrat-lite; they'll vote for the real Democrats. And besides, moving left is an abandonment of principle.

Two: a big argument has to do with should Republicans and conservatives continue to focus on social issues, or change focus to economic issues?

Simple answer: why can't we do both?

Third thought: one thing we can do is talk more about what conservatives are FOR, not just what we're against. Yes, we're against high taxes and excessive regulation. But in this high-tech world, we should be in favor of encouraging investment into new tech stuff, alternatives to darn near anything, and reminding people--especially young people--of the fact that a government that gets out of your way helps bring about new inventions, new gadgets, and positive changes in peoples' lives. How about starting there?

More thoughts to come.

Still a strong pulse

George Will makes a good point today--the GOP still has a remarkably strong pulse:

"...the Republican Party retains a remarkably strong pulse, considering that McCain's often chaotic campaign earned 46 percent of the popular vote while tacking into terrible winds. Conservatives can take some solace from the fact that four years after Goldwater won just 38.5 percent of the popular vote, a Republican president was elected. The conservative ascendancy that was achieved in 1980 reflected a broad consensus favoring government more robust abroad and less ambitious at home -- roughly the reverse of Tuesday's consensus. But conservatives should note what their current condition demonstrates: Opinion is shiftable sand. It can be shifted, as Goldwater understood, by ideas, and by the other party overreaching, which the heavily Democratic Congress elected in 1964 promptly did."

Indeed. I mean, there were people talking about an Obama "landslide." Well, gaining less than 20 seats in the House, and about 6 seats in the senate, is hardly a landslide. Nor is winning 52-47% or thereabout in the popular vote. The feelings among Republicans and conservatives right now remind me a lot of how we felt in 1992, after Bill Clinton's victory.

And then came 1994. Chin up!