New Yorker: "The Republican Identity Crisis After Trump" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 07:58:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  New Yorker: "The Republican Identity Crisis After Trump" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: New Yorker: "The Republican Identity Crisis After Trump"  (Read 2435 times)
Red Velvet
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,186
Brazil


« on: November 09, 2020, 12:27:33 AM »
« edited: November 09, 2020, 12:39:34 AM by Red Velvet »


In terms of what would bring more power in the long term to the party:

Reversal > Remnant > Restoration

Reversal path would make the Republican Party the better party so considering the people who are currently in it, I doubt it will ever happen even if economically left and socially conservative positions would be a really powerful combo of populism, directed especially to the big masses. Imagine democrats confused with a Republican calling them disgusting fake elites that don’t want to share their wealth with the working class? I kinda would live for the gag.

Remnant scenario is the best one that is achievable, keep being economically right and socially conservative like the party naturally is but keeping the populism in rhetoric that Trump brought in order to energize your base. You may get some (limited) credit with non-white working classes that don’t feel represented by the democratic party with the empty for-show speech while keeping the policies the current establishment is comfortable with. The only bad thing of this is that empty populism gives you short-term credit only and people will eventually grow tired after divisive rhetoric without receiving any real gains, it’s easier to stick the argument that you’re just “mean”.

On the reversal scenario you can get away with being divisive much easier because you show with policy/actions you care about the people, pushing the narrative you’re the “good side” and that it’s the other side (democrats) being divisive by not wanting people in rural areas to have the good stuff. The fun of reversal is that Republicans could say something like “Working class people won’t have their taxes raised, it’s people like Hillary Clinton who will have to pay for every stuff we’re going to do, we’ll milk them dry just like they always did to you”. It’s same populist rhetoric Trump used against places like Mexico, but now directed to wealthy unpopular elites in order to push for economically left agenda of taxing the rich.

Restoration is the most boring one and the one that goes against the current trends and winds (It’s not the Reagan 80s anymore), but could possibly happen if there is no adequate leadership for the other two. But if republicans really don’t want to become irrelevant with non-white voters that are continuously growing, it’s absolutely the worst path. On the other hand, it’s the better one to regain white high-education voters that even if they lean conservative, chose Biden over Trump. Which may not be as relevant in the long term, but still are very important.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.