Whatever happened to the Constitution Party?

[AltWorlder]

They used to be a more powerful third party in the '90s, right? It seems like these days only the Libertarians, Greens, and whatever high-profile independent (McMullin in 2016, potentially Schultz in 2020) are getting any appreciable third party support.

[Grassroots]

After the tea party, most of the constitution party's limited supporters funneled themselves into the republican party.

[RINO Tom]

I say this out of ignorance, but the Constitution Party strikes me as a bunch of your "I'm a libertarian, but I'm actually just a social conservative that uses 'small government' and 'the constitution' when it suits my cause" types.

[Leinad]

If you liked the economic policies of a white teenage dude circa 2007-2012 (I know from experience lol) and the social policies of your grandparents, you'd join this party. The former got jobs and the latter started going to bingo again, so it fizzled out.

[Agonized-Statism]

Side effect of political brinkmanship. It's a "with us or against us" era, so the third parties are losing steam. Most remaining third partiers are flocking to the "big" alternatives, the Libertarians and the Greens, but I don't think they'll last long because the Republicans and the Democrats will swallow them too.

[AltWorlder]

In retrospect, the Republican Party drifting further and further into the right (evangelicalism under Bush, movement conservatism with the Tea Party, and anti-immigration hardline borders security and economic nationalism under Trump) probably ate up the Constitution Party's distinguishing characteristics.

I see parts of the Democratic Party becoming more socialist or Green-focused, but I think the Libertarians still have no home among both parties. And where do socially conservative/fiscally liberal people go?

[Agonized-Statism]

And where do socially conservative/fiscally liberal people go?

I'm one of them. We drift angrily with no representation in government. Too few in number for anyone to care about.

[Leinad]

fiscally liberal

To be fair both parties are pretty "fiscally liberal."

[AltWorlder]

I meant economically progressive, in the sense of how American liberals want to use gov't spending to create social welfare programs.

[AltWorlder]

"God and Country - 36 Hours with the Dying Embers of the Constitution Party" is an excellent article from MTV.com of all places, published back in the 2016 election. Really great coverage of the CP convention and showing how that third party has drifted into irrelevance.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Gary Johnson elected Trump in 2016 and the Constitutional party along with the Libertarian party has been consumed by the Trump party. Once Trump loses in 2020, the 3rd parties are free to reform, again

[Sam Smith]

In retrospect, the Republican Party drifting further and further into the right (evangelicalism under Bush, movement conservatism with the Tea Party, and anti-immigration hardline borders security and economic nationalism under Trump) probably ate up the Constitution Party's distinguishing characteristics.

I see parts of the Democratic Party becoming more socialist or Green-focused, but I think the Libertarians still have no home among both parties. And where do socially conservative/fiscally liberal people go?

LOL.

[AltWorlder]

Trump's border hawk policies are objectively to the right of the soft on border policies of the Bush era. When Bush was president only Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter were obsessed about illegal immigration.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Trump's border hawk policies are objectively to the right of the soft on border policies of the Bush era. When Bush was president only Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter were obsessed about illegal immigration.

Not true: Jeff Sessions, David Vitter, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, Wayne Allard for the Senate, as well as several people in the House: Sue Myrick, Virgil Goode, JD Hayworth, Dana Rohrabacher, Lamar Smith, Elton Gallegly, Brian Bilbray, Sam Graves, Steve King (he was just less vocal about it then), and many many others cared about it.

It is also worth noting that the Denny Hastert/Tom Delay controlled House advanced an enforcement only bill in 2005, which lead to mass protests by immigrant rights groups in early 2006. The mentioned Senators were at the forefront of the opposition in 2006 and in 2007 when the Senate pushed Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

The failure of the 2007 debate coincided with McCain campaign's temporary collapse and the high point of Mitt Romney's bid (when he had leads in IA, NH, MI And NV), while Rudy dominated the irrelevant national polls. Fun times! If Mitt Romney had any significant appeal outside of rich and middle class "Conservative" suburbs, he would have run away with the nomination at that point. His narrow base though allowed him to be knocked out when the vote consolidated to Huckabee on one side and McCain on the other. 

[AltWorlder]

Trump's border hawk policies are objectively to the right of the soft on border policies of the Bush era. When Bush was president only Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter were obsessed about illegal immigration.

Not true: Jeff Sessions, David Vitter, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, Wayne Allard for the Senate, as well as several people in the House: Sue Myrick, Virgil Goode, JD Hayworth, Dana Rohrabacher, Lamar Smith, Elton Gallegly, Brian Bilbray, Sam Graves, Steve King (he was just less vocal about it then), and many many others cared about it.

Sorry, I meant they were the only presidential candidates who cared about it. Though I suppose in 2012 Virgil Goode did run under the Constitution Party.

The failure of the 2007 debate coincided with McCain campaign's temporary collapse and the high point of Mitt Romney's bid (when he had leads in IA, NH, MI And NV), while Rudy dominated the irrelevant national polls. Fun times! If Mitt Romney had any significant appeal outside of rich and middle class "Conservative" suburbs, he would have run away with the nomination at that point. His narrow base though allowed him to be knocked out when the vote consolidated to Huckabee on one side and McCain on the other. 

It's interesting that for a moment after 2008 Sarah Palin, who's not much of a border warrior, was the movement conservative icon from that election. Was Mitt Romney for border enforcement already back then before 2012? If so it's interesting how that topic didn't become a big issue yet, I suppose the Iraq War overshadowed it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Trump's border hawk policies are objectively to the right of the soft on border policies of the Bush era. When Bush was president only Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter were obsessed about illegal immigration.

Not true: Jeff Sessions, David Vitter, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, Wayne Allard for the Senate, as well as several people in the House: Sue Myrick, Virgil Goode, JD Hayworth, Dana Rohrabacher, Lamar Smith, Elton Gallegly, Brian Bilbray, Sam Graves, Steve King (he was just less vocal about it then), and many many others cared about it.

Sorry, I meant they were the only presidential candidates who cared about it. Though I suppose in 2012 Virgil Goode did run under the Constitution Party.

The failure of the 2007 debate coincided with McCain campaign's temporary collapse and the high point of Mitt Romney's bid (when he had leads in IA, NH, MI And NV), while Rudy dominated the irrelevant national polls. Fun times! If Mitt Romney had any significant appeal outside of rich and middle class "Conservative" suburbs, he would have run away with the nomination at that point. His narrow base though allowed him to be knocked out when the vote consolidated to Huckabee on one side and McCain on the other.  

It's interesting that for a moment after 2008 Sarah Palin, who's not much of a border warrior, was the movement conservative icon from that election. Was Mitt Romney for border enforcement already back then before 2012? If so it's interesting how that topic didn't become a big issue yet, I suppose the Iraq War overshadowed it.

Romney's national profile was built off border hawk positioning. In 2006 the dominant contenders for GOP were Rudy and McCain. Both had appeal to suburbs and both supported amnesty/comprehensive immigration reform.

Romney got in and essentially ran to their right on immigration and host of other issues. But it was immigration that allowed for his message to stick in spite of all the other weaknesses that his campaign had, it was one trump card he had, even against Huckabee who passed in state tuition benefits for illegals (Romney campaigned against magnets for illegal immigration and this was one such magnet).

Identity mattered a lot and it still does. Romney is a candidate tailor made for a narrow niche of voters, the kind that dominated Orange County, Pheonix/Denver/Las Vegas/Atlanta Suburbs. Rich, Reaganite Boomers, who were concerned about immigration from a mostly crime and demographic tension standpoint (Trump approaches it from an economic and demographic tensions standpoint). McCrory ran a very similar campaign to Romney's in NC in 2008, promising to crackdown hard on "crime, gangs and illegal aliens". McCrory way outperformed McCain in metro Charlotte area and especially the Charlotte suburbs.

Huckabee didn't really appeal to these more high end voters as he was more of a down market candidate who scared Romney supporters. They viewed him as a pro-life liberal who would spend like crazy and get away with it because he was "more pro-life". In terms of identity though, Huckabee comes across as one of the people in a place like rural Missouri or Georgia, while Romney "looked like the guy who comes to lay you off from your job" as Huckabee put it.

If you think about the Southern GOP as being divided between two groups:

1. Sort of a low country, high end fiscal conservative (many of whom tended to be more in favor of immigration and trade), and were more pro-war. These people are the political heirs and they themselves in some cases, the people who first went Republican in the South. Transplants, middle class professionals, military and ex-military, and while religious it wasn't to the exclusion of the other points. These are the heirs of the Thurmond voters in 1948.  

2.  Socially Conservative populists, who tended to favor pork barrelling politicians and were more populist on trade and later immigration issues, while also having an isolationist history. They derive from two places, ancestrally Republican mountain vote in places like Tennessee and also up country whites that had only joined the GOP post Clinton. This latter source created great against for those in category one and Mark Sanford (most definitely from group 1), lamented the ex-Democrats who joined because of abortion and got elected to the legislature only to continue their big spending ways.

Huckabee was perfect for group number and Huckabee criticized Bush for having a "bunker mentality" on Iraq, was accused of being a big spending "pro-life liberal" by Romney supporters and had raised taxes in Arkansas.

It is less well known, but McCain's family has deep south roots in Mississippi and thus was very strong with the former low country group. McCain was very supportive of the military, fiscally conservative and against pork, while generally favoring reform and thus being at odds with the good ole boy system that was dominant in group 2.

Romney's narrow niche comes in between them appealing strongest to rich, Reaganist suburbanite boomers, who rather then seeing immigrants as welcomed housed hold servants and field workers, saw them as a threat to their political hegemony. They also viewed Huckabee as being too populist and McCain as too moderate. You see this divide strongly appear in Georgia, Missouri, and Tennessee.








SC, though Romney wasn't a factor here.


The suburbs come down to a battle between McCain and Romney, while the rural areas were between McCain and Huckabee. Huckabee trailed way behind in the suburbs and Romney trailed way behind in the rural areas. Since McCain could compete in both areas, McCain ended up in a stronger position then either Romney or Huckabee and became nominee because of it.

[darklordoftech]

The Constitution Party is a party of paleocons, so when Pat Buchanan and the paleocon movement fizzled out, so did the Constitution Party.

Fun fact: Pat Buchanan threatened to run for the Constitution Party’s nomination if Bob Dole picked a pro-choice running mate.

[AltWorlder]

I'm wondering if Trump's victory, and his embrace of economic nationalism, border security, and national sovereignty/foreign isolationism, has sapped the paleocon movement by bringing it directly into the GOP. Hence the California AIP endorsing him in 2016 instead of bothering to run their own candidate. The Constitution Party will probably grey out on their own, but doubtless many erstwhile CP supporters- or disaffected Republican politicians who would've left the GOP to join them- will just vote for Trump and so marginalize the CP further.

[Sam Smith]

I'm wondering if Trump's victory, and his embrace of economic nationalism, border security, and national sovereignty/foreign isolationism, has sapped the paleocon movement by bringing it directly into the GOP. Hence the California AIP endorsing him in 2016 instead of bothering to run their own candidate. The Constitution Party will probably grey out on their own, but doubtless many erstwhile CP supporters- or disaffected Republican politicians who would've left the GOP to join them- will just vote for Trump and so marginalize the CP further.

Trump fails on Limited Government. Paleocons oppose the welfare state Trump doesn't.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Didn’t the Party endorse Trump in 2016?

[Fuzzy Bear]

And where do socially conservative/fiscally liberal people go?

I'm one of them. We drift angrily with no representation in government. Too few in number for anyone to care about.

We used to go to the Democratic Party.  Now, the Democratic Party has made social issues their line of cleavage with the GOP.

[Agonized-Statism]

And where do socially conservative/fiscally liberal people go?

I'm one of them. We drift angrily with no representation in government. Too few in number for anyone to care about.

We used to go to the Democratic Party.  Now, the Democratic Party has made social issues their line of cleavage with the GOP.

I no longer belong to that group. It's a tenuous position that's desolate in the political landscape for a reason. It's hard to justify economic egalitarianism without the same in social issues, and likewise with hypocritical conservative anti-corporatism.

[Fuzzy Bear]

And where do socially conservative/fiscally liberal people go?

I'm one of them. We drift angrily with no representation in government. Too few in number for anyone to care about.

We used to go to the Democratic Party.  Now, the Democratic Party has made social issues their line of cleavage with the GOP.

I no longer belong to that group. It's a tenuous position that's desolate in the political landscape for a reason. It's hard to justify economic egalitarianism without the same in social issues, and likewise with hypocritical conservative anti-corporatism.

 

By social conservatism, I mean several things:

1.  Pro-life/anti-abortion.  I actually view this as a liberal position, the position of defending the human beings least able to defend themselves.

2.  Pro-family.  By this, I mean that the two-parent biological nuclear family ought to be encouraged, in that it is the form of family organization that provides the best outcomes in the aggregate in terms of happier and more successful individuals, and society being enriched by individuals with greater self-reliance and personal responsibility, the two (2) virtues most needed to maintain liberal democracy.  I believe that public policy should encourage two (2) biological parent family formation with incentives not given to others. 

3.  Pro-Immigration Restrictions.  By this, I mean we ought to affirm our immigration laws and enforce them fully, until Congress changes them.  I believe that whatever immigration limits we set ought to be set ENTIRELY for the benefit of American Citizens.

I will say that I am more moderate to liberal on some other issues that people would call "social issues".  I'm anti-death penalty, for one.  I'm for dialing back the War on Drugs. 

[Libertas Vel Mors]

"God and Country - 36 Hours with the Dying Embers of the Constitution Party" is an excellent article from MTV.com of all places, published back in the 2016 election. Really great coverage of the CP convention and showing how that third party has drifted into irrelevance.

""I haven't filed a tax return or paid income tax since 1994," he said, thinking it a big selling point. Then he plugged a website he didn't remember the name of, then he went and said a billion terrible things."

Lmao I can't