The Southern strategy redux

By Richard K. Barry

Mike Murphy, generally one of the more sensible GOP strategists, was recently discussing Republican chances of taking back the White House in future elections. 

The GOP's greatest challenge is the fact that Democrats begin each presidential election with a near lock on the Electoral College. Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia have given their electoral votes to the Democratic presidential nominee in at least five out of the last six elections. These states represent 257 electoral votes out of the 270 needed to win the presidency. Under current trends, the GOP nominee has to pull the equivalent of drawing an inside straight in poker to get to the White House.

His answer to the problem is that the Republican Party needs to put more blues states in play, particularly where there are a lot of white people.

He writes: 

The GOP should make it a priority to win states like Michigan, where Republicans have institutional advantages over Democrats driven by their foothold in the governorships. The nation's shifting demographics are another reason Michigan should receive more attention from the national GOP.

In the last two presidential elections, President Barack Obama carried minority voters by 60 points. As Latinos become a larger part of the electorate in Colorado, Nevada, Arizona and Florida, the pressure for the GOP to expand the playing field in the Midwest becomes greater. So while the GOP must be committed to winning the support of minority voters, the party needs to increase its share of white votes in states like Michigan and Wisconsin.

I'm not sure what Mr. Murphy is talking about. Sure, he's saying the right things about winning minority support, but how exactly do you increase your share of white votes, as white votes, if not by encouraging them to feel different, more American, more deserving, than minority groups. And if that is not a new Southern strategy, what is it? 

We saw this in 2012. Are we going to see it again?

Stick around so we can hit you

By Mustang Bobby

Via Steve Benen, more moaning from the whiny gripers:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) complained on Fox News [Sunday], "All [President Obama] does is go out and make speeches" instead of negotiating with lawmakers like him. Around the same time, on "Meet the Press," Republican strategist Mike Murphy argued that the president should "stop the speeches" and "stop the politicization." Also on "Meet the Press," Republican pundit Michael Gerson complained about the "outside game [Obama's] been pursuing," in which the president hits the road, "beating up on the Congress."

It's not exactly subtle: Obama's GOP detractors aren't happy about the president taking his message directly to the public though outside-the-beltway events.

Then again, it appears the White House doesn't much care.

If your choice was to hang around Washington so that John McCain can yell at you or get on Air Force One and head for Vegas, what would you do?

The truth is that the Republicans really hate it that the president gets out to the people because they know he's really pretty good at it, and besides, every time he tries to sit down and negotiate with the GOP leadership, they kick him in the junk. So it's not a tough call to get the hell out of Dodge. 

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

How the Republican Party could save itself

By Richard K. Barry

I'm not suggesting it was brilliance on my part, but just after the election I said that the Republican Party would break into warring factions on either side of an analysis of why they lost. On one side would be those who would say that the message was fine and that if only some technical aspects of the campaign could be fixed, they would win next time. On the other side would be those calling for a reexamination of basic values and orientation of the GOP.

It was a no-brainer, I understand. But it has been interesting to see who has come out on which side of the debate.

Mike Murphy, one of the smarter Republicans around, sees the need to do more than tinker with campaign techniques.

Writing in Time magazine he says:

Identifying the problem is easy. The Republican challenge is not about better voter-turnout software; it is about policy. We repel Latinos, the fastest-growing voter group in the country, with our nativist opposition to immigration reform that offers a path to citizenship. We repel younger voters, who are much more secular than their parents, with our opposition to same-sex marriage and our scolding tone on social issues. And we have lost much of our once solid connection to the middle class on kitchen-table economic issues.

Read more »

Smartest Republican of the Day: Mike Murphy

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Sometimes, just sometimes, a Republican says something smart or otherwise does something that is worthy of positive comment, even here at this liberal blog.

So let's start a Smartest Republican of the Day series. There surely won't be as many entries as there are in our Craziest Republican of the Day series, but I think it's only fair to give credit where credit is due.

And, today, I am pleased to say, credit is due to GOP strategist and long-time McCainiac Mike Murphy, who wrote this for the New York Daily News:

Gov. Sarah Palin is the political train wreck that keeps on giving. First, she was an awful choice last year as John McCain's running mate. I came to this conclusion with regret -- I am one of McCain's biggest admirers.

But facts are facts. An inexperienced governor of a small state, she lacked the experience to be President and brought nothing to the ticket except a surefire knack for exciting voters who were already reliably Republican. It was a strategically awful choice, and I said so -- both on and off microphone -- at the time. Most pundits thought I was wrong. Look at the crowds she can draw, I was told. She "excites the base."

Phooey. Every presidential election year brings forth some new nugget of conventional wisdom from the media elite that totally misses the real picture. Last year, the big wrong idea was this notion that base voters have somehow become the new swing voters. We are now told the party base -- those voters who will vote for a bag of cement if it has an R or D attached to it -- must be carefully appealed to, romanced and appeased.

Under that funhouse reasoning, Palin was an inspired pick.

Unfortunately for McCain, the actual swing voters, the independents who do determine the winner of the election, didn't buy into this fantasy at all. After a three-week sniff, most couldn't run away from Palin fast enough.

*****

Other politicians are more reliable conservatives; Palin ran for governor on a set of populist issues usually linked to Alaska Democrats. She lacks any real accomplishment - no military or private-sector career of note, no academic achievement beyond a frenetic bounce between five colleges, including a sun 'n' surf-oriented outfit in Hawaii. She has served only two years as governor of a small and uniquely easy-to-govern state (other governors pine for Alaska's small population and billions of dollars in easy revenue from oil production), a job she has now abandoned.

And so on. The title of the op-ed says it all: "To go forward, GOP must snap out of its Sarah Palin spell."

That's good advice, from a Republican perspective.

As for me, though, I welcome as much Sarah Palin as the Republican Party can handle. The more the merrier. In fact, I encourage Republicans to hitch their "funhouse" wagon to this "train wreck."

Why? Because Murphy is right: "She'll lose, of course, almost certainly the Republican primaries and certainly the general election."

The Republican Party is indeed "demoralized." What could demoralize it more than the annihilation it would suffer with Palin at the helm?