The future of the GOP

I've been invited to give a talk on the future of the Republican Party in June. I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with it, but Robert Farley's post from earlier today seems like a good place to start. Still, I'm not sure I agree with him here:

Political parties do die. They don't die often, but even in the United States they sometimes go belly up. I think that the Republican Party has become stuck in an ideological and demographic trap of its own making, and I'm not sure that it understands the seriousness of the situation. It's Congressional deficit is greater than any that the Democrats have faced since 1931. It's struggling to maintain its share of a part of the electorate that is steadily shrinking, and it has failed to make serious inroads into any other demographic.

For one thing, the last time a major party died was in the 1850s, and its death gave rise to the Republican Party and the Civil War. To say they "don't die often" is a bit of an understatement.

But beyond that, I'm not sure how useful it is to use a party's demographic shortcomings to describe its prospects for overall success. Yes, the GOP is at a low ebb right now, but not necessarily because its unpopular with Latinos or women. It's pretty much unpopular across the board, as this graph of party self-identification shows:

But that won't last forever. At some point, Obama's approval ratings will drop significantly, either because the economy fails to rally, or because of a scandal or some kind of screw up. And the GOP will look relevant again. That doesn't mean they'll be the majority party again any time soon; that may take decades to achieve. But they'll be back. They'll probably make some gains in the House in 2010, although I'm not sure about the Senate. And when their stock begins to rise, they'll start looking good among various demographic subgroups, too.

Just remember where the Democrats were in 2002. It really didn't seem like they were on their way back to unified control of the government within six years.

Oink oink

We've got swine flu here in Colorado! According to the Post, the disease struck a baggage handler at DIA and a woman in Arapahoe County who recently traveled to Mexico.

The rumor on campus is that the University will go into flu mode if one case shows up on campus. That means we finish out the quarter using on-line technology; chat rooms, discussion boards, video conferencing, etc. Campus will otherwise be pretty much shut down. I'm wondering if students will be allowed to go home or will be confined to their dorms.

Again, this is all rumor so far -- no specific instructions from the administration yet other than to wash hands a lot. I'd better go do that.

Okay, Biden's earned his keep for the year

According to Greg Sargent, it was Biden who orchestrated Specter's defection. Not a bad piece of work.

Afghanistan's Parties

Marc Herman points out an interesting passage from a recent report by the European Council on Foreign Relations:

In the longer term, the international community should begin to address a cause of the systematic instability that has racked Afghanistan for the last seven years: the absence of political parties. In most political systems, parties play a central role in selecting leaders, defining a political agenda and bridging social cleavages. Yet in Afghanistan, alliances tend to be based on ethnicity or religion rather than ideas.

It's quite heartening to see parties portrayed in a positive light, something that's often lacking in debates on political development. But it also raises a key question: why have coherent parties not emerged in Afghanistan?

My understanding of most new democracies (I'm an Americanist, so bear with me here) is that the first election is often chaotic, featuring dozens or even hundreds of minor parties, but that those usually cohere into a few major parties within a few election cycles. I believe that's the story in most of Eastern Europe, and I think that's what's been happening in Iraq in recent years. Why is this not happening in Afghanistan?

I'm just guessing here, but I'd surmise that one of the reasons that minor parties can see past their differences and coordinate on elections is because there's a big payoff for winning: control of the national government. That still doesn't mean a whole lot in Afghanistan. The national government has never been very strong there and still has trouble coordinating actions and enforcing laws across such rugged terrain. So there's not much incentive to integrate parties.

File under "This was already a 'West Wing' episode"

Gov. Ritter gave a speech touting the great outdoor spaces of Colorado yesterday. But due to crappy weather, he had to give the speech inside. Forgot to change the speech. Whoops.

“What a joy it is,” he said, “to be here today soaking in this beautiful Colorado weather.”

Yeah, President Bartlet did the same thing when addressing the United Organization of Trout Fishermen.

Incumbents vs. the Party

Arlen Specter:

I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

Few statements better crystalize the tension between parties and the people they put in office. Incumbents are hard to control. They develop their own constituencies, their own funding sources. Sometimes the party can actually topple them with a primary challenger. Sometimes they can keep an incumbent loyal just by threatening a primary -- incumbents don't want to work that hard to keep their jobs. But there are limits to what you can do, particularly when the incumbent has such a devoted constituency that is so antithetical to the party's members.

Sixty

Arlen Specter is now a Democrat. Once Franken gets seated, that's sixty Democratic senators. That means health reform, seizing the means of production, you name it.

I think the lesson here is that Republicans should've left Specter alone for the same reason Democrats leave Ben Nelson alone. Yes, they're crappy members of the party, but they also have constituencies to represent. Joe Lieberman had no excuse to be a crappy Democrat -- his state was quite liberal. He could be pushed. Push Specter too far to the right and you lose the seat. Or you drive him out of the party.

Update: Josh Marshall notes that Republican voter registration is way down in the past few years in Pennsylvania, which is a closed primary state. Only the real hardcores are still there. This made the 2010 GOP primary look like very hostile territory for Specter.