The Economist: Ship of Fools (the decline of the Republican Party)

[NewJeffCT]

The Economist is a conservative English magazine, but is far more intellectually honest than US counterparts (not to say they're perfect, either):

JOHN STUART MILL once dismissed the British Conservative Party as the stupid party. Today the Conservative Party is run by Oxford-educated high-fliers who have been busy reinventing conservatism for a new era. As Lexington sees it, the title of the “stupid party” now belongs to the Tories’ transatlantic cousins, the Republicans.

There are any number of reasons for the Republican Party’s defeat on November 4th. But high on the list is the fact that the party lost the battle for brains. Barack Obama won college graduates by two points, a group that George Bush won by six points four years ago. He won voters with postgraduate degrees by 18 points. And he won voters with a household income of more than $200,000—many of whom will get thumped by his tax increases—by six points. John McCain did best among uneducated voters in Appalachia and the South.

The Republicans lost the battle of ideas even more comprehensively than they lost the battle for educated votes, marching into the election armed with nothing more than slogans. Energy? Just drill, baby, drill. Global warming? Crack a joke about Ozone Al. Immigration? Send the bums home. Torture and Guantánamo? Wear a T-shirt saying you would rather be water-boarding. Ha ha. During the primary debates, three out of ten Republican candidates admitted that they did not believe in evolution.

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12599247

[malaise]

1. Idiocy has consequences, too

Excellent analysis of the party of ignorance.
K & R

[NewJeffCT]

6. That last paragraph is brutal - to the GOP

But the odds in favour of an imminent renaissance look long. Many conservatives continue to think they lost because they were not conservative or populist enough—Mr McCain, after all, was an amnesty-loving green who refused to make an issue out of Mr Obama’s associations with Jeremiah Wright. Richard Weaver, one of the founders of modern conservatism, once wrote a book entitled “Ideas have Consequences”; unfortunately, too many Republicans are still refusing to acknowledge that idiocy has consequences, too.

[malaise]

8. It's perfect

:hi:

[ladjf]

2. Republicanism is a dogmatic philosophy that guarantees failure because

it is based on ideas that are not in accordance with the processes of survival, let alone prosperity. nt

[Scriptor Ignotus]

13. agreed

I think its a point not brought up often enough - conservatism is a fatally flawed ideology.

[tanyev]

3. LOL! "And in a desperate attempt to serve boob bait to Bubba,

he appointed Sarah Palin to his ticket, a woman who took five years to get a degree in journalism, and who was apparently unaware of some of the most rudimentary facts about international politics."

:rofl:

[ProfessorGAC]

9. Yes, That Was A Deliciously Angry Line

The Professor

[glitch]

11. that's a keeper. nt

[SpiralHawk]

4. "Wee R kNot sTewPiD." - Republicon Homelanders

[NewJeffCT]

5. That guy will be their symbol for at least the next 8 years, I would think

he is a Freeper icon

[sinkingfeeling]

7. I still think they should take the title of 'Know Nothings' again!

[NewJeffCT]

10. But, according to Rush, Hannity and O'Reilly

we're the ones with no ideas...

[Ghost Dog]

12. There are some good comments there too.

I particularly like this one:

There is nothing conservative about the current GOP. They are, for the most part, a bunch of Yahoo radical populists wallowing in racism, jingoism, intolerance, obscurantism, corporate lollipops galore, fiscal irresponsibility, executive abuse of power, a supine legislature - Burke would spit on them. True conservatism rises from the recognition that the world is a dauntingly complex place, that unforseen harm can often overwhelm the benefits of well-meant action, that we are never as smart as we think we are. It takes brains, lots of them.

But this does ring true, doesn't it?

The Economist has always been known for that singular British combination of wit, condescension, and restraint, which is why I love it despite standing a lot further left on most issues. But the spot-on "boob bait for Bubba" line about Palin shows no restraint, in an article sure to incense the "conservative intellectuals" like Corliss below, who seems almost desperate to show he can spell and use big words correctly in a long sentence.

The fact is, however, that far more than 50% of the white voters in the US voted for Palin/McCain, despite everything: global financial crisis, torture, housing failure etc etc. Rumours of the impending death of the Republican Party have been greatly exaggerated. But The Economist did get it right when it said that "Repubs = white trash party" is a bad branding idea, if only because it ensures that we lefties and moderates will find the energy (and voters) to fight them forever.