Love 'em or hate 'em, the unique thing about the Republican Party, the path it takes on issues and its overall attitude, especially since Reagan, is that regardless of the facts - regardless of whether or not they win a Presidential election or regain or lose a majority in the House and/or Senate - most of them at the forefront of the conservative Republican movement behave as if America is still winning and they're winning - or will win in the end. They complain plenty from time to time, they have their doomsday scenarios about the "other side" just like the left's liberals, but in the end, most Republicans seek to replicate the indomitable spirit and surface-friendly, "Morning in America," pro-American smile that arguably defined Reagan's political success and the success of Republicans since that have tried to follow in his footsteps. It can even be said that this spirit - this belief in his own optimism (however some believe it was affected by Alzheimer's) - sealed his friendship with Gorbachev and helped his successor to end the Cold War once and for all.
This may not be the most "realistic" approach, but my OPINION is that if you're serious about advancing a cause - ANY cause - then what matters first and foremost is what can put you in the position to do what you want. In politics, it's rarely enough to convince people that you're competent or knowledgeable or even right - at the end of the day, those supporting you have to FEEL GOOD about it because if they don't, they're more likely to fall into apathy and compromise your success. It's what happened in 2004 with Kerry and again in 2008 with McCain and for election after election before. I distinctly remember 2008, when push came to shove and those that were asked why they liked Obama, especially the youth, DID NOT talk about his experience in law OR his record in the Senate (such as it was - and if they even knew about it in specific terms), but boiled their so-called reasoning down to the fact that he pushed "hope and change" instead of war and the status-quo. Period. He made them feel good and let's face it - unless you're a racist, I think it felt good to see a black man win the Presidency for the first time, regardless of what party you belonged to. It did me.
If you can't win the race to get into the White House or the Congress or Senate or governorship, etc., then your idealism, your facts, your competence - they mean NOTHING. People complain that even when the right loses, it figures out a way to get its way - or to subvert the efforts of those wanting to move America "forward" (to quote Obama) - and many attribute this to the fact that there is just too much money in the hands of Republican voters. If you want to be "realistic," you'll realize that when you look at the statistics, most of the blue, Democrat states are those on America's borders, and they include some of the biggest in America, both geographically and economically - New York, Massachussetts, California... even Michigan, which has lost a lot of its economic strength, but is still the historic home of the American auto industry. You would think, then, that since money is so powerful and with so many "wealthy" (if debt-ridden) states in their collective pocket, we'd have... LEGAL GAY MARRIAGE, LEGALIZED MARIJUANA, TRULY SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, etc. But, we don't - not even with Obamacare - for better or worse.
He hasn't won yet, as I write this, but I've seen Democrats on here wonder aloud how on earth a super-rich, out-of-touch guy like Mitt Romney could fool so many struggling lower and middle-class people into believing that he gives a damn about them. At first, I wondered the same thing, given his initial lack of charisma, but I think that while Democrats tend to vote for individuals like Kennedy, Clinton and Obama, Republicans and conservatives vote for the party, at large, for the unity within that includes the candidate(s) (most of the time) and for the winning spirit that the party at least tries to put forth, regardless of circumstances. Once someone is in the White House or the Congress or wherever, THEN reality matters, and that's not at all to say that Republicans haven't disappointed because Bush did, in the end, and this last 101st "do-nothing" Congress definitely has. Until then, though, it's hard to get excited about voting for the leader or would-be leader of a country that you are convinced has too much weighing on its conscience. Why, I ask, do you care if America has a good leader when you act as if you don't even think she deserves it? I think that Obama's "YES WE CAN" slogan and chant had as much to do with his 2008 appeal and ultimate win as anything because it contrasted with the usual feeling that I, at least, get from Democrats, which is something along the lines of, "Yes, we should, but probably won't if so-and-so doesn't compromise or fall-in-line or hold our hands and chant, blah, blah, blah." Frankly, I think even some Democrats would agree with that, even if they still don't agree on the actual issues
.
In conclusion, attitude matters, as does appeal, which even Rush Limbaugh admitted today right after saying that conservatism was a purely intellectual thing (not sure I completely agree, even though I understand where he's coming from). I'm obviously a Republican, though I know I'm not always right. That said, there are some stances that more liberal people in my "Friends" list promote that I agree with and would more readily get behind if they'd just stop with the rude and lewd jokes and the woe-is-me accusations that serve as excuses for their cited lack of progress. 'You want me to sympathize? BE SYMPATHETIC! Make and stick to the LOGICAL case that I know exists for these things instead of constantly trying to make everyone feel guilty, even if it's only by association. Romney may not be a sympathetic candidate, but he's definitely upbeat (in general... and why the hell shouldn't he be with all that money? LOL), as is Ryan and as are many on the right because believing in their cause, they also believe what Lincoln did and what many Democrats say they do when quoting him: That right makes might. You might not ever make complete sense of BELIEF, religious or otherwise - AND, as I said in an earlier post, it should never make you begrudge someone else their particular choice, especially in a Democratic Republic - but there's a lot to be said for BELIEF and for its power as a necessary first step in advancing any cause. If you BELIEVE you're right and and you truly believe Lincoln, then there are no excuses and no if's, and's or but's. There's only the path you follow and the reasons you think others should follow, too.
