Conservatives must learn from the shutdown

Speaker Boehner: ‘’We just didn’t win’’

16 days overdue, thus ends an American take on Monty Python. Without the satire.

The White House has preserved ObamaCare, Democrats have won clean resolutions and the GOP has been humbled into a very public and very bloody retreat.

For Republicans, there are only two positives.

First, with this deal, the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, has probably saved the GOP from being vanquished in next year’s Mid-Terms. Second, McConnell has challenged the President to live up to his word and engage in serious negotiations (my take on 'serious') before next January. In short, McConnell has given CPR to a party drowning in emotion.

For leading the GOP off its Maginot Line, McConnell deserves the gratitude of all conservatives.

Unfortunately, he won’t get it. 

Instead, the very opposite is likely to occur. Conservative firebrands will rage against his ‘betrayal of conservative values’. McConnell’s primary challenger, Matt Bevin, can expect his campaign coffers to brim. After all, for a loud but vocal conservative minority, compromise is treason. A capital crime. 

This insipid absolutism can’t continue. It’s time for us, the majority of conservatives; the ‘quiet conservatives’, to bring reason back to Republican politics.

For a start, we need to recognize what we’re up against - that there are those in our movement who see ‘purity’ as their defining cause. That for these conservatives, politics isn’t about asserting an agenda, it’s about purging the ‘ideologically impure’. We need to recognize that these partisans see themselves as the modern incarnations of John Stark’s heroic toast, - ‘’Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils.’’ That for these men and women, political death is preferable to compromise.

Next, we need to point out the fallacy of their argument.

Let’s cut the faux patriotism, ObamaCare is not the British Army and this isn’t the Revolutionary War. In their struggle, Stark and his comrades were fighting for an ideal that was both pure and possible – freedom and independence.

Neither was true with regards to the GOP strategy on ObamaCare. As I argued earlier this week, demanding that Obama sacrifice his landmark law was always implausible. Democrats control the Senate and the Executive. The Judiciary has rendered its decision- the law conforms with the Constitution. The polls were also clear- Americans might dislike ObamaCare, but they disliked the GOP’s brinkmanship even more. On top of it all, Obama had a post-Syria necessity to project clear leadership.

Unsurprisingly, the news coverage has reflected this understanding. Instead of focusing on the absurd incompetence of the ObamaCare rollout, the media set up camp on a different story – one centered in a Republican celebration of rudderless obstructionism. A political opposition marching in perfect step with Democratic propaganda. A modern tea party… without the tea.

For conservatives, this strategic delusion speaks to our burgeoning fetish - self-immolation at the shrine of partisan resistance.

Over the last two weeks, the House GOP has rendered itself the governing equivalent of a skydiving team without parachutes- for two minutes, soaring ecstasy as the jumpers sail through the clouds. Until terminal velocity meets certain gravity. Then truth renders its judgment – the illusion of omnipotence at an awful price. Self-destruction is the nemesis of political reason.

If we’re serious about preventing an American welfare state, we conservatives need to get serious.

We need to grasp the virtuous truth- that Political leadership demands both courage and rationality. That in a democracy, believing alone isn’t enough. In the end as with all arguments, political success requires presenting a case, persuading voters and pursuing change.

The alternative is what we’ve seen today. A gleeful Democratic party, a preaching President and a Republican brand that’s bobbing in the sewer.

Please watch video below for my thoughts on broader issues involved.

Shutdown, ObamaCare and what it all means

Interviewed by AJ Delgado (video below), I offer my thoughts on the shutdown, ObamaCare and the broader ideological disagreements sustaining the discord.

How the GOP is outmaneuvering Democrats on the Shutdown

1) POLLING

The latest polls suggest that a super-majority of the American people desire a compromise solution. Yet the polls also tell another tale – there's been very little change as to who Americans regard to be responsible for the shutdown. Although the GOP is seen as marginally more to blame, the data suggests that opinion against the GOP is static. The White House expected that the opposite would occur - that once the shutdown began, the GOP would be routed by public anger. It hasn't happened.

2) PR Flowing with the polling data, the GOP’s present shutdown PR strategy is far more astute than that of Congressional Democrats/the President. While the President refuses to negotiate and overtly broadcasts an ‘'exasperated'’ demeanor – (see Obama + Reid), the GOP is staging clever PR stunts (see ‘empty chairs’ and WWII memorial funding). Essentially, the GOP have realized that now the shutdown is underway, they must be regarded as open to compromise. In contrast, the Democrats have allowed their anger to distract them away from a cognizant PR strategy.

3) POSTURE As with the sequester, the warnings of ensuing horror (at least in a immediately salient sense) have not come to pass. At the same time, with the problematic ObamaCare roll-out, the GOP’s talking points have been somewhat vindicated. In turn, this has weakened Democratic criticisms of the GOP. Republicans are more able to claim that they are being reasonable - IE – ‘all we want is a one year delay’ etc. In addition, as time goes on, the President is likely to come under increasing public scrutiny for the continuation of the shutdown – IE – as the chief executive, the public will expect Obama to lead America out of this mess. I suspect that Boehner senses the President's vulnerability on this 'leadership perception' issue. At least in part, it would explain why the Speaker is now pushing for a grand bargain.

HOWEVER... it's not all rosy for the GOP. Over the longer term, the present Republican strategy will furnish doubts among independents over the party's governing responsibility. If the GOP becomes a populist centric party – even in the sense of garnering independents over ObamaCare – it risks jeopardizing its position come the 2016 Presidential elections (a concern I've previously warned about). This is especially true with regards to national security (see DNI Clapper’s comments on the intelligence impact of the shutdown).

A 3-step ladder to escape the Shutdown hole

The Shutdown is underway, but it doesn't need to stay that way.

1) Obama and Boehner must meet

The notion that Obama and Boehner cannot stand each other is a myth.

For the most part, during their 2011 debt negotiations, the President and the Speaker were able to develop a good working rapport. Bob Woodward talks about their once budding friendship extensively in his book ‘The Price of Politics’. Alternatively, one photo provides an effective summation. Although those discussions ended in failure, their very essence proved that compromise is possible. But there’s another point here. If Obama can speak with Rouhani, he can certainly meet with the Speaker of the House of Representatives. A ten minute phone call is not the same as a face to face. Indeed, when challenged on this point yesterday, the WH Press Secretary, Jay Carney, was unable to defend the President's unwillingness to meet with the Republican leader. He was unable to do so for a simple reason – the President’s job is to find a path through the political wilderness. Even when the wilderness is not of his own making. In the same vein, Obama is the chief executive of the United States - Boehner has a responsibility to work with him. It won't be easy, but ultimately dialogue is the first step to consensus. Even if the discussions don’t immediately bring about a prosperous outcome, the imagery of constructive discussion would strengthen moderates in Congress and help foster greater trust. Aside from the intransigents, everyone would benefit. It would also help stench the hemorrhaging reputation of American political life.

2) A touch of humility

House Republicans must recognize Obama's political position. The President faces a base which is angry and ready for a fight. A base that believes he’s yielded too easily in previous showdowns with Congress. More than this, not only do liberals believe that the GOP is behaving outrageously; they also believe that any necessary spending cuts have already been implemented. At the same time, Obama must recognize that Republicans face a distinct political reality of their own. At a basic level, conservatives expect further spending cuts from the House and they feel empowered by the polling data (nevertheless, they shouldn't take this data as an endorsement for a shutdown - see the latest polling in the video below). True, in some sense, these diverging understandings suggest an unyielding standoff, yet, they also hint at a solution. Were the President to address certain elements of the non-Obamacare elements of the GOP plan (those focused on spending/keystone etc), he could induce elements of the GOP caucus into a compromise position. At the same time, Obama would ensure the survival of ObamaCare and he'd be able to take credit for guiding the country out the shutdown. Reciprocally, Republicans in Congress would be able to broadcast their own deal inducing message to the conservative base - the President wanted a clean resolution but we were able to extract concessions. If both sides can sell a deal, there is a deal.

3) Leadership

At a foundational level, this shutdown is the result of both Obama and Boehner's unwillingness to face down the rejectionist elements of their respective bases. In essence, instead of pursuing real leadership, the two men have played to narrow perceptions of leadership. Following on from my arguments in (1) and (2), were Obama and Boehner to take a stand in the center ground- resisting internal discord in their own parties, the American people would respond positively. It would make sense for Obama in the aftermath of his post-Syria credibility deficit and it also would make sense for Boehner - offering the Speaker a pre-2014 midterm expression of good faith negotiation.

Ultimately, the President and the Speaker must decide between two choices. Political posturing at the cost of continued shutdown suffering, or common sense engagement that serves the common interest.