Constituent parts of the GOP

Months ago I tried a thought experiment--trying to classify the different constituent parts of the Republican Party. I never wrote it up, but it was an interesting exercise is species classification, which is always one of the first steps in a scientific understanding of the natural world.

With the GOP fracturing (to what extent we don't know yet), it's apropos to talk about the constituent parts, which may soon be warring factions:

1. The country club set of monied executives. They want a good business environment and as low taxation as they can get away with.
2. The middle class/working class allies of the executives. They want a good business environment for the jobs it entails. They are pro-business and pro-development because they are pro-jobs.
3. The social conservatives who are pro-prayer, pro-life, and anti-modernism. They got lip service during most of their association with the GOP, especially at the federal level. A lot of the establishment treated them as patsies, but enough patsies can take over large swathes of the party.
4. The traditionalists who are fearful or resentful of the changes that started in the 60's and were embraced by the Democrats.
5. The foreign policy hawks who want America safe and ascendant in the world. 
6. The fiscal conservatives who want the government to restrict its purview to the areas where it is necessary and effective, and thus stop wasting money on other areas. This isn't a philosophical viewpoint was much as a practical view.
7. The anti-tax brigade that don't care whether government could do something well--they just want to pay the least tax they can.
8. The libertarians who want a small federal government focused only on its limited constitutional role.
9. The haters who are in the GOP because they hate the Democrats for assorted reasons. (The Dems have their hate wing too. I'm not just picking on the GOP.)

I think that covers it. I'm not planning to use this classification in any particular way, such as trying to figure out rivalries and internal jockeying. It really was just an exercise in trying to understand an unfamiliar clan.

Image: brookings.edu

Breaking: Major fissures in the conservative world

Is the US conservative universe collapsing? There are certainly a lot of odd tremors:

• A major leak from Fox News--a high-level Fox contributor visited David Petraeus in Afghanistan with a message from Roger Ailes advising Petraeus on how to deal with his boss (otherwise known as the president). We lowly peons can listen because someone made a digital recording which has been leaked to Bob Woodward. I wonder what other vile secrets will be escaping the Fox vaults next.
• Fox has exiled Karl Rove and Dick Morris from their Fox News pulpits, at least temporarily. Another interesting Fox leak.
• A group of fiery no-compromise congressmen have been removed from their committee posts. This is a message to Tea Partiers and Ron Paul supporters that compromise will happen, so get out of the path of the speeding bus.
• Key senators aren't backing Boehner's inadequate but significant offers to raise taxes. DeMint is icy, McConnell is non-committal.

I'm not predicting the end of US conservative or any such nonsense, but there appears to be increased seismic activity. I expect a major shake-up, and I can't see the hard-liners, no-compromise guys winning. However, they may put on one hell of a show while they're going down.

Image: hshdude@flickr

Extra: More great images here, but too much for this post.

Same day update. Oops, I forgot about Dick Armey leaving FreedomWorks in a huff. FreedomWorks had a major role in training conservatives in grassroots organizing, though it wasn't in on the very beginning of the Tea Party.

Update 12/6/12. Jim DeMint is leaving the Senate and going to the Heritage Foundation where he hopes to be more successful at conservative messaging. Or maybe he's tired of being in the minority and all that blasted compromising that has to be done.

Last outpost of sanity: Pat Robertson

Pat Robertson has stated on the 700 Club that the Earth isn't 6000 years old and that doctrine wasn't divinely inspired. He also said:

"If you fight revealed science, you're going to lose your children. I believe in telling them the way it was."

What, no more tying yourself in knots to argue for the "young Earth" and against evolution? I'm hoping this is the start of a major trend among evangelicals. I'll have to check back in a decade or two and see if the creation science wars are over.

Snide aside: Robertson should call Marco Rubio and tell him it's OK to say the earth is very old. However, Pat Robertson is still a false prophet, as are most other preachers according to the Google search auto-completion truth-o-meter.

Image: apostasywatch.com

Negotiation box scores

The Atlantic Wire had a neat summary of the negotiation offers, and I think I'll steal the idea. It'll be fascinating to see the evolution of the offers through these summaries. Here goes:

_______________________________________________________
Boehner/Ryan 11/14/12

• New revenue only through GDP growth.
• All the spending cuts in the Ryan 2012 budget. (source)

_______________________________________________________
Boehner 11/15/12

• Ok, maybe some new revenue.
• All the spending cuts in the Ryan 2012 budget. (source)

______________________________________________________
Obama 11/29/12

• $400 billion in entitlement cuts.
• $1.6 trillion in tax revenue.
• $50 billion stimulus program. (source)

______________________________________________________
Boehner 12/3/12

• $800 billion in tax revenue.
• $600 billion in Medicare and Medicaid cuts.
• $300 billion in savings from programs like farm subsidies.
• $200 billion to slow growth of government, including Social Security.
• $300 billion cut to federal agency budgets. (source)

______________________________________________________

The first partially serious offer is Boehner's on 12/3. By the way, Boehner's new revenue would come only from high earners, according to the Washington Post. Look for more box score updates!

Image: businessinsider.com

"You really should take Simpson-Bowles"

During the campaign, the GOP complained that Obama really should have supported Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction report. They made this earnest suggestion while not supporting S-B themselves, but it was just perfect for the Dems.

Of course it's chutzpah to tell your opponents what positions they should take, but not really surprising. Simpson-Bowles is the ugly girl with a great personality and much more good sense than all the boys and girls combined. Someone should be bringing her to the senior prom negotiating table, but not ME. She's just not right for me, because I need a girl with lower revenue requirements than 21% of GDP and a real overhaul of Medicare. Besides, if I bring Simpson-Bowles as an opening at negotiations, the end point is going to be much worse than S-B when negotiations are finished. [Odd that this problem wasn't on the radar when various GOPers remarked that Obama should have embraced S-B.]

A few conservatives, such as this editor at Town Hall, are bucking this logic and pushing for the GOP to make S-B as their first serious offer. Currently, that's the outsider's position because the leadership isn't close to doing that.They're still in the faux outrage phase, "flabbergasted" that Obama as victor is less conciliatory than he was in August '11 or during the debates.

Well, it looks like no one will take the sensible ugly girl to the prom. Instead, they'll be acting like adolescents, jumping off the fiscal cliffs, maybe shutting down government over debt ceiling increases, and trying the make hay with whatever opportunities they have.

When it comes to the end of the Bush tax cuts, the truth is that no one has to do anything. They fade into the sunset all on their own. Each side will blame the other--"We wanted to save them, but those other scoundrels just wouldn't cooperate"--but neither will sacrifice a high card to prevent the tax rises. They will, however, try like hell to pin the blame on the other guys.

The next real choke point will when we hit the debt ceiling in March, but there is also the funding bills for the government which will start in the spring, if I remember correctly from 2011. Maybe some smart young senator or Congressman will ask Simpson-Bowles to one of those lovely events. Maybe she'll be the date for the entire Gang of Six, and she'll finally achieve the popularity she deserves.

Call me already--you know you need me!

Image: dontwannahearit.com

Short: Inside the fake hope of a Romney win

I found it hard to believe that Romney conned himself into believing he would win. Here is a much-cited article about his campaign's own polling. Even according to his own polls, Romney wouldn't have won, but it would've been closer.

Interesting reading, but it changes nothing. Individual polls aren't reliable, but aggregating helps. Getting out the vote, which Obama's organization did very well, is the best way to win in a close election. It also helps to have a larger potential base, that is, fewer people whom you've pissed off during the campaign.

Image: tnr.com

Screw the "greater good"

That appears to be the position of the leadership of both parties. Neither party wants to risk the blame for the pain of budget cuts, so they're both saying "You first." 

• The GOP is essentially making the same proposal that they did throughout 2011, but with a little more tax collected from high earners. For this paltry sacrifice, they want all their proposed spending cuts from the Ryan budget enacted.

• The Dems want the top rate to rise, partially to humiliate the GOP with their tax pledges. When it comes to additional spending cuts, the Dems are making the paltry offerings.

It looks like without a presidential election to force them into good behavior, our politicians revert to spoiled partisan children. They want what they want, and the other guys will just have to give in.

Look at last year. A 2% tax increase was at stake, and the GOP caved after trying to get concessions for 2 months. Now a 4% tax increase is looming, but neither side is willing to bargain. Perhaps the threat needs to be bigger, like a full government shutdown, before these bitter opponents stop grandstanding.

By the way, I'm not talking about just the GOP. The Dem offer is at the same level of blind stubbornness as the GOP position is. Did we just reelect this brats? I'm afraid so.

 Man the trenches!

Image: wattwork. blogspot.com

Extras. The Ryan budget cuts: broadly outlined without specifics (p.64). A thumb guide to the stages of negotiations.