A Thinking Reed

The Thomas Frank thesis in action

Written by

Lee M.

in

From Newsweek (via Get Religion):

Keeping Republicans and their conservative kin together won’t be easy. For the first time in a nomination fight, corporate lobbyists are determined to play a leading public role. They are concerned that an obsessive focus on abortion and gay marriage will jeopardize what they regard as a once-in-a-generation chance to unshackle commerce from the grip of federal regulators. To hold their hands, they have not only [GOP lobbyist Ed] Gillespie—whose lobbying firm maintains a roster of big-business clients—but former senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee, the actor-lawyer-lobbyist, who signed on as the “sherpa” who will walk at least one Bush nominee through the confirmation process (think Virgil in Dante’s “Inferno”).

So, what happens if the pro-lifers and social cons get sold out for someone who will “unshackle commerce”? Will they desert the GOP? Do they have anywhere to go?

Comments

7 responses to “The Thomas Frank thesis in action”

  1. Marcus

    “Will they desert the GOP? Do they have anywhere to go”

    Yes, and yes.

    Multitudes of them (or “us”) sided with the GOP chiefly on the socio-con issues, and don’t really have a lot of sympathy for their stands on money issues.

    If they openly dump the socio-con agenda, there’s nothing left of the GOP but the bare-knuckle agenda that we never liked, anyway.

    Do we have anywhere to go? Sure. Left.

    Or just stay home instead of voting at all.

    A few million Christian Right types, sitting home in a sulk instead of voting, could make a big difference, next time out.

    Reply
  2. Marvin

    Matthew Yglesias writes: You can resolve the “conflict” between this agenda and the cultural conservative agenda by appointing someone who’s … well, business-friendly and culturally conservative.
    Are there tons and tons of people out there like that? Probably not. But Bush only needs a handful. After all, the (National Association of Marketers) and the religious right managed to work together to support all of Bush’s nominees for lower federal courts. If he gets one vacancy, he’ll pick one who they’re both thrilled with. If he gets two vacancies, he’ll pick two who they’re both thrilled with. If he gets three, he’ll pick three, etc. And the picks will almost certainly be confirmed, no matter what liberals say or do about it. Readers may recall a lot of shrill pre-election commentary about how if Republicans re-took the White House, picked up Senate seats, and picked up House seats they were going to do all kinds of bad things. Well, guess what? Here come the bad things.

    Reply
  3. Joshie

    No and No. Conservative evangelicals have cast their lot with the Republicans and have nowhere else to go. The economic conservatives aren’t numerous enough to be sucessful on their own and neither are the social conservatives. They need each other, so they’ll work it out somehow. There are fault-lines, sure, but they’ll work it out, probably with an economic conservative who gives lip service to socially conservative issues.

    The dem’s only hope in 2008 is if they can unite their even more diverse coalition together and the reps are divided between an e-con and a so-con. But that ain’t gonna happen. They have no hope in this supreme court business.

    Reply
  4. Russell Arben Fox

    “Do we have anywhere to go? Sure. Left.”

    Absolutely correct, Marcus; I couldn’t agree more.

    Reply
  5. Lee

    Of course it’s worth pointing out that some social conservatives are also economic conservatives by conviction, and not just for tactical reasons. Also, I think it’s safe to say that there is considerable overlap between social cons and (for lack of a better term) nationalist conservatives who are primarily concerned with foreign policy. The question is: how many of the social cons/pro-lifers are only grudgingly, rather than enthusiastically on board with the rest of the GOP agenda?

    It’ll be interesting to see how things shake out here in PA next year where we have Rick Santorum going up against Bob Casey, Jr. – a pro-life Democrat who is nevertheless progressive on economic issues.

    Reply
  6. Joshie

    although your boy Rick has been saying some pretty dumb things lately, regarding the RC child abuse scandals.

    Reply
  7. Kevin Carson

    Great post, Lee. Of course, social conservatives who are also “economic conservatives by conviction” mean something entirely different by that term than what Bushco does. A lot of economic conservatives in middle America view the corporate welfare state (pushed by too many self-described “free market” advocates) as just the opposite of economic conservatism.

    Unfortunately, I fear Bush will be able to get by paying just enough lip service to social conservatism to keep his captive demographic in thrall. If Bush were caught on live video feed doing a Great Dane up the poop-shoot, and wiping his wing-wang off on an American flag afterward, all he’d have to do is say “God” and “Jesus” a few times, and he’d be off the hook. After all, who’re they going to believe, God’s man on Earth, or their own lying eyes?

    Of course, the GOP wouldn’t have to lose a majority of Christian conservatives. Giving socio-cons the shaft might well make it impossible to energize them in the next election, and cost enough of them at the margin to make the difference.

    And if it comes out that Karl Rove was gettin’ it on with Jeff Gannon during those “special visits” to the White House, all bets are off.

    Reply

Leave a reply to Marcus Cancel reply

More posts