It’s All The Social Conservatives Fault!

I really, really wish I were joking about the title, but I’ve actually heard several folks seriously suggest this.  (Hugh Hewitt show had a co-host/guest suggest “dropping the abortion issue,” for example—thankfully, Hugh pointed out that was…not a great idea.)

In a campaign where social issues were not focused on, where the SoCon vote was assumed, where the entire point would be “It’s the economy, stupid” and our turnout dropped hugely… we should really ditch these social conservatives entirely and try to peel off some Democrat voters.  I was one of the folks that was saying at the beginning that we could not just assume we’d get our own base and that all we needed was to go after other groups, though I—like many others—thought that things were obviously bad enough that maybe the base could be taken for granted.

We tried the “shut up about social issues, focus on the financial short-term disaster.”   Shock shock, it didn’t work.  The “of course” votes didn’t show up, as best we can tell at this early of a time.  Of course there was fraud and probably voter suppression, but we knew from the start that we’d have to win so big that they couldn’t cheat.

I know the thinking Libertarians believe that Social Issues hurt us, and if we’d just drop them it would improve—but they ignore that if you let people do all the stupid stuff they immaturely desire, they are going to want to be saved by someone else.  (I’m ignoring the sub-group of thinking Libertarians that thinks having children at is a “personal choice” with no serious effect on the future of society, and mostly only something that ‘women want while they leach off men.’  I wish that last part was not a very slight paraphrase.)  Of course, thinking Libertarians think social issues hurt because when thinking Libertarians recognize the cause and effect of libertine personal actions in creating demand for a leech-State, they become at least isolationist conservatives, rather than Libertarians.  But I’m digressing.

So, we tried assuming that the rah rah Abortion!! stuff on Obama’s side would be enough to 1) get half our base out, and 2) get them to vote for Romney.  Clearly, that was wrong.

We focused on the economy.  I think we did pretty well on that, considering that Obama and Co could lie their tails off about what we actually said.  (It’s a given, sadly.)

That makes me think that we maybe should’ve beat on the military side of things a bit more as well.  I  have friends who are still active duty who thought I was blowing smoke up their rears when I told them there was never a protest when the Ambassador was killed, when that was known just days after the attack.  (Power Line linked an interview in a UK paper that included quotes from the guys who were opening a hospital with the Ambassador; they were on the phone when the attack started, and there was no mention of a protest, which would’ve been a pretty big deal.)

So, we need to actually make our own case, try to win the base before we try to peel folks off, and probably improve our communication networks.  I’m going to work even harder on applying this in person—when someone says something incredibly untrue in person, I’m going to politely correct them.  Yes, it’s uncomfortable and socially awkward, but that is what the other side’s tactics depend on.  At some point, the drunk in the party has to be confronted.  We’re there and past.

This is going to be especially hard on religious people.  There are a lot of very nice people who…well… voted for Obama because that’s what “nice” people do.  It’s never easy to stand up to family, no matter how wrong you know they’re being.

25 Responses to It’s All The Social Conservatives Fault!

  • You know what, I agree that it is Social Conservative’s fault, but not in the way most people think. We have utterly failed to transform the culture. Jesus gave us the commision to “Go out and make disciples of all nations”. If we had been doing that, this whole debacle would never have happened. It is time to get off the sofa and get out there and evangelize. 50% of Catholics voted for Obama. That is disgusting and needs to change.

  • “Of course, thinking Libertarians think social issues hurt because when thinking Libertarians recognize the cause and effect of libertine personal actions in creating demand for a leech-State, they become at least isolationist conservatives, rather than Libertarians. But I’m digressing.”

    We call ourselves Ron Paul supporters, or as I also like, paleo-libertarians. It’s just the Old Right.

    But to be clear: we are not “isolationist.” 18th century Japan was isolationist. 18th century America under the leadership of the founders was non-interventionist, foreign and domestic. Meaning the federal government stays out of both the lives of people living in other countries and the people living in this one as well. As for diplomacy and free trade, we are all for it, unlike isolationists, who aren’t. Along with Thomas Jefferson and Ron Paul, I also don’t object to the use of military force abroad if it is used to stop aggression against the U.S.

    I just think we’ve had the troops in the wrong parts of the world. They belong in the narco-terror state south of the border.

    It’s all a digression from your main point, though, with which I agree. Good post. We won’t be driven into silence by “libertarians” who fail to understand the connection between strong families and strong economies, or who blindly give into the demands of the totalitarian homosexualist movement.

  • We call ourselves Ron Paul supporters, or as I also like, paleo-libertarians. It’s just the Old Right.

    Roughly what the other Thinking Libertarians say as their evidence for why you’re not Libertarians…probably doesn’t help that they also exile the unthinking type college libertarians?
    (It’s a bit like the issue with children and abortion and such– a sizable chunk of the TLs want the woman to be responsible for their own and the man’s “fun,” with children being non-beings without rights or responsibilities. Yes, it’s all male, that I’ve spoken to. Most annoying thing about Ricochet….)

    Glad you like the broader point, though.

    I wonder what the effect of “GOProud” and those idiots that tried to claim the TEA party was all about ditching social issues had on turn out….

  • Well I suppose all the “smart people” will tell us that Santorum can’t be that guy next time because he has too much baggage. Why we should listen to them I have no idea, but I think building off what he did in the primary would be a big advantage and he’ll have surely learned alot about how to get his message across.

    Again the “Smart People” will tell us that women still hate him, but I can’t see how we can truly get less women than Romney got and Santorum is much more attractive to the base and to middle class and to the hispanic community than Romney was.

    Too bad the Smart People will tell us he can’t win, like they told us Romney could.

  • I would never support Rick Santorum in a GOP primary. If he somehow won a GOP primary to become a presidential candidate, I still wouldn’t vote for him. At that point I would simply not vote or vote 3rd party. He is explicitly pro-war and would bankrupt this country through military adventurism.

  • “He is explicitly pro-war”? Parrot Ron Paul much?

  • Do you think it’s time that the Christian Conservatives just say the heck with both parties and form their own? Perhaps with people like Sarah Palin and Allen West leading the way? They certainly have the charisma to jump start it. In hindsight, during the primaries, Romney was much tougher on Santorum and Gingrich than he was on Obama. There seemed to be a deliberate effort to exclude the socons from political influence which has turned the GOP into democrat lite – so what’s the real difference? The people need to have a party that truely speaks for them and their beliefs with no compromise on the moral/social issues.

  • My only option is Rand Paul. He isn’t completely anti-war (neither am I), but at least he understands that fiscal conservatism is incompatible with Wilsonian idealist adventurism abroad. He is also a social conservative, opposing abortion and “gay marriage.” And of course he is his father’s son and would do as much as he could to dismantle the intrusive federal bureaucracy that is attempting to take total control of our lives.

    Yes, I “parrot” Ron Paul, but only because he parrots the founding fathers as well as the greatest economic minds of the 20th century.

  • There is such a party. It’s called the Constitution Party. Here is its platform: http://www.constitution-party.net/party_platform.php

    BTW, here is a link to Rick Santorum on the issues. He is a hard right Conservative. But he isn’t a war monger.
    http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Rick_Santorum.htm

  • Such a party would ensure overwhelming Democrat political domination for the next generation and cause the enactment of social policies in every state diametrically opposed to the beliefs of social conservatives. There are precious few Democrats who are social conservatives who would join such a party and such a party would need to have stands on all the issues which would quickly lead to the same sorts of divisions that currently exist in the Republican party on economic and foreign policy isssues. For myself, I am a plain old conservative: economic, foreign policy and social.

  • Paul P,

    I deleted the offensive portion of my comment and your reply to it. I went too far, I acknowledge that.

  • David Frum was singing the same song – the Republicans need more social diversity – after the 2008 elections, and I am sure his clones would do the same now. Giving them credence will bring death to the Republicans, for at the bottom what animates most of these social libertarians is a hatred of Christianity.

  • Here’s a must-read for conservatives. (Paulists probably don’t need to bother)

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/333010/election-and-right-yuval-levin#

  • I’ve been reading a lot of political sites. Every single ones either has posts calling for dropping the social issues or commenters writing in and saying quit talking about abortion.

  • Daisy observed the following, “I’ve been reading a lot of political sites. Every single ones either has posts calling for dropping the social issues or commenters writing in and saying quit talking about abortion.”

    If the GOP abandons its support for the life of the unborn child or for traditional marriage between one man and one woman, then I will vote for a third party such as the Constitution Party. We should no longer put our trust in the princes of this world. Furthermore, I do not think that it matters any longer who wins because the culture has become so thoroughly pagan and hedonistic that nothing save utter catastrophe can reverse things. That was the case in ancient Israel and Judah, and we are seeing history repeating itself again.

    Now there are others here at TAC who are far more optimistic than I and believe that we can salvage something using the political process. I pray that those individuals are correct and I incorrect. But after seeing the filthy advertisements on national TV and on the internet that the Democrats ran (a girl saying that voting for the first time is like having sex for the first time, so do it with the right guy – Obama), the general rot and refuse on popular TV, the barbaric body piercings young and old alike sport in public places, and all the other disguting stuff, I am convinced that short of the miracle of God’s grace, we as a nation are headed towards the fall that we so richly deserve. Popular entertainment TV shows like the Mentalist or Castle or Elementary that show dominate women and weak men as a norm to be emulated are merely symptoms of a decay that has long progressed into terminal cancer, except the patient isn’t aware he will die because he is feeling no pain. This exists all over, so when Obama runs his war on women theme, he wins – either people don’t care, or people do care and support him.

    Nope, I won’t support the GOP if it gives up on social conservativism. And if the country goes to hades as Israel and Judah did, then that too is a part of God’s plan. Viva Cristo Rey! The persecution the Cristeros faced will be repeated.

  • I’ve been reading a lot of political sites. Every single ones either has posts calling for dropping the social issues or commenters writing in and saying quit talking about abortion.

    Probably by the same folks that urged the “don’t talk about it” tactic for this election….

    Paul: watch something else! Good heavens, Warehouse 13 manages to have a very masculine guy… he acts like a goofball, and then goes and is utterly awesome nearly every episode. *grin* Need more decent, upbeat goofballs.

    Sure, TV sucks. Seems like it always has…..

  • Love WHSE 13, Foxfier. Usually watch the Science Channel, though, or H2.

  • I know the thinking Libertarians believe that Social Issues hurt us, and if we’d just drop them it would improve…
    –Foxfier

    If only those TLs (thinking Libertarians) could explain why the Libertarian “no social issues here” Party vote didn’t crack 1% of the total vote despite the millions of voters unhappy with Social Issues talk.

    P.S. When I remind TLs that the Democrat party is chock full of its own Social Issues agendas, they suddenly want to change the subject.

  • The Democrats always bring up their social issues. Abortion (strike that, it’s the right to choose, but they never finish the sentence), gay marriage, etc.

    Romney did not get involved in social issues and it is still the social conservatives’ fault Romney lost. Yeah, right. I heard Ann Coulter thinks this. Coulter can pound sand.

  • If the news outlets would quit pretending the 400,000 marchers in DC didn’t exist…

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .