On-Topic Moderate Republicans Begin Move Away From Party, Toward Democrats

[palbert]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...me-welcome-democrats-191019543--politics.html

The Republican Main Street Partnership, a Washington-based group that has promoted moderate GOP lawmakers and policies, will remove the word "Republican" from its title and welcome center-right Democrats in 2013, Yahoo News has learned.

The organization's board of directors voted Tuesday morning to scrap party identification from its title and be known simply as "The Main Street Partnership." The group's new president, former Ohio Republican Rep. Steven LaTourette, told Yahoo News that he plans to begin conversations with Blue Dog Democrats and centrist groups in the coming months.

"The goal is to try and fill the void that is the middle," LaTourette, who resigned from Congress this year, said. "The American political system is like a doughnut: You've got sides, but you don't have anything in the middle, and it would be my goal to work with Republicans and Democrats who want to find the path forward to getting things done and compromise."

To me, very welcome news. Maybe it will break the logjam.

Particularly where the Tea Party has declared war on Repubs voting with Obama on the fiscal ckiff.

 

[palbert]

Further to the above see White Eagle's thread on the John Birch Society:

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/thr...ical-Parties?p=8617963&viewfull=1#post8617963

 

[xbuzzerx]

I would love to see this happen, but this same split between "moderate Republicans" and "fringe crazy" was also predicted towards the end of George W. Bush as people were beginning to distance themselves from his Presidency, and all it ever seemed like happened was that the Tea Party sorta parasitically grafted itself into the mainstream party.

 

[palbert]

xbuzzerx: I think the divisions are now so great and the animosity so entrenced that we indeed for a time may see 3 parties: Dems, Main Street, and Tea Party Repubs. I am not saying it will get us through the next election cycle, but if it gets something done in this Congress we're probably ahead.

 

[xbuzzerx]

xbuzzerx: I think the divisions are now so great and the animosity so entrenced that we indeed for a time may see 3 parties: Dems, Main Street, and Tea Party Repubs. I am not saying it will get us through the next election cycle, but if it gets something done in this Congress we're probably ahead.

I don't disagree that those splits are there and I would LOVE to see it actually manifest in voting/election habits. I just have the cynical outlook that no matter how much Republicans claim to be dissatisfied with where their party is going or how much they disagree with elements of its platform... I want to wait and see them actually change how they vote before I presume they're capable of it. I think they're far less capable of it than progressives.

 

[palbert]

The Northeastern (formerly Rockefeller) Republicans are in a very tight spot and need to make common cause with some power group. Witness Maine's Snowe/Collins generally working across the aisle.

 

[rareboy]

puff. pant....wheeze...

Will they make it in time? Before the Tea Party blows the bridge up?

 

[JB3]

They should realize the democratic party is widely a centrist party where they would be welcomed. Maybe even a tad bit right of center. The republicans are so far off in loonyville right now. I'm just sitting back and watching the drama unfold with the republican party turning in on itself. Everyone is turning on each other in that party like a bunch of rabid animals, and the rational minds that were still remaining packed their bags.

The republicans have fallen below 30% of the voting electorate and I predict this trend will continue. Infighting and dissertations doesn't paint a nice picture for their future.

They would never join the democratic party because, even if they are moderate, they still vehemently disagree with their tax policy.

The big difference is that instead of holding everyone hostage over those beliefs, they're willing to compromise.

 

[xbuzzerx]

They would never join the democratic party because, even if they are moderate, they still vehemently disagree with their tax policy.

The big difference is that instead of holding everyone hostage over those beliefs, they're willing to compromise.

Nutball conservatives who still believe in Reagonomics are certainly covered by what you say, yes. But in that case you're talking about the koolaid drinkers who are far enough to the extreme end of ill-informed ideology that they'd never change how they vote no matter what.

There are plenty of Republicans however who began to distance themselves from the title during and since W Bush, and really only vote GOP on one or two issues and don't even try to defend the rest of the platform. The Republicans I know who don't give a hoot about gay people or abortion far outnumber the ones who religiously make sure to vote because those issues are important. Likewise I know people who don't even have much of an opinion on economics or taxation but vote GOP on only one issue-- say guns.

 

[palbert]

They would never join the democratic party because, even if they are moderate, they still vehemently disagree with their tax policy.

The big difference is that instead of holding everyone hostage over those beliefs, they're willing to compromise.

And given what we've got now, that is the hope of progress.

 

[cynicus]

Anywhere for us center-left Democrats and Progressives?

 

[xbuzzerx]

That was my thought. Since when are Tea Party / Reaganomics people "moderates"? lol.

If you still believe in something despite 20~ years of proof that it doesn't work you don't qualify as much of a moderate.

 

[Jack Springer]

The main focus of the Tea Party is to control government spending and taxes. Only liberals could make that an extreme position.

I don't see many republicans leaving the party. There is usually some back-and-forth movement between parties --- it's happened for years and will probably happen in the future.

 

[xbuzzerx]

The main focus of the Tea Party is to control government spending and taxes. Only liberals could make that an extreme position.

I don't see many republicans leaving the party. There is usually some back-and-forth movement between parties --- it's happened for years and will probably happen in the future.

I think "controlling government spending and taxes" is something you could probably get a majority of all Americans to heartily endorse in a poll. You leave out the fact that what makes the Tea Party fringe is the ideology driving their vision of what that means.

"Do it all yourself and stop whining" hardly represents the totality of "people who want to reasonably control spending and taxing."

 

[palbert]

Jack, we need a reasoning middle -- words unfamiliar to you -- to make this government work. If the far right and far left are dissatisfied,well, I measure that as success.

 

[White Eagle]

Further to the above see White Eagle's thread on the John Birch Society:

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/thr...ical-Parties?p=8617963&viewfull=1#post8617963

Thank you. I don't think I've ever had anyone cite a thread of mine. Life gets better don't it?

 

[JayHawk]

I think any coalition of adults looking for agreeable compromises in our congress should be applauded and encouraged. It would be worthwhile to email or tweet encouragement to lawmakers that become affiliated. What we need is stability, compromise and decisive leadership from our congress. Not petty bickering that results in nothing but headlines for news networks.

 

[nycguydowntown]

My uncle who was a highly educated guy with a doctorate---used to tell me American needs a more Parliamentary type gov, which made no sense to me at the time--but now I see our system is so dysfunctional that if we had a few more parties---the sane parties could govern by excluding the lunatics---this sorta happened when the Dems and the few semi-sane GOP congressman came together to avoid the fiscal cliff---but generally the lock step GOPers vote in lock step.

 

[Stardreamer]

The main focus of the Tea Party is to control government spending and taxes. Only liberals could make that an extreme position.

I don't see many republicans leaving the party. There is usually some back-and-forth movement between parties --- it's happened for years and will probably happen in the future.

The fiscal conservative basis of the Tea Party is not extreme but unfortunately the grass roots manner in which it was formed resulted in a lot of extremist elements of the far right joining it and having far too much influence unfortunately which has ruined its effectiveness and purpose. It has also pursued its goals in an extremist manner allowing for no compromise which quite frankly simply doesn't work in the long run as compromise and negotiation is the heart of accomplishing things politically.

 

[Stardreamer]

I think any coalition of adults looking for agreeable compromises in our congress should be applauded and encouraged. It would be worthwhile to email or tweet encouragement to lawmakers that become affiliated. What we need is stability, compromise and decisive leadership from our congress. Not petty bickering that results in nothing but headlines for news networks.

I'm sort of confused as I read the OP and it comes across not as Republicans leaving to join the Democrats but a group of moderate conservatives inviting moderate Democrats (blue dogs) to join them. If anything they are rejecting BOTH parties.