“Unity” Means Trouble for Republicans

by Ryan on June 4, 2006

in Politics

There seems to be a “movement” in the American political center. The new Unity Party wants to attract those Americans sick of all the partisanship and the disconnect between Washington and Main Street. C-Span had a Ford Republican and a Carter Democrat on this morning to discuss the new “center” that they want to involve. Even Peggy Noonan is giving kudos to the Unity Movement starting to take shape to elect candidates in the 2008 Elections. Noble goals, hints of 1990s Perot-like nostalgia, same ol’ 3rd party mistake of mimicking the two major ones, but what else is going on here?

One must agree that politics is polarized today, but then again so are the issues! America is having some major identity problems, epitomized through the Red v. Blue state debate that has popped up since the 2000 elections. It is tough living in a post-9/11 world where the rules don’t seem to make sense any more. Example: we won’t have a big grand treaty to end the War on Terror, nor do we have enemies that respect life (even their own) , or the concept of a peaceful inclusive future if the fighting were to end. Some American’s are frustrated because the world’s not simple anymore and solutions aren’t clear, and leadership seems missing on big issues. Add to that a once dominant political party in decline fearing for its life, and another one that seems too scared to make tough decisions that are popular with the American people.

The levee could break in anyone’s favor at this point, but mostly to the detriment of Republicans if they fail to act in the short term:

  • If the Republicans fail to seize the agenda and momentum back, it’s back to minority status, especially since a pragmatic Democratic President would easily steal the domestic security issue from the Republicans and claim he/she (shudder) “did” something about the borders, brought the troops back home, etc.
  • If the Dems lose again, they’ll just steal whatever momentum the Unity agenda had and become competitive again in some swing districts. Some argue that Katrina began Bush’s lame duck status– and Bush has sure acted that way since dropping Iraq from his speeches again in March and bungling immigration by alienating his base. That leaves the White House very vulnerable in 2008.
  • If Unity does pick up mo-, then who knows what’ll happen then? This could be a Perot-like fad, or a real beginning of another electoral shift given the gravity of the contemporary issues since 9/11. I personally hope the Republicans don’t allow this to happen through continued complacency and a failure to act on the big issues.

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Mike June 4, 2006 at 12:31 pm

I think there is a major difference between the “Unity” movement and Perot. Perot was a right of center candidate, arguing for fiscal responsibility and government reform whereas the unity approach is based from the left.

Ford Reepublicans and Carter Democrats are liberals. The only party from which they could draw votes is the Democrat party.


Ryan June 4, 2006 at 4:10 pm

Perhaps, if “Unity” catches on, the Republican’s new problem could be not the Dems and Unity, but Unity taking the Dems place, leaving the Moonbats to wallow in political obscurity! One can dream.

But, I think you have a point. The Right is solid, if underrepresented in gov’t right now. The dems are quite fracturous. I’ll pitch this idea to some Libs at work and get their take.


Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: