Revisiting GOP Party Dynamics: The Decline of Moderates & Rise of Populism
August 2, 2022 | Applying a GOP history lesson to our current political moment
Listen to the original episode here.
This week we revisit an episode from 2020, adding some fresh questions and analysis on its lessons in GOP history from a 2022 perspective. Is Donald Trump losing his populist grip on the Republican Party after 6 long years, a failed re-election, a failed campaign to reverse that loss, and the orchestration of tribal anarchy during the January 6 insurrection?
According to several recent polls, critical editorials from the New York Post and Wall Street Journal, and an abscess of Trump coverage on Fox News, his former media home away from Mar-A-Lago, that might appear to be the case. But does this mean the GOP is turning from populism toward more moderate leadership, messaging, and policies?
That’s a very different question. And our special guest for the repodcast episode, Dr. Geoffrey Kabaservice (author of Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and The Destruction of the Republican Party from Eisenhower to The Tea Party) suggests that populist momentum in the GOP predated Trump by many decades, and could be with us for quite some time.
According to Kabaservice, VP of Political Studies at the centrist Niskanen Center, the cerebral Richard Nixon (somewhat of a moderate Vice President under Eisenhower) had a big hand in the populist transformation of the GOP during his 1968 ascent to the White House. And another former history professor turned congressional firebrand, Newt Gingrich, had a major role as well, from the 1990s right through to the Tea Party Movement.
Guided by Dr. Kabaservice and aided by archival clips featuring Republicans from Goldwater to Gingrich, The Purple Principle takes a historical view of the GOP’s sharp turn from moderation in this episode, with discussion of Democratic factionalism as well. To look ahead with clarity at the 2022 and 2024 elections, we first need to review with accuracy the forces and factors that shape today’s politics. Tune in for a fluently knowledgeable revisit of GOP party dynamics from 1960 to the current moment with Dr. Geoffrey Kabaservice, noted scholar, author and columnist.
The Purple Principle is Fluent Knowledge production.
Original music by Ryan Adair Rooney
SHOW NOTES
Our Guest
Geoffrey Kabaservice: Columnist, Author of Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party, From Eisenhower to the Tea Party, and Vice President of Political Studies for the Niskanen Center.
Articles by Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Liberals Don’t Know Much About Conservative History - Politico Magazine - (9/9/18)
What’s driving so many Republicans to support Joe Biden? - The Washington Post - (10/30/20)
The Future of the Republican Party - Persuasion - (11/23/20)
Articles on Signs of Trump’s Recent Political Decline:
Half of G.O.P. Voters Ready to Leave Trump Behind, Poll Finds – The New York Times - (7/12/22)
‘It’s the accumulation’: The Jan. 6 hearings are wounding Trump, after all – Politico - (7/20/22)
The Murdochs and Trump aligned for mutual benefit. That may be changing - The Washington Post - (7/31/22)
Articles Showing a Tone Shift on Trump in Murdoch-Owned Media:
The President Who Stood Still on Jan. 6 - The Wall Street Journal - (7/22/22)
Trump’s silence on Jan. 6 is damning - New York Post - (7/22/22)
Source Notes:
John Buntin (2013). “California Republicans Try to Reenergize the GOP.” Governing Magazine.
Barry Goldwater. Encyclopedia Britannica.
Nelson Rockfeller at the Republican National Convention, 1968
“The Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Long Struggle for Freedom.” Library of Congress.
“Blacks and the Democratic Party.” FactCheck.org
Ann Devroy (2/2/95). “House Republicans Get Talking Points.” The Washington Post.
Joseph Loftus (7/13/64). “Scranton Challenges Rival To a Debate at Convention.” The New York Times.
“Independent voters vital to Biden's win” (11/13/20). The Fulcrum.
Richard Hofstader (1955). The Age of Reform. Penguin RandomHouse.
Douglas Hanks (1/19/17). “Where Climate Change Isn't a Partisan Issue.” Governing Magazine.
Brian Schaffner. Department of Political Science, Tufts University.
Join Us for Premium Content:
Apple: https://link.chtbl.com/PurpleApple
Patreon: patreon.com/purpleprinciplepodcast
Find us online!
Twitter: @purpleprincipl
Facebook: @thepurpleprinciplepodcast
Instagram: @thepurpleprinciplepodcast
Sign up for our newsletter: https://mailchi.mp/purpleprinciple/the-purple-principle-report
Transcript
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, I was writing about the decline of moderation in the Republican party. Moderates actually used to be a sizable indeed and sometimes a dominant faction within that party. But really since the 1970s, the moderate faction has been dwindling and now I would say it's almost nonexistent.
Robert Pease (host):
That’s Dr. Geoffrey Kabaservice, author of Rule and Ruin, a widely-read history of the modern Republican party. I’m Robert Pease, and this is the Purple Principle. We’re repodcasting parts of his post election 2020 interview at this potentially pivotal moment with regard to former President Trump’s grip on the GOP…
[Outside Archival, Vaughn Hillyard of NBC]
But it comes as a new poll shows even voters in his own party may be ready to move on. The New York Times/Siena College poll released on Tuesday shows half of Republican voters preferring an alternative to Trump as the party's nominee in 2024.
Robert Pease (host):
As you listen to Dr Kabaservice we’re asking you to ponder a few important questions: Is the GOP at an inflection point with regard to the embrace of Donald Trump, Stop the Steal and MAGA styled populism? Former moderate Miami GOP Congressman Carlos Curbelo, a Purple Principle guest early this year, thinks that may be the case:
[The Purple Principle Archival, Carlos Curbelo]
Uh, look, Donald Trump is still the most powerful and uh relevant figure in the Republican party right now. Uh, but, uh, his, uh, his support and the intensity of his support is certainly on the decline. Like, like all things that, especially Donald Trump TV shows, uh, they get old and, uh, and a lot of people are just, uh, uh, wanting to move on and people who like them like him, tell me, well, yeah, he, I like Trump, but he really shouldn't run.
Robert Pease (host):
But, secondly does that mean that GOP voters and contributors are moving in a more moderate direction or simply shifting support to other populist or hard line conservative candidates not named Donald Trump? Another Recent guest Dan Schnur of University of Southern California was a veteran strategist for many moderate GOP candidates before turning independent. Schnur does not foresee more moderate republican party leadership or positioning anytime soon.
[The Purple Principle Archival, Dan Schnur]
I think it is important to remember that the strongest and most successful voices against Trump in the Republican party over the last couple of years have been very conservative voices. And they may represent a more traditional conservatism, a pre-Trump conservatism, if you will.
Robert Pease (host):
What does this shift in the right leaning winds of the country mean for 2022 general elections, for the next 2 years of what’s likely to be divided Government in Washington and for the 2024 Presidential race due to heat up really soon? To look ahead with clarity we need to look back at forces and factors that brought us to this populist era. Which is what we’ll do with Dr. Geoff Kabaservice, Vice President of Political Studies at the Niskanen Center. He emphasizes that the decline of moderation and rise of populism in the GOP has been a major force for 5 decades now and counting. And with our zero sum, two party system, that has a huge polarizing effect for all Americans. Now for the episode co-hosted by Emily Crocetti.
[Enter Interview Part 1]
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
You know, in a rational system, or at least the system that's more along the lines of the multi-polar, multi-party systems of other countries, we would have at least four different parties, probably more like six. But that's not the system that we have.
Robert Pease (host):
Dr. Kabaservice wil give us his independent-minded take on polarization between and within the major parties. This is The Purple Principle and I’m Robert Pease.
Emily Crocetti (reporter): And I’m Emily Crocetti. And for listeners of my generation, it may come as a bit of a surprise, but as recently as the 1960s and 70s, the Republican party – with apologies to elephants – was a very different animal than today.
Robert Pease (host):
Sure, there was a strong conservative faction in the Republican Party, personified by Barry Goldwater, the 1964 nominee for president.
[Outside Archival, Barry Goldwater]:
I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
But there was also a vibrant moderate wing represented by George Romney, father of Mitt Romney–
[Outside Archival, George Romney]:
Too many do not really believe and practice the belief that each American is endowed by his creator with the same inalienable rights and must have equal opportunity for self-development and participation in a truly open society.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
–as well as Nelson Rockefeller, who made this speech against racism at the 1968 Republican Convention, to a mixed response.
[Outside Archival, Nelson Rockefeller]:
It is essential that this convention repudiate, here and now, any doctrine, any doctrinaire militant minority with a communist, Klu Klux Klan overture.
Robert Pease (host):
We don’t need to tell you, our indie-minded listeners, that polarization is a huge factor in all our problems in the U.S. Please stay with us for some deep insights into how we became so polarized.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
Starting with Dr. Kabaservice, updating his critically acclaimed history of the decline of moderate Republicans, entitled Rule and Ruin, published by Oxford Press.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
What obviously I didn't foresee was the rise of Donald Trump. But in some ways I haven't been all that surprised by Trump's rise, because what I saw in the Republican party with moderation absent was an ever harder line on ideology to the point where it actually couldn't offer or respond to actual problems. It was an ideology that in a way had disabled itself when it came to dealing with the issues that its constituents faced.
Robert Pease (host):
So, do you think it's no longer helpful to view U.S. politics through the lens of factions such as moderates versus conservatives or centrists versus Progressives?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, you know, I think that both the conservative Democratic faction and the moderate Republican faction have been badly squeezed in recent years. So certainly, it makes less sense to talk about factions within the party these days given how many votes are on party lines. On the other hand, I think Americans are still factional. I think there's still quite a lot of people in the “exhausted majority,” to use a phrase that's come up in recent years. And I think it would make much more sense to talk about people in terms of being moderate Republican stalwarts, even different kinds of conservatives. And it would make equal sense to talk about that on the Democratic side.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
So when did moderate Republicanism begin disappearing from the Republican party?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, moderate Republicanism took a nasty hit in 1964 when Barry Goldwater, the very conservative Arizona Senator, became the GOP presidential nominee.
[Outside Archival, Barry Goldwater]:
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
And that was significant not just because a conservative for the first time sees the nomination, but also because Barry Goldwater was one of the few Republican legislators in Congress to vote against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And that had long standing and permanent repercussions. It meant that African American votes for the Republican party, which had been about 40% of the total African American vote in 1956 under Dwight Eisenhower and even 33% under Richard Nixon, fell to single digits and has never really recovered. The problem was that the conservative faction gained strength with every passing year in the Republican party after 1970 or thereabouts. Richard Nixon really took the party in a much more populist direction after 1970.
[Outside Archival, Richard Nixon]:
To you, the great silent majority, my fellow Americans, I ask for your support. For the more…
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
And life became more difficult for them after Ronald Reagan became elected in 1980, although Reagan himself was enough of a pragmatist that he understood there was a need for moderates in the GOP big tent coalition.
[Outside Archival, Ronald Reagan]:
Well my view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons or parties.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
But really this problem became worse with Newt Gingrich in the 1994 election.
[Outside Archival, Newt Gingrich]:
Now I recognize sadly, that the Washington press corps is all too often the praetorian guard of the left. But it tells you something, it tells you something, about how out of touch they are with the American people.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
And moderates have really been marginalized in the party at this point.
Robert Pease (host):
Well, let’s drill down a little further on that. Why are moderate voices in Congress disappearing when there still seem to be a lot of purple states and districts out there?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, the wisdom in Congress used to be that members of each party were allowed to vote their district. And there was an understanding that if you were a Republican who represented an urban or suburban area, you would be voting somewhat differently than a Republican who represented a very rural area. Likewise, if you're in a moderate battleground, you would be given a pass by the leadership. And as you know, gerrymandering has become a big issue, and there are very few competitive districts in any given election year at this point, whereas there used to be many, and this is why the parties have really separated. The most liberal Republican, and I use that word in quotes, is considerably more conservative than the most conservative Democrat. So there's really a real division. It's a division in just about every way you can imagine.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
And from your perspective why is it so few Republicans, moderate or conservative, have been willing to publicly disagree with President Trump over the past four years?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
As I mentioned earlier, the Republican party has become largely a white working class party. This is a group of people who have not done well over the last several decades. These are people who have not benefited from globalization, who indeed have seen their fortunes decline. And these are people who really felt and were marginalized by both parties. There simply was not a lot of attention given to their perspective, their interests, by either party. And Donald Trump was the first candidate who came along who really was not a candidate of the status quo who was speaking for this Republican base.
[Outside Archival, Donald Trump]:
You’re the smartest people. You know what they talk about, they talk about the elite, the elite, do you ever see the elite? They’re not elite. You’re the elite, you are the elite.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
So it's very understandable that they are going to be loyal to that person, even though he really hasn't done much for them and indeed has hurt their interests in many ways.
Robert Pease (host):
You mentioned Newt Gingrich, who's obviously a conservative today, but was more of a moderate before becoming House Speaker and actually shocked House colleagues when he adopted his scorched earth policy. Do you see Newt Gingrich as a major precursor to Trump?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
In many ways, Newt Gingrich is a precursor to Trump. And it is ironic as you mentioned, because Newt Gingrich was not just a moderate Republican, but arguably a liberal Republican. He actually was a delegate for Nelson Rockefeller at the 1968 Republican convention. But Gingrich did see the direction that polarization was taking, the way in which the country was ripe for somebody to step into that role of dividing the parties and knocking down Congress as an institution. And that's what he did.
[Outside Archival, Newt Gingrich]:
Now the problem is, if you’re a welfare state liberal, and you don’t know how to do that in Washington or Atlanta, you can’t very well decide that it is your mission in Somalia to create the small businesses you’re killing in America.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
There's that famous memo from Frank Luntz where Republicans are instructed by Gingrich to describe Democrats and their ways in terms of treachery and sick and ill and all that sort of thing. Obviously that's had a major negative impact on our politics, but I do kind of believe that if Gingrich hadn't done that, somebody else would have because that was the direction that country already was moving in.
[Exit Interview Part 1]
Robert Pease (host):
So, Emily, a lot to unpack there from Geoff Kabaservice on the historical turning points here, such as the surprising Goldwater nomination for President back in 1964.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
Then the steady decline of moderate Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller, George Romney and others.
Robert Pease (host):
Which signaled and also shaped big changes in the Republican voter base.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
And made possible the scorched earth tactics of Newt Gingrich in the 1994 midterms. This election radically changed the tone of congressional politics.
[Outside Archival, Newt Gingrich]:
It tells you something, about how out of touch they are with the American people.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
We learned something about that from the Georgetown neuropsychologist Abigail Marsh in our “Heard from the Herd” episode.
[The Purple Principle Archival, Abigail Marsh]
You know, I really think that contact hypothesis is really what it comes down to. It's one of the oldest theories in psychology, which is that just contact with people who are different from yourself, especially in a non-antagonistic setting, is a great way to heal these divides. And one of the reasons for the current political divide relates to changes that Newt Gingrich made to the way Congress works decades ago, where he changed the length of the congressional work week so the congress people could go back to their home districts over the weekends, and then it turned out their families didn't move to D.C. They didn't hang out socially together in D.C. anymore. And so they used to have these friendships across different political differences and stopped having those friendships.
Robert Pease (host):
Which brings us to party polarization today in 2020. Most of the election is now behind us. The Republican party has lost the White House, but done better than expected at virtually every other level – though the Senate still hangs in the balance until the Georgia run-offs. I spoke to Geoff Kabaservice about what he found most surprising and significant about the 2020 elections.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
So, I'm speaking to you on November 24th of 2020, and of course, all kinds of crazy things could happen in the future. I suppose the surprising thing was that it came to this point in the first place. For the entirety of our Republic's existence, there has been more or less peaceful and expeditious transition of power from a defeated administration to the incoming administration. And in this case, Trump resisted, he did not concede, he probably will never concede, but he attempted to use the power of the presidency to overturn the democratic outcome of the election. And perhaps what's most astonishing is that the vast majority of the Republican party went along with this attempt to in effect overthrow the Republic. So here we are.
Robert Pease (host):
So, certainly, historically, you know, yes, we're all surprised at the way the outcome was contested. On the other hand, wasn't there a fair amount of signaling, really pretty far back, even 2016, that Trump would never accept a defeat?
[Outside Archival, Donald Trump]:
… that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election if I win.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Yes, Trump did in fact say that he would not accept the 2016 outcome unless he won, which he did. So, you know, Trump is Trump. Trump has always been Trump. But again, I think what's different is that if Hillary had won convincingly by anything approaching the margins by which Joe Biden won this election, Trump may well have said, no, I really won, but no one would have gone along with him.
Robert Pease (host):
Okay, but this is confusing to our listeners who are primarily independents and don't really understand how you can be so loyal to a party. The leader of the Republican party, in this case Donald Trump, has lost, and would seem he's a weakened figure. Why are so many Republicans in office staying loyal to someone who just lost reelection?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, I would challenge one of the premises that you put forward there. I think this is actually a case where the vast majority of the Republican party is being loyal to the individual of Donald Trump rather than to the party as such. And the fear among Republican legislators certainly has been that if they were to come out and openly say that Trump has lost the election, that he should concede, that this would turn the party faithful against them and their political careers would be over. It's extraordinary, really, and I think largely unprecedented in American history that Donald Trump has taken ownership of the Republican party in this way, such that the party has no real independent existence outside of his candidacy and presidency.
Robert Pease (host):
But what about the moderate Republican governors who actually handled COVID relatively well, not that anyone handled it really well, but I’m thinking about, you know, Governors Sununu, Scott, Baker, Hogan, Republican governors mostly in the Northeast, very much science-based. Why do they get so little mention within the Republican party and the media?
[Outside Archival, Larry Hogan]:
… warning about the fall coronavirus surge, which is raging across the country–
[Outside Archival, Chris Sununu]:
—some of the more non-essential personnel or personnel doing jobs and tasks that are going to be put temporarily on hold are going to be moved around–
[Outside Archival, Charlie Baker]:
–but the reason we’re taking this so seriously is because it is incredibly contagious.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
You know, the governors historically have been the most moderate segment of the Republican party because they represent states that include within them a wide diversity of voters and interests. They typically will include both rural and urban and suburban interests. They will have the need to balance a budget, which means they have to get agreement from all kinds of people within their state legislatures. They deal with the day-to-day problems of people. So no, it's not a surprise to me that a number of the Republican governors have distinguished themselves in generally being pretty capable in their approach to the pandemic.
Robert Pease (host):
Well, let's talk a little bit about the role of independents in the 2020 election. It does seem there was a shift towards Biden from independents, especially in those swing states. What do you think it was that swayed them? Or is it something that Trump said, or COVID, or is it likely to have been in a Democratic messaging?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, I think that when it comes to independents, most independents are in fact leaning one way or another, that has been the traditional wisdom. But in fact, I tend to put a higher estimate on independents. I think they do in fact have some kind of capacity to change their minds and to be swing voters and tickets splitters. And I think that to some extent what happened in this election, compared to 2016, independents I think were voting against Hillary Clinton. She was a historically unpopular candidate. Donald Trump was also unpopular, but relatively untried and an unfamiliar quantity. When it came to this election, Joe Biden was known and didn't really have extremely high levels of resentment. So yes, this time you really did see a big break of independents in favor of Biden's candidacy, or against Trump's, depending on how you want to put that.
Robert Pease (host):
Let’s turn to the Senate for a moment. Where we're located, as you know, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, is quite near Maine. So we followed the Senate race in Maine, a very expensive race where the polls were not very accurate. But now that Susan Collins has won reelection, can she and Lisa Murkowski and the few other moderate Republicans exert any influence on the Republican caucus in a closely divided Senate?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
It's an interesting question though, as to what Susan Collins will be in the Republican Party going forward. She's obviously very out of step with both Trumpy populists and with the sort of more run of the mill, highly ideological conservatives. But she, Murkowski, and Mitt Romney could actually form a kind of important potential critical swing group in the Senate, given how close the margins are likely to be. But on the other hand, you know, this kind of particular football has been pulled away by Lucy to the moderate leaning Charlie Browns for a long time now.
Robert Pease (host):
Fair enough, Lucy never did much in moderation. But back to this very perplexing election result. Considering how well Republicans did at virtually every level except the White House, what do you think were the key messages on the Democratic side that turned off swing Republican or Independent voters?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Well, that's the $64,000 question right now. In fact, I don't know if you listened in on that conference call that took place among House Democrats shortly after the election. But it was fascinating because you did have a number of the comparatively moderate Democrats blaming their more progressive colleagues for the losses of so many of the relatively moderate Democrats.
[Outside Archival, House Democrats’ Conference Call excerpt]:
–and we need to never use the word “socialist” or “socialism” ever again, because…
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
We won't know for quite some time what really turned the dial in some of these districts. But, you know, the hypothesis certainly is that in, let's say majority-minority Hispanic districts like those in South Florida, that tying Democrats to the self-professed socialism of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders was in fact important in moving a lot of voters there, because these are people who either fled from socialist regimes in Central and South America, or they have parents or other relatives who did that.
[Outside Archival, Bernie Sanders]:
...this campaign is not just about electing a president, it is about making a political revolution–
[Outside Archival, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez]:
–putting in the work, putting in the sweat and the tears to make sure that we bring a working class revolution to the ballot box in the United States of America…
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
And maybe even the tearing down of statues across the country made them think of the kind of socialist revolutions that they had seen, or at least had heard about.
[Outside Archival, News Clip]:
–across the country, protesters aren’t waiting for cities and counties, and are pulling down monuments to Confederate history, setting statues on fire…
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
You can also say that maybe the “Defund the Police” slogan that so many Progressives embraced this past summer proved to be determinative with at least some of these constituents in the swing districts who really do fear a return of the kind of levels of crime that we saw in the seventies, eighties, and nineties.
[Outside Archival, Protesters]:
Protestor 1: Defund!
Crowd: Police!
Protestor 1: Defund!
Crowd: Police!
Protestor 1: When I say defund, you say police! Defund–
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
In fact, if you look at the polls of African-American opinion, African-Americans are much more resistant to the “Defund the Police” slogan than are white liberals. So it could also be that this slogan backfired with some of the minority constituencies whom white Democratic liberals thought it would please.
Robert Pease (host):
That’s our special guest this episode, Geoff Kabaservice. He’s the author of Rule and Ruin Geoff’s breaking down the 2020 election for us. And, Emily, again, a lot to unpack in terms of how Trump lost the White House for Republicans.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
And why independent-minded voters didn’t vote Democratic down ballot as might have been expected, especially during a pandemic and a recession.
Robert Pease (host):
And why some of the messaging that won Democratic primaries clearly did not resonate in the general elections. Former Congressman Jason Altmire spoke to us on that point in our earlier episode, “Outlook from Dead Center.”
[Previously recorded audio, Jason Altmire]
It's all about the way we handle elections in this country. One of the questions I get asked most often when I speak around the country about these issues is, why is there so much partisanship in Washington? We don't see that in our neighborhood. Why is that what we're getting in Congress? Well, the answer is because we're electing partisans. We have a system that is designed to elect and protect people on the political extreme, on the fringe. And that is because primarily of what happens in our primary process.
Emily Crocetti (reporter):
And, unfortunately, it certainly seems like we are just as polarized as a nation coming out the 2020 election as we were going into it. And that’s going to make effective government more difficult, to say the least.
Robert Pease (host):
And that’s the real tragedy here. I asked Dr. Kabaservice about polarization between and within the major parties, and whether the huge ideological divides suggest any opportunity for a third, more centrist party.
[Enter Interview Part 2]
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
You know, the witticism of the historian Richard Hofstadter still applies. He said, “third parties are like bees, they sting, and then they die.” They can seize upon an important issue that neither party is really taking into account and they can make one of those two parties take account of that issue. And then that third party tends to die away. But to be honest, I think that the split potential is bigger on the Democratic side, because the Democrats have to cover a wider geographical area, a wider socioeconomic span in a way, and they have to manage a greater diversity of constituencies. The Republican party's base is older, mostly Southern white people with a particular appeal to men. And it's simply easier to shape more uniform messages to that kind of constituency. You know, again, that may change given that the Republican party is now largely a working class party with between 60 and 70% of its voters non-college educated. And you know, minority groups such as Hispanics and African-Americans are also predominantly working class.
Robert Pease (host):
Let’s go back to this loyalty issue again. It's a small number, but it did seem like during the runup to the election there were a few other new anti-Trump or at least not fully pro-Trump voices in the Republican party. I'm thinking about Liz Cheney in the House and Ben Sasse in the Senate. Do you think that represents maybe a generation of people not so happy with their party right now?
[Outside Archival, Ben Sasse]:
–he spends like a drunken sailor, he mocks Evangelicals behind closed doors. His family has treated the presidency like a business opportunity, he’s flirted with white supremacists–
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
I think there's actually a lot of people in the Republican party in Congress who are not happy at this particular moment. I think the job of being a legislator has become much less satisfying for a lot of reasons. And these reasons, some of them predated the Trump era, but I think Trump has made things worse. So I actually, despite what I just told you, do have some hope for moderate Republicans in this forthcoming Congress. But my hopes are more at the level of the House because, you know, again, contrary to the pollsters’ predictions, what you saw in this past election was almost no Democrats winning in what were thought to be Republican leaning or toss-up districts. Republicans did extraordinarily well in a lot of these districts where a Democrat had won in 2018, usually turning out a moderate Republican who had previously occupied that district. So I think there's actually an opportunity for people like, let's say Carlos Gimenez in Florida who, you know, was elected in the Miami-Dade district, where he had been mayor, where he had successfully handled the pandemic, where he's interested in issues of climate change and some kind of resolution of the legal status for dreamers. You know, I think there's actually some possibility for him to form a group with other like-minded moderate Republicans and also to work with the center left faction in the Democratic party. But again, that remains to be seen.
Robert Pease (host):
Right, so let’s talk a little bit about global warming. I know from our previous conversation that global warming is an important initiative area of study at Niskanen Center. What do you think the Republican reaction will be to what will probably be the U.S. rejoining the Paris Accords, if that happens, and any other efforts on climate change?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
I do think it's true. The United States will rejoin the Paris Climate Accords and that there will be Republican reaction against this simply because in our polarized environment, that's what you expect. But I do think that climate change is an issue that actually may have a greater impact on the red states than on the blue states. Gimenez, for example, comes from an area which is coastal and low lying, like much of Florida. And this is simply an area that is seeing real estate values take a hit from rising sea levels. There's a real, tangible, physical threat from this phenomenon to property owners and every kind of Republican voter in the state. So at some point their representatives, I think, are going to have to respond to this danger and work with Democrats to actually try to get some solutions there. The issue though, is that I don't think there is any room in the current political climate for big ambitious democratic solutions, such as the Green New Deal. I simply think those things are off the table. If any kind of progress is going to be made, it's going to have to be fairly incremental progress.
Robert Pease (host):
Let’s turn to your recent article, the “Future of the Republican Party” you've written in Persuasion, where you've sketched a couple of scenarios. Could you tell us what you think the most likely scenario is for the Republican party after this election?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
You know, my feeling about the future of the Republican party is not optimistic for the most part. I think that Trumpian cultural war appeals are going to have a lot of resonance with the base for years to come. And the cooperation with the Democrats generally, and Joe Biden specifically, are going to be regarded with great hostility by many of those voters at the base. So the future does not really hold much in the way of bipartisanship or cooperation or harmony between the parties. But I also think that the Republican party is likely to muddle through with a mixed Trumpian and plutocratic message and agenda, if that makes sense. That is to say, it's not going to become a genuinely populist party, one that's oriented toward the needs, economically, socially, of its working class base. It's not going to be a party that's out there outbidding Democrats for a $2 trillion infrastructure rebuild plan. It's not going to be a party that's taking the lead on how to combat the opioid epidemic, which afflicts so much of Heartland America. But its heart is going to continue to be with the agenda of its donor class. It's going to call for tax cuts under all situations. It's going to call for regressive economic measures. It's going to call for cutbacks in the social welfare safety network, even though its own followers depend disproportionately on that kind of social safety network. And it's just going to be a kind of incoherent muddled party. And if anything, it's going to militate against coherent functional government.
Robert Pease (host):
Given that scenario, if there were one Republican from the past that you could bring back to life at this time, who you think might make a difference, might be able to steer the party in a more constructive direction, who would that be?
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
Romney. Not Mitt Romney, George Romney, his father. George Romney was the head of the American Motors Corporation, and then became the governor of Michigan and was a Republican, a pretty conservative Republican in a lot of ways, but really believed that the Republican party was the party of all citizens, that it should be a one nation Republican party. As opposed to the Democrats, which even then he saw as splitting down into being the party of different group interests. George Romney was somebody who launched his presidential campaign by touring some of the most deprived parts of the United States, the inner city African-American ghettos and the worst served areas of Appalachia. And he really believed that the Republican party should speak to and for these people, that it should come up with policies that could actually improve their lives.
[Outside Archival, George Romney]:
We must create genuine equality of opportunity, in education, in employment, and in housing. In education, we must work with preschool programs. In employment, emphasize study-work vocational training. In housing, zoning that creates either large scale economic or racial segregation should be eliminated.
Geoffrey Kabaservice:
So, you know, I'm really looking for a kind of figure who can achieve that level of popularity, who can appeal to so many people who don't even now think of themselves as Republicans, who can be persuaded that the Republican party can actually be a force for progress and change and original ideas in the American solution. So yes, if I could bring back George Romney right now, I think he would actually have a real appeal to a lot of Americans.
[Exit Interview]
Robert Pease (host):
That was Dr. Geoff Kabaservice of the Niskanen Center, giving us some much needed historical perspective on the GOP this election season. Again that episode was produced just after the 2020 elections but with an eye on the populist forces that had been gaining ground in the Republican Party not just under Donald Trump, or for the past decade or two, but as far back as the 1960’s and 70s.Coming up soon on the Purple Principle our continuing series on Hispanic Swing Voters, a huge, diverse and often less predictably partisan bloc that may well decide our 2022 and 2024 elections Upcoming guests include the recent pulitzer prize winner Maria Hinojosa and comedians Crystela Alonzo and Carlos Mencia. They’ll provide a more human and personal perspective on immigration and other issues of great importance to hispanic voters and candidates. We hope you’ll join us then, share us on social media and review us on Apple podcasts. This is Robert Pease for the whole Purple Principle Team here at Fluent Knowledge. Original music by Ryan Adair Rooney.