Reaganism - Redefining The REAL Majority in America

The most powerful political party in America is (and has been for generations) one that does not even have a name, a structure, even a platform.

According to the most recent polls, about 40% of America does not identify themselves as "Republican", "Democrat", "conservative", or "liberal". This number has surely fluctuated from year to year and election to election, but it can safely be said that the number of people in this group usually outnumbers the GOP and DNC, respectively.

The open secret of our political system is that we have a "hidden" de facto party that turns out to be the deciding bloc in almost every election. Yet year after year, we act surprised. Just as the GOP is struggling today to find a new base, the DNC of the 1980s wallowed in self-pity for over a decade before Clinton was able to capture enough support (with the help of Perot) to take the White House.  

As the right moves further to the right and left moves further to the left, this plurality based model becomes ever more skewed to the semi-mysterious bloc of voters in what a traditional political analyst would call the "middle".  

But for those of us who have cast away the archaic left-middle-right model of American politics, this hidden party has emerged as a powerful, albeit unpredictible, body.

When I hear todays GOP struggling on whether or not to hold firm to their conservative roots, or to try to "move to the middle", I just chuckle. The party that preaches small-government and liberty for all has just wrapped up an 8 year hold on the Oval Office that saw government expand at unprecedented levels, skirt one of the most fundamental principles of American liberty, habeas corpus, by putting "enemy combatants" in an internment facility in Cuba, and continue to oppose the fundamental right to equal protection under the law based on such trivial factors as sexual preference. Is there really any question as to why the GOP did not get the votes they needed from the middle in 2008?

Rush Limbaugh suggested recently that the GOP simply needs to start "teaching" America about conservatism. While this might be a sound strategy for a talk radio host who needs to sell ads, it blows as a political strategy.

See, Ronald Reagan did not get 525 electoral votes in 1984 by "teaching" America to believe in his conservative views. He did it in 1980 by convincing enough of that de facto "hidden majority" party that he was willing to consider all viewpoints as part of his decisionmaking...and in 1984 by following through on his promise. Contrary to today's revisionist history, Reagan alienated many in the "conservative" camp of the GOP. From amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants to the Social Security bailout in '83 to the INF treaty, Reagan proved his commitment to consider all sides of an issue, and to not necessarily tow the party-line.

It makes me cringe when I hear today's Republicans hold up Reagan as some hardline conservative. Sure, we can put his record up against other presidents and say he was one of the most conservative. But Reagan was not so rigid in his thought process -- especially with respect to radical conservatives, who he decried. Today's GOP should realize that the Limbaugh brand of conservatism isn't what brought them success and isn't what is going to bring them back to success.

Personally, after years of wanting nothing more than to see a viable third party, I have seen the truth in the math, and think that this system might just be perfect. As someone who believes about half of what each party espouses, and votes accordingly, I have never felt more certain that my vote counts.