Beginning in 1956 and until his death in 1972, the late National Review editor Frank Meyer argued for conservative fusionism, the idea that libertarians and traditionalists should unite under a small government agenda. This idea was reintroduced to the conservative movement by journalist Ryan Sager in his 2006 book, The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians, and the Battle to Control the Republican Party. Sager argues that the only way to avoid ideological chaos and electoral defeat (especially in Western states) is for both wings of the conservative movement to once again adopt the principle of fusionism.
Tea Party victories indicate there will be a return to fusionism for Republicans this year. Yet looking ahead to 2012, we see that at least three big government Republicans may be in the running for the GOP presidential nomination: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.
If recent history has taught us anything, it is that Republican presidential candidates fail when they embrace big government. If we’re going to succeed in 2012, the two wings of the conservative movement must unite behind a Republican presidential ticket that will present an actual contrast to President Obama.
Libertarians would very much like the head of the ticket to be one of their own. Texas Congressman Ron Paul is undoubtedly the libertarian favorite. Unfortunately, Paul is viewed as an unserious candidate by many conservatives because of his noninterventionist views and hostility toward Israel. Paul himself seems to realize this and has indicated that he may not even run in 2012. Instead, he has floated the name of former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson as the next libertarian presidential standard-bearer.
I have blogged about Johnson before, and he is impressive. As the two-term governor of New Mexico, he vetoed 750 bills in the name of fiscal restraint. His biography is inspiring, as well. Should he choose to run in 2012, he would likely be a more serious candidate than Congressman Paul insofar as Johnson does not seem, well, kooky. Yet, while less extreme than Paul, Johnson’s positions on some of the same issues that have plagued Paul may raise too many questions for conservatives. It may be that Johnson is just a bit too small government, particularly for social conservatives who became accustomed to Bush administration pandering.
A candidate more appealing to social conservatives is former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. She seems to be the natural heir to Ronald Reagan, who seamlessly blended libertarianism and social conservatism. While Palin has a strong record of restraining government and promoting individual liberty, she is a foreign policy hawk and takes a more traditional approach to social issues.
Palin’s problem is that libertarians have been somewhat leery of her. They have been warming up to her following revelations of a relaxed approach to marijuana policy, but there is still work to be done. She will need to take additional steps to bring libertarians onboard.
The strongest step in that direction would be an early electoral alliance between Gov. Palin and Gov. Johnson, beginning with his endorsement of Palin in the 2012 primaries and culminating in a victorious Palin choosing Johnson as her running mate. Johnson’s endorsement of Palin would build trust among libertarians, giving her an edge over other potential candidates who might appeal to libertarians. If Palin were to select Johnson as her running mate it would keep libertarians onboard for the general election, especially if she promises to give him a prominent policy role in a Palin administration.
There is another good reason for a Palin-Johnson ’12 fusion ticket: it will make Republicans more competitive in Western states, the new battleground in presidential elections.
Palin and Johnson are both well-suited to compete in the West. Johnson served as a popular two-term governor of New Mexico, and Palin is perceived as Western coming as she does from Alaska, the “Last Frontier.” Moreover, both Palin and Johnson are, like so many Westerners, outdoorsmen — the former an avid hunter and fisherman, the latter a mountain climber. A ticket featuring both Palin and Johnson would be certain to appeal to Westerners and present a clear contrast to Obama, an amalgamation of Northeastern elitism and Pacific radicalism.
But there is more to a potential Palin-Johnson ticket’s appeal in the West than mere personalities. There is also the libertarian factor. Sager argues that the interior West differs markedly from the reliably Republican South. Whereas the South is more socially conservative, the West is more libertarian. The Western philosophy is very much one of “live and let live,” according to Sager, and Democrats have in recent years been able to make gains by manipulating that philosophy.
After four years of Obama, the West will see that the Democratic Party is not the “don’t tread on me” party. Yet to be successful in the West, Republicans will have to offer a clear contrast that doesn’t take government out of the boardroom only to put it back in the bedroom. Gov. Palin is on course to become, should she choose to run, the first truly fusionist candidate since Reagan. She will appeal to Western libertarians all the more if she has the support of Gov. Johnson and if she chooses him as her running mate should she win the primaries.
If Gov. Johnson wants to give libertarians a real seat at the Republican policymaking table, he will anoint Gov. Palin the libertarian, erm, pitbull in 2012. Meanwhile, Gov. Palin should build on her fusionist image in the primaries and choose Gov. Johnson as her running mate for the general election. If she does, she will lock down a united conservative base, she will appeal to center-right independents, and she will strengthen her chances of winning battleground Western states.
Mark my words: If we are lucky enough to see Palin-Johnson ’12, this team of Western governors will defeat President Obama, and they will defeat him big.
Tea Party victories indicate there will be a return to fusionism for Republicans this year. Yet looking ahead to 2012, we see that at least three big government Republicans may be in the running for the GOP presidential nomination: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.
If recent history has taught us anything, it is that Republican presidential candidates fail when they embrace big government. If we’re going to succeed in 2012, the two wings of the conservative movement must unite behind a Republican presidential ticket that will present an actual contrast to President Obama.
 |
Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson
|
I have blogged about Johnson before, and he is impressive. As the two-term governor of New Mexico, he vetoed 750 bills in the name of fiscal restraint. His biography is inspiring, as well. Should he choose to run in 2012, he would likely be a more serious candidate than Congressman Paul insofar as Johnson does not seem, well, kooky. Yet, while less extreme than Paul, Johnson’s positions on some of the same issues that have plagued Paul may raise too many questions for conservatives. It may be that Johnson is just a bit too small government, particularly for social conservatives who became accustomed to Bush administration pandering.
 |
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin
|
Palin’s problem is that libertarians have been somewhat leery of her. They have been warming up to her following revelations of a relaxed approach to marijuana policy, but there is still work to be done. She will need to take additional steps to bring libertarians onboard.
The strongest step in that direction would be an early electoral alliance between Gov. Palin and Gov. Johnson, beginning with his endorsement of Palin in the 2012 primaries and culminating in a victorious Palin choosing Johnson as her running mate. Johnson’s endorsement of Palin would build trust among libertarians, giving her an edge over other potential candidates who might appeal to libertarians. If Palin were to select Johnson as her running mate it would keep libertarians onboard for the general election, especially if she promises to give him a prominent policy role in a Palin administration.
There is another good reason for a Palin-Johnson ’12 fusion ticket: it will make Republicans more competitive in Western states, the new battleground in presidential elections.
Palin and Johnson are both well-suited to compete in the West. Johnson served as a popular two-term governor of New Mexico, and Palin is perceived as Western coming as she does from Alaska, the “Last Frontier.” Moreover, both Palin and Johnson are, like so many Westerners, outdoorsmen — the former an avid hunter and fisherman, the latter a mountain climber. A ticket featuring both Palin and Johnson would be certain to appeal to Westerners and present a clear contrast to Obama, an amalgamation of Northeastern elitism and Pacific radicalism.
But there is more to a potential Palin-Johnson ticket’s appeal in the West than mere personalities. There is also the libertarian factor. Sager argues that the interior West differs markedly from the reliably Republican South. Whereas the South is more socially conservative, the West is more libertarian. The Western philosophy is very much one of “live and let live,” according to Sager, and Democrats have in recent years been able to make gains by manipulating that philosophy.
After four years of Obama, the West will see that the Democratic Party is not the “don’t tread on me” party. Yet to be successful in the West, Republicans will have to offer a clear contrast that doesn’t take government out of the boardroom only to put it back in the bedroom. Gov. Palin is on course to become, should she choose to run, the first truly fusionist candidate since Reagan. She will appeal to Western libertarians all the more if she has the support of Gov. Johnson and if she chooses him as her running mate should she win the primaries.
If Gov. Johnson wants to give libertarians a real seat at the Republican policymaking table, he will anoint Gov. Palin the libertarian, erm, pitbull in 2012. Meanwhile, Gov. Palin should build on her fusionist image in the primaries and choose Gov. Johnson as her running mate for the general election. If she does, she will lock down a united conservative base, she will appeal to center-right independents, and she will strengthen her chances of winning battleground Western states.
Mark my words: If we are lucky enough to see Palin-Johnson ’12, this team of Western governors will defeat President Obama, and they will defeat him big.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire