Do Republicans Need their Own DLC? Posted by Shadi Hamid

Peter Beinart has an interesting idea - maybe Republicans need their own DLC, an organization that will help bring Republicans back to the center, by advocating effective, practical policies that appeal to broad cross-section of Americans, particularly independents. In the 1980s, we couldn't win over swing voters. That's where the DLC came in. Today, it's Republicans who "can't buy a swing voter."

The interesting question, in my view, isn't whether this is a good idea for Republicans, but if it's a good idea for Democrats, and, by extension, the country at-large. Let's consider a couple possible responses to Beinart's suggestion:

1) If a powerful center-right RLC succeeded in bringing the GOP toward the center, there would be less ideological space between Left and Right. This would make it difficult to distinguish between the parties - a la Bush-Gore 2000 - and sap enthusiasm among voters. After all, if the majority of Republicans turn into Schwarzenegger/Bloomberg clones, then Republicans winning elections wouldn't be the end of the world. Compare that to the situation today, where Republicans winning elections does actually mean the end of the world. Also, the whole point of the resurgent Left is to counter the people who we think are destroying the country. If they stop destroying the country, do we perhaps lose a little bit of our raison d'etre?

2) The more interesting response - and the one I tend to agree with - is this: If an RLC brings Republicans toward the center, then that essentially moves the whole political spectrum toward the Left. Then they're playing on our turf. In other words, once Republicans sign on to universal healthcare, as Arnold has done, then that normalizes previously "far-left" ideas and makes them into "centrist" positions, thereby allowing liberals more breathing space to start asking the questin of not whether we should have universal healthcare, but rather how to improve the quality of universal healthcare we already have and make it more just, equitable, and effective.   

This ties into the bigger issue of liberals  buying into the political frames of Republicans. We're always playing by their rules and fitting our ideas into the existing right-of-center discourse. The very fact that we still don't feel comfortable calling ourselves liberals is indicative of the problem. One day, hopefully sooner rather than later, we should be the ones setting the terms of the discourse, of what's acceptable and what isn't, instead of reacting and playing defense.

Comments

[Dan Kervick]

The very fact that we still don't feel comfortable calling ourselves liberals is indicative of the problem.

Personally, I don't call myself a liberal because I don't think I'm a liberal, as most of the world understands that term, not because I'm intimidated by right wing discourse. I'm a social green-o-crat.

[Jeff]

I thought they did?

http://www.republican-leadership.com/

Hell even the initials are the same.

[Shadi Hamid]

jeff, you're right - there's an organization with that name already. but they're weak, and not particularly influential or well-funded. plus their website is pretty bad. im talking about an "RLC" that would be as influential as the DLC was to the Democratic Party in the 1980s and 90s.

A Republican Leadership Committee couldn't be as influential in the GOP as the DLC was within the Democratic Party, because the two parties don't operate in the same way.

The Democratic Party is driven by organized interest groups with very specific agendas: abortion, union organizing, support for Israel, opposition to tort reform. Candidates, especially candidates for President, get nowhere in Democratic politics without assuring (at least) most of these groups and (ideally) all of them that the candidates support interest group agendas completely, with enthusiasm and without reservation. Especially in