With 2014 being the 50th anniversary of Barry Goldwater’s 1964 campaign, there have been a number of articles about how then-Senator Goldwater lost that election and yet ultimately won the ideological contest with Ronald Reagan’s victory in 1980. The moral, then, is that standing firm may hurt in the short run, but it will win in the long run. Which is, I suppose, the theory of Senator Ted Cruz, et al, with respect to the immigration crisis on our southern border: Stand up for what you think is right. Maybe you won’t win now, but “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice” and “moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue”. Perhaps that is why Senators Cruz and Sessions (Jeff, R-AL) stirred up enough House Republicans to prevent the House from passing a bill on Thursday and to threaten the possibility that the House wouldn’t pass any bill before it adjourned for five weeks.
With the following result: Even though President Obama proposed a plan but then wouldn’t negotiate with Republicans about it (negotiation/compromise isn’t something he does well with who disagree with him*) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wouldn’t even bring up a bill up in the Senate, the efforts of Ted Cruz, et al, wound up focusing attention on disarray among House Republicans (who actually did wind up passing a plan, though that wound up being almost an addendum to the main story). I understand that much of the media is out of sync with Republicans and will criticize them almost no matter what, but we don’t need to make their job easier for them. Even if the media isn’t great, the media counts. It’s how a lot of people, especially those in the middle (i.e., those who decide elections) get the news – and their impression of the news.
It was important for the House to pass a bill. It won’t become law (because the President won’t negotiate and Harry Reid won’t force his members to vote on something that might hurt their chances for re-election), but it would have been great to show people that the Republicans were trying. Instead, because of the efforts of people like Senator Cruz, it was the House Republicans who looked like fools.
The key point here is that this is about tactics. It’s not about ultimate philosophy; it’s about how to get there. A good argument can be made that the Goldwater campaign was an important part of a philosophical change in the Republican Party and America. But that is not the situation today. John Boehner has the same general principles as the House Republicans who were fighting him on Thursday. It’s not about the destination; it’s how to get there – and whether we can convince the American people to go with us.
As the title of this post says, 2014 is not 1964. John Boehner is not a 2014 version of Lyndon Johnson – or even Nelson Rockefeller. And Ted Cruz, et al, need to understand they are not Barry Goldwater.
--------------
* At least those in the United States. He seems to handle negotiation/disagreement with those outside of the United States better than with those at home.
Comments