The Republican Party Did Change After Bush- Just Not How They Should Have

When President Obama won the 2008 election, some seven years ago, it was suggested that the Republican Party would have to change, or it would die. They had just lost a landslide, and lost just about every group of voters, besides white men. It was said that the GOP had to abandon the party they had been under President George W. Bush. They had to stop being a Christian-conservative party. They had to stop being a war-mongering party. They had to turn their back on the Bush-era conservatism. That was the story, at least.

The GOP did change after 2008, but not in the way that we expected. The party basically doubled down on a lot of it's policies, particularly on immigration, guns, abortion, and other social issues. The party insisted on moving to the right on issues of fiscal policy, calling for deep spending cuts. The Republican Party even wants to see President Obama have a much more robust response in Syria and Iraq against ISIS, meaning they haven't even really budged on the Iraq War failure of a decade ago. If that were all, we'd say they didn't learn their lesson, but that is not all. The Republican Party has not stopped at doubling down on old policies and old rhetoric. They've gone much harder right, towards their base, during the age of Obama.

First it was "take our country back," and then it's only become worse. The language of "makers and takers" was introduced to the 2012 election, as was the "food stamp President." Republicans abandoned George W. Bush's appeal to Hispanic voters, and now largely favor building a wall with Mexico. They are calling "Black Lives Matter" protestors "murderers," not merely disagreeing with them. Some are calling for a repeal of marriage equality. Many now favor banning Muslims from coming here, banning refugees from Syria, and even banning "five year old orphans." Some are literally calling for war crimes in the Middle East against Syrians. The infamous 2012 GOP Debate moment when someone yelled "Let 'em die" at Rand Paul now seems mild.

The GOP has become a more hyper-nationalistic, white-identity politics party. I'd call them white nationalists, but only some of them actually know that's what they are. The Republican Party, rather than attempting to even moderate their rhetoric towards voting groups they lose, has decided to double down on groups they win. It's not that they didn't respond to their electoral failings under Bush, it's that they have adopted a strategy that they think will bring out more of their own base. Math says that no matter what they do with that base, it is now a minority in America, but I'm not sure that means it necessarily will fail. In finding a culture driven, more angry group of voters in their base, the GOP has been able to control Congress and state legislative bodies, despite not winning more votes. Additionally, it remains to be seen if the Obama coalition that they are mostly railing against, will hold in elections without him in it. Even a slightly depressed Democratic turnout might mean victory if they can find a few more angry whites. Obviously if Democrats can show that they are able to consistently get voters to the polls, this strategy will fail. With that said, that's an if yet. It also means you can't say the GOP doesn't have a strategy. You might not like the strategy- I don't. However, it is a changing party, even if it is not for the better.