Saturday, September 8, 2012

If President Romney Doesn't Deliver Which 2016 Tea Party Option;Primary Challenge Or Palinite Third Party? You Decide.

There is a mode of thought amongst conservatives, especially supporters of Sarah Palin, that out of loyalty to Palin, rather than any enthusiasm for Romney, that they are obliged to vote for Romney.

Some Palinite's and non-Palin conservatives, and possibly Ron Paul supporters, will not vote for Romney even though Palin has said ABO (anyone but Romney). But many of her supporters agree with her that the main goal is to remove President Obama whom they see as a major threat to the principles they hold dear.

Looking beyond a Romney victory, should that happen, there has been clearly stated expressions that that result may in fact just be step one of a true conservative revival. The removal of Obama would happen in lock step with the second phase of the Tea Party/Palin assisted election of conservatives to Congress in 2010. 

Whether Romney or Obama wins this process will continue in the 2014 mid-terms until the process of returning America to its center-right roots in the legislatures is completed. A new return to "normalcy"

If Obama wins then the next step would be ensuring a true conservative is nominated in 2016 when it would be expected the normal election cycle by itself will assist with the election of a Republican who would also have a majority in the House and Senate.

For those conservatives who will vote ABO the Romney administration will, perhaps, present the biggest challenge to them if he is perceived as tacking to the center and being simply a continuation of the RINO  presidents, or worse of the Obama  administration. 

At that point, if the perceived betrayal of conservatism is seen as blatant and irredeemable, momentous decisions would have to be made if acquiescence and defeatism is not the result of such a betrayal. Such feeling would seem unlikely, given the depth of passionate determination amongst those on the right.

Acquiescence not being an option then, there appears to be three directions open to conservatives who will simply not accept another RINO administration in 2020.

1. Refuse to vote: Don't campaign for the GOP-never repeat an "ABO" or nose holding vote out of party loyalty ever again-no matter who asks for such an action-even Palin. The consequence of that would of course be a massive victory for the Dem's. If repeated it would mean the end of the Republican party, or the Beltway/establishment throwing in the towel and asking the rank and file to nominate their candidate.

Given the apparent depth of feeling now, which would surely be white hot after a period of RINO betrayal, the stay at home in quietude option would seem remote.

2.Primary President Romney: This is of course something which could be done and has been done against sitting presidents in the past by both the GOP and Dem's (Reagan/Ford Kennedy/Carter  McCarthy/LBJ

However, there is not a single modern instance where such an insurgency has been successful against a president seeking another term. A sitting presidents hold over the levers of power is just too strong to overcome. Even the hapless Taft was supported by the party machine against Roosevelt (and Taft went on to win only two states). Further, at the GOP's 2012 convention the establishment changed the rules to make a challenge to a sitting president even more difficult.

Things have changed in recent years in that, as Obama showed in 2008, a strong grass roots campaign in the multitude of small primary states can bit by bit build up a solid block of delegates. 

Even still, whilst the challenge would be difficult, it would not be impossible. What sort of shape the party would be in after such a bruising battle, especially if the president was dumped, would be another question of course and the possibly Pyrrhic victory could see a massive defeat in the November election.

3. Start a new conservative party. This option would remove all the problems associated with challenging a sitting president, especially the time, effort and money needed and would ensure the new party was united which the challenge option could not guarantee. A new party would, through its energy of common cause and total dedication to an unimpeachable set of core principles, not be lacking in unity and direction.

However, history is, once again, a hard taskmaster. Even Teddy Roosevelt, a hugely popular figure at the time could not lead his new party to victory even tough it out-polled the Republicans and did much better by far in the electoral college than the Taft party. George Wallace, Bob Lafollete, Strom Thurmond all garnered EC votes and Perot garnered popular votes but none of them came remotely close to making a major breakthrough and their vehicles disappeared.

The difference with a new conservative party would be there might be no turning back. When TR lost he said "there is only one thing for us to do and that is to return to the Republican party." A new conservative party, which had broken with the Romney/Establishment GOP would  be not likely to return to the vehicle and persons it rejected (especially if another Bush was next up for the GOP).

Such a third party split would see the Republicans defeated surely. Eventually, through either the GOP rank and file joining the new conservative party, or simply the collapse of the GOP followed by some eventual business cycle recession, there would be a strong chance for the conservatives to win the presidency. 

A run of Democrat presidents would see an economic crisis in due course or even the normal "its time for a change" feeling by voters, would bring that change.

These are the three options open to conservatives if a Romney administration fails them and the nation in my opinion and your opinion is most welcome as this is, I believe, a dialogue that may come upon conservatives in full force soon. 

It would be useful to debate the options now, so in the eventuality that change is needed it could be implemented quickly, based on a plan already in place.