This may sound like an obvious statement, but in an election, there is a winner and there is a loser. This time around, Democrats came out on top as they did in 2008, meaning it is now time for Republicans to figure out exactly where they came up short when it comes to winning votes. This process has already started, but it is not going in the direction you would expect. Republicans are worrying that they will no longer be competitive in major national elections given what this election turnout has shown.



The reason for this lack of competitiveness is however not the fault of Republicans or their strategists; it is apparently the fault of the electorate itself for having changed, not being morally present, and being less of the "old America". The quick fix solution it now, it would seem according to the major news programs, would be for the Republican party to rethink its outreach to these newly blossoming demographics where minorities play a much greater role. However it is that same thought process that will continue to 1) alienate more voters from Republican candidates and 2) keep pointing out the fundamental flaw that the Republican party has with its ideology.



The first consideration will seem like an obvious problem to anyone with a small sense of how "politics" is supposed to work. "Outreach" is not the same as "caring"; that is to say that reaching out to a certain demographic is not the same as conveying a message of sincere caring about a problem or set of issues important to a specific demographic. Republicans want to "reach out" to these minorities that by their accounts sprung up out of nowhere to hand President Obama the win on Tuesday in order to win back votes for the next elections in 2014 and 2016. The problem with this idea is that minorities, like anyone else, does not want to simply be reached out to, they don't to have a sales pitch be given to them with regards to whom they ought to vote for.



Instead, people are looking to be shown logical reasons as to why their vote belongs to one candidate or another. They don't want sales pitches and they don't want gimicks. In an age where any campaign material is quite literally dissected and dispersed in seconds, Republicans can no longer afford to apply a clear sheen to a baseless message like they have for the last two decades almost. For those of you worrying this charge is not part of partisan hackery, it is a reflection of the two styles of campaigns run by the Obama and Romney camps. Romney was consistently attacked for not being specific enough with his own policy recommendations which gave him real problems when it came down to him explaining what sort of change he was willing to bring to the White House. Obama on the other hand was never cited for lacking a vision within his campaign, and his victory speech showed that.



Any voter, minority or not, is bound to be attracted more by the candidate who is out to change lives and become truly involved with the problems of the people rather than the candidate who ends up fitting the mold of the shallow, careless politician. The bottom line here is this; voters do not want to sell their vote to candidate, they want to give their vote to a candidate. No amount of sales trickery will ever be a good enough substitute for a politician that looks the part of the concerned leader.



Sales and businessmen brings us to the second major point. Republicans need to realize that the reason why they are not able to provide substantial policy initiatives is because their political philosophy revolves around a singular economic ideology. While it's fantastic on its own to have in a national discussion, economic discipline simply does not answer the vast array of questions regarding social policy. A libertarian approach to government might be convincing when it comes to finances, but it also leaves you answer-less to questions about civil rights, labor issues, environmental policy, and even international relations because the answer will always be somewhere along the lines of "government shouldn't be answering that question" when instead politicians should be doing exactly that.



The Republican party has been trying to milk the political cow that has been Reaganism for the last thirty years now, and it turns out that the source has run dry well before this last Tuesday. Republican commentators and strategists still have not caught on to this, as all they are saying now is that they simply cannot believe that people do not vote with their wallets anymore. Better still is their suggestion that minorities are wrong in not thinking first with their pocketbooks. That simply can't be the full story because while people's money is an important factor in making a decision for supporting a candidate, so are reproductive rights, rights of marriage, immigration policies, education, and general fairness of diversity. Those are topics, among many others, that are polled and are sent into consideration by all sorts of voters. While the economy may have been the biggest polled response among all these individual worries, it was not greater than all the other factors put together, which was the true downfall of Republican efforts this time around.



There needs to be an almost full retreat from this idea that economics knows best because it is simply no longer the case. The American people have seen this fact and learned it first hand; from Gov. Romney not being able to articulate a policy agenda that included anything beyond fiscal responsibility to the Republicans in Congress blocking legislation more than they have introduced it. By reducing their agenda to just economics, and somewhat flawed ones at that, Republicans have effectively become the "we will get back to you on that" party. Instead of trying hard to find answers on social policies hidden between Ayn Rand and Adam Smith, Republicans need to become more proactive in establishing a serious social agenda between now and the next elections if they want to be looked at as a party in tune with the times. That might mean challenging previously held principles to see if they truly stand the test of time, or even restructuring an entire political philosophy behind their cause. If they do not, minority turn out will be the least of their worries come 2016.









Liked what you read? Want to know when the next post is up? Then Subscribe via email (top right tab bar) or by RSS Feed.

