This is an appropriate description of how things developed until now, but I disagree with the notion that it will always remain like that. Republican party leaders and officials were fully in the "camp CoC/Koch" for a long time, and they still controlled a lot of the levers of intraparty power. More importantly, they had a whole network of intellectuals, institutions, think tanks, fleshed out policy agendas and allies in the media at their disposal. In contrast, the populist revolt (first the OG tea party movement before it was co-opted, then Trump and Trumpism) was and still is an amorphous movement without clear structures, it does not have a spelled-out ideology or platform yet. And the only real leader this side of the intraparty divide ever had was Trump, a guy who never had it in him to take care of this stuff.

Nonetheless, it is clear that the center of gravity within the Republican party very much lies with the Trumpists/populists, not with the Cheneys or Romneys. One of the biggest achievements of Trump is that he spurred a development which brings the party officials more in line with its base. For far too long, Republican officials had taken the energy and votes from people who cared about stuff like abortion, guns or immigration and translated this energy into Wall Street tax cuts and foreign wars. Trump's triumph in the 2016 primary was essentially a revolt by the base against this approach. I really doubt that party elites can go back to that.

Another factor to keep in mind is that upscale/college-educated whites are looking very steadfast in their realignment with social and cultural liberalism. These voters are not coming back unless the GOP fully embraces stances which would sink them with rural/working-class whites. Therefore, the way I see it, the party will have no other choice than to make further inroads with working-class voters (of all races!!!) - and to do that, they will have to tone down the fiscal conservatism and start actually enacting at least some economic policies which are pro-working class.



At the end of the day, this realignment of the (white) working-class toward right-wing parties and college-educated voters toward liberal/left-wing parties can be observed in all Western societies, it has been going on for decades. The Trump years were not an aberration, he only accelerated trends which were already there and which will continue even after he's gone. It would be foolish by the GOP to try to go against the tide. 2012 is not coming back, the party has to double down on 2020 (without a botched pandemic response, race riots and an unpopular, incompetent and polarizing standard bearer). And to do that, lip service will only go so far, at some point, the party will have to actually deliver for the working class.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Apr 1 2021 06:54am

This is not how they see it. Too many unqualified immigrants depress wages and add competition, all while increasing the tax burden of existing citizens.

What are some examples of "moderate Democrat" working class policies? For his part, Trump was a lot further to the center on this issue than his party would allow. Trump wanted $2k cheques. Trump wanted infrastructure spending. The Republican party is not an economically populist party right now, that is still in its infancy.

A few thoughts:

- Romney is the guy who proposed a serious child allowance program that would be incredibly beneficial for working class families. Faux populist Rubio opposes it. Not sure if Hawley has taken a position, as Dr. Suess book cancellations take priority.
- There's quite a few voters who would like to vote Republican but are turned off by the craziness. It simply can't be true that all Republican voters were always this batshit crazy, so obviously there's reasonable center-right people who would vote for a Republican party that rejected cultural liberalism, but also rejected the angry lunacy. Trumpism is different from cultural conservatism. If I cared about the success of the Republican party, I would want them to lean into the latter.
- Your post doesn't really address policy issues... you're describing intraparty politics. Sure, maybe the people who have the populist bumper sticker nailed to their forehead are ascendant, but what does that actually mean for working class people? The fact that this discussion can't happen without people bringing up "culture" tells me that policy is taking a backseat(or doesn't truly matter beyond rhetoric). Of course, the faux populist Trump, who started this faux populist movement, couldn't care less about policy, which is why building some intellectual populist framework around him always failed.



Sure, immigrants in some areas of the country do that, but for most working class people, there's several items(trends and potential policies) that are more consequential, and should get way more attention. But it's easier to blame immigrants.

Let's just take those two issues, bigger checks and infrastructure spending. Trump sat on the sidelines during negotiations and then lobbed the 2k checks at the end... he chose to pursue tax cuts that mostly benefit the rich and corporations, and Obamacare repeal, instead of working on an infrastructure bill. Shouldn't people be judged by what they do, not just what they say?

Biden passed checks for Americans. He tried to do a minimum wage increase(which I disagreed with $15, but the idea of increasing the minimum wage is typically regarded as a policy for the working class, which is why guys like Hawley pretend to support it). He increased the child tax credit. His next project is a large infrastructure bill. If right-wing populists are against all these things, I'm not sure how they are any different from establishment Republicans, except in the rhetoric they use.

A prerequisite for robust social policies is control of the border and restrictions on immigration. Other well known welfare states (e.g. Canada) practice this religiously. It is one of the more consequential policy decisions. From a cultural perspective, it is important to make sure that we are also not taking in more immigrants that we can reasonably assimilate. As a product of assimilation, I reject the negative connotations that various persons on the left have been trying to attach.

Minimum wage is an example of why "populist" is a better fit than "working class". Republicans do not believe that traditional "socialist" policies are the right answer to the economic problems the country faces.

Republicans should be opposed to the substance of Biden's spending, not the concept. It is a moot point, however, as the Democrats will try to push all of this funding through on a partisan basis.

To me, you're just describing what anti-immigration Republicans have always believed. If you're making the argument that basically standard hardline Republican viewpoints are pro-working class, you should just say that. That's what Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney believe.

Sure you could make that point, if you are a complete liar.



This post was edited by Plaguefear on Apr 1 2021 03:09pm

Romney's proposal was surprising and a bit out of step with his hardline fiscon platform from 2012. If you remember our discussion about this proposal, I was very positive on the principle of a child allowance program, tacitly positive on the concrete proposals he made and mildly sceptical on Romney's intentions. I'm not a Rubio fan and don't really care about the guy.


This is indeed the direction the party should take. A lot of Trump's policies and the ideology he was standing for are just that: cultural conservatism and nationalism. It just took a backseat to his outsized narcissism and the daily Trump show.
Interestingly, there are indications that Republican activists and voters do indeed place greater importance on Trump-style policies than on Trump, the person.



https://mobile.twitter.com/KSoltisAnderson/status/1364613345706393608

71% of the polled Republicans find it important that a future candidate supports Trump's "America First" agenda if he wants their support in future primaries, 54% place great importance on a candidate having supported Trump as president and just 29% want someone with a personality like Trump's. (I find it kind of staggering, however, that a full 49% find support for Trump's claims of a stolen election important. )





Was that really him? Iirc, the tax reform bill was mostly a project pushed by McConnell, Ryan and the donor class.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Apr 1 2021 04:15pm

Trump supporters are the last group of people I expect to actually understand why they do things. Sometimes just straight up asking people isn't a great strategy to figure out what their motivations are. Kinda like when somebody says "They should use legal avenues", then you tell them that entering the U.S. to seek asylum is a legal avenue and their tone suddenly changes to keeping brown people out.

Interesting. "Fight" and "Trump's personality" are basically the same thing but they poll much differently. At the end of the day though, it's clear that "owning the libs" is the biggest priority for Republicans.