The Awkward Pivot (Republican Party civil war)

[ProSense]

The Awkward Pivot

Josh Marshall

Most of our attention yesterday was on Jeb Bush’s unexpected and still pretty inexplicable shift on immigration reform. Bush — Mr. Immigration Reform from a Pro-Reform political dynasty — is probably the last guy I would have expected to make a move like this. And he’s now to the right of his protege Marco Rubio on what’s supposed to be the big issue of this political cycle.

But look what’s happening down in the states. Republicans are now fighting among themselves over one of the signature initiatives of the dreaded ‘Obamacare’. First, Florida. A few weeks ago, Gov. Rick Scott bucked expectations and decided to accept the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare. Yesterday, his Republican-dominated state House voted to block that decision.

Even more striking is Arizona. Gov. Jan Brewer was another GOP Governor who bucked expectations and decided to opt-in to the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare. Now GOP SuperPACs are battling it out over her decision and, by extension, Obamacare. Americans for Prosperity is running ads attacking Brewer for the decision. And she’s now being defended by another Super PAC, Restoring Arizona, which is encouraging voters to support Brewer’s “fiscally conservative Medicaid plan.”

So take stock of that. Republican Super PACs are now battling it out at the state level over the merits of Obamacare. That’s where we are.

I don’t want to make too much of these squabbles. In themselves they’re not the end of the world. But they are small examples of how difficult the GOP’s post-election pivot will be. You cannot easily walk away from one of the party’s defining positions — opposition to ‘Amnesty’. Mitt Romney noted yesterday that ‘Obamacare’ drove lower income and minority voters into the Obama camp. Flat opposition to reform is still dogma for the GOP base. But the party’s establishment and operative base now sees that it’s driving support of growing parts of the electorate. Which is a big problem. Governors’ attempts to reposition, even in small ways to reflect fiscal and political realities, are sparking fights with state legislatures.

- more -

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/03/the_awkward_pivot.php

President Obama is destroying the Republican Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022455520

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. The Grumpy Old People party is waving their canes at each other.

[ProSense]

2. You think their days are numbered? n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. It depends on a lot of factors. But, I think they're becoming irrelevant.

The demographics are against them as far as conservatism is concerned. But, their biggest problem is their powerful right wing which is making the demographics count. Alienating the racial minorities and women as voters is killing them as evidenced by the last election.

What I think will happen is a very real schism in the party between the pragmatists (equivalent the Democrats 3rd Way) and the fire eaters. A schism that could end in a real break up but probably won't. The pragmatists will try to be the "not as bad" as the Democrats and win a few elections. While the tea-party types will fade, simply because few people will vote for them. While the fight goes on, the Democrats will be able to cash in on the split.

The end result will be two pragmatic, moderate, parties competing for the center and doing their damnedest to maintain the status-quo.

Of course, a real crisis, (as opposed to the manufactured ones now being set before us) could throw a monkey wrench in the above speculation. Mishandling of a crisis by whichever party is in power would like lead to reprisals at the ballot box in which old grievances are forgotten and revenge is sought.

[Populist_Prole]

6. Very interesting post. Quite plausible

I do have a gnawing unease about just how "pragmatic" can be defined. I'd sure like to think that the progressive ( the NON 3rd way ) wing of the Democratic party is NOT the equivalent of the GOP's tea party wing. The "not as bad" 3rd-Way wing may well preserve the party as a brand name, but at what a price? As is now the 3rd-Way types are basically just republicans that don't like guns.

[ProSense]

4. LOL! Jeb:

<...>

So today he flipped yet again.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) told MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Tuesday that he would support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants “if you can craft that in law where you can have a path to citizenship where there isn’t an incentive for people to come illegally” — a position that puts him at odds with his new book, out today from Simon & Schuster.

Sheesh. Jeb is starting to make Romney look like a model of stability and deep conviction.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/05/1191578/-Jeb-thinks-America-wants-more-Bush-begins-punching-brown-people

[pampango]

5. Romney II indeed. "What does your group want me to say?"

The funny thing is that he will have to back off of his "support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants “if you can craft that in law where you can have a path to citizenship where there isn’t an incentive for people to come illegally”.

The tea party primary voters are not going to buy that. To them any 'path to citizenship' is 'amnesty' and there is no form of 'amnesty' that in their 'minds' does not give an 'incentive for people to come illegally'.

Of course, Jeb probably figures he can wink at tea party voters when he has to sound 'reasonable' on national TV and hope they understand that he really does not mean it when he has to sound 'reasonable' for the general public. He hopes they still see him as 'one of 'us'' at heart. Of course, Mitt tried that to no great effect so we'll see.

[pampango]

7. From the UK: Jeb Bush disavows own book on immigration reform after GOP outcry

Former Florida governor surprises party with new book that opposes a path to citizenship – then quickly changes his mind and then changes his mind back again.

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush, one of the Republicans' leading hopes for the 2016 presidential election, was speedily backtracking Tuesday after throwing into confusion the party's stance on immigration reform, one of the key issues of Barack Obama's second term.

Bush, long a champion of immigration reform in the face of sustained Republican grassroots opposition, surprised his own party by adopting a more right-wing stance in a new book, Immigration Wars, published Tuesday. But within hours of publication, he changed his position again, reverting to his original, more progressive line.

The Republican party, having been badly punished by Latinos in the November White House election over its opposition to reform, has been shifting its position over the last four months. A bipartisan group in the Senate, that includes Republicans Marco Rubio, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, is due to publish proposals for a bill this month supporting a path to citizenship. But Bush, in the book co-authored with constitutional lawyer Clint Bolick, puts himself at odds with the bill emerging from the Senate. Instead of a path to citizenship, he argues in favour of a path only to residency. Pro-immigration groups oppose the latter option, saying there would be little incentive for undocumented workers to come forward.

But 24 hours later, after widespread surprise over his unexpected policy shift, Bush went on MSNBC to disavow the views in the book. He said he would support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants if a way could be found to produce legislation that would not act as magnet for more undocumented migrants.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/05/jeb-bush-disavows-immigration-reform