From longtime Republican luminaries to the party's rising stars,
almost everyone asked about the Republicans' Nov. 6 election drubbing
seems to agree that a wholesale update is necessary for a party that
appears to be running years behind Democrats in adapting to rapidly
changing campaigns and an evolving electorate.
Interviews with more than a dozen Republicans at all levels of
the party indicated that post-election soul-searching must quickly turn
into a period of action.
``We've got to have a very brutally honest review from stem to
stern of what we did and what we didn't do, and what worked and what
failed,'' said former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, who ran the party
in the 1990s.
The party ``has to modernize in a whole wide range of ways,''
added former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who ran against White House
nominee Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential primary. ``We were clearly
wrong on a whole range of fronts.''
To determine what went wrong, the Republican National Committee
is examining every detail of the 2012 elections, with the goal of
rebuilding the party for the future _ much as the Democratic Party did
in the 1980s after suffering a series of stinging losses at all levels
of government.
Now, as was the case back then, the stakes are enormous for the
party that failed to win the White House and has lost the popular vote
for several national elections in a row. They're perhaps even higher for
Republicans grappling for ways to court a rapidly changing electorate
whose voting groups don't naturally gravitate toward the Republican
Party. The dangers of failing to act could be severe: permanent minority
status.
So it's little surprise that, after the election, some Republicans were quick to sound stark warnings.
The scale of the losses largely shocked a party whose top-shelf
operatives went into Election Day believing Republicans had at least a
decent chance of capturing the White House and gaining ground in
Congress, where Republicans controlled the House of Representatives and
had a sizable minority in the Senate.
Instead, Romney lost all but one of the nine contested
battleground states, North Carolina, to President Barack Obama.
Republicans also lost ground to Democrats in both houses of Congress,
though Republicans retained their House majority.
How to move forward dominated the discussions at last week's
Republican Governors Association meeting in Las Vegas, where some of the
party's leading voices castigated Romney's assessment _ made in what
was supposed to be a private telephone call to donors _ that Obama won
re-election because of the ``gifts'' the president had provided to
blacks, Hispanics and young voters. These governors faulted Romney.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal attributed Romney's loss to a lack of ``a specific vision that connected with the American people.''
Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, who describes himself as a
``pro-choice moderate Republican,'' echoed Republicans across the
spectrum when he said last week: ``We need to be a larger-tent party.''
Brown lost his Senate seat to Democrat Elizabeth Warren.
Across the board, Republicans say that arguably the most urgent
task facing the party is changing its attitude about immigration as it
looks to woo Hispanics. This rapidly growing group voted overwhelmingly
for Obama, by margins of 7-to-1 over Romney, who had shifted to the
right on the issue during the Republican primary campaign.
It didn't take long after the election for even staunch
conservatives to start changing their tune on immigration. Days after
the election, even conservative TV and radio host Sean Hannity said he
would support an immigration reform bill.
Said Barbour: ``If we would be for good economic policy in terms
of immigration, that would go a long way toward solving the political
problem.''
It's not just Hispanics.
Republicans said they also have work to do with single women and
younger voters, many of whom tend to be more liberal on social issues
than the current Republican Party. These Republicans said a change in
tone is needed, though not a change in principles such as opposition to
abortion.
``We need to make sure that we're not perceived as intolerant,''
said Ron Kaufman, a veteran Republican strategist who advised Romney's
campaign. ``The bottom line is we were perceived to be intolerant on
some issues. And tone-deaf on others.''
Republicans also said the party has to work on its relationship with working-class voters.
``Republicans have to start understanding that small business and
entrepreneurs are important, but the people who work for them are also
important,'' said Rep. Charles Bass of New Hampshire, who lost his seat
to Democrat Ann Kuster. ``We've got to be compassionate conservatives.''
Republican leaders also said their party needs to change how it
communicates its message. Obama's campaign, they said, was particularly
effective at talking directly to voters, and building relationships over
long periods of time, whereas the Republicans were more focused on
top-down communication such as TV ads and direct mail.
``There are whole sections of the American public that we didn't even engage with,'' Gingrich said.
Others pointed to the pressing need to recruit candidates who
know how to stick to a carefully honed message, especially in a
Twitter-driven era. Among their case studies: Senate candidates Richard
Mourdock in Indiana and Todd Akin in Missouri, who both discussed rape
and pregnancy during the campaign, to the chagrin of party leaders
looking to narrow the Democrats' advantage among women.
``We need candidates who are capable of articulating their policy
positions without alienating massive voting blocs,'' said Kevin
McLaughlin, a Republican operative who worked on several Senate races
for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Many Republicans say the party doesn't have a choice but to change _ and quickly.
Said Kaufmann: ``In this business, either you learn and grow or you die.''
Subscribe to this comment's feed
