Will the GOP Go the Way of the Whig Party?

In 1852 there were two major political parties in the United States – the Democrats and the Whigs. While Whig Millard Fillmore – who succeeded the deceased Zachary Taylor – was President, deep problems existed for the Whigs. The Whigs held under 40% of the seats in the Senate and House, but it faced a far greater difficulty. The Whig Party was splintered over the issue of slavery. The Whigs would nominate General Winfield Scott over incumbent President Millard Fillmore. Scott lost soundly to Democrat Franklin Pierce. The Whigs would never elect another President to office. The Whigs disintegrated into “the Opposition Party,” a loosely affiliated coalition of politicians united only by their disdain for the Democrats. By 1857, the Republican Party was organized, and there was not a single trace left of the Whigs.

The political similarities between the Whigs and today’s GOP are superficial at best. The Whig Party favored government intervention in the free market, public works, and tariffs – all of which modern Republicans would at least be against in theory if not in practice. However, like the Whigs, the GOP is now becoming a minority party and on the verge of becoming a regional party. While the effects of decades of gerrymandering allow the GOP to remain strongly competitive in the House of Representatives, its prospects in the Senate are dwindling. Susan Collins remains the only Republican Senator in New England, and there are no Republican Senators on the West Coast. Changing demographics suggest that the GOP will continue to lose influence in the Southwest. As white Americans gradually become a minority, the GOP will have a more difficult time electing a President.

The Whig division over the issue of slavery led to its demise. The GOP today finds itself deeply divided on several issues. On domestic policy, Tea Party Republicans favor deep spending cuts while moderate Republicans continue to favor economic policies that are often indistinguishable from those held by Democrats. Despite giving lip service to Reagan conservatism, the Republican Party has shown itself to be no more willing or able to deal with the exploding national debt than the Democratic Party. On foreign policy and civil liberties, the libertarian wing of the GOP favors less military intervention and a greater concern for protecting Constitutional rights while the neoconservatives continue to espouse bellicose foreign policy and continue to insist that even a decade after the 9/11 attacks, curtailing civil liberties in the name of security is necessary to defend the nation against terrorism. The reactions by neoconservative Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham to Senator Rand Paul’s filibuster against the use of drones to kill American non-combatants on American soil was a perfect illustration of this growing schism within the GOP.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” This may prove true for the GOP as Karl “Turd Blossom” Rove begins to wage a civil war against the Tea Party wing of the party. Rove’s Conservative Victory Project is an offshoot of his American Crossroads super PAC and is aimed at defending the RINO mainstream of the party – made up by old and tired moderate Rockefeller Republicans and discredited neoconservatives – against “whacko bird” insurgents. While underestimating Rove would be a mistake, what would he accomplish if successful? Would a few more GOP seats in the House or Senate be worth it if the candidates ended up being purple RINOS closer to blue than red? More likely, the winner of Rove’s civil war will be Progressive Democrats.

Accurate or not, the GOP is now gaining a national reputation as merely an obstructionist “Opposition Party” united only by its disdain for President Obama and the Democrats. There is no clear party message and even fewer convictions when it comes to its nebulous principles. Just as Governor Mitt Romney was unsuccessful in defeating President Obama by merely being “the candidate who is not Barack Obama,” Republicans will not enjoy long-term success by running candidates who are merely “the candidates not wearing blue.” Bearing an elephant insignia rather than a donkey insignia is simply not enough anymore.