The Republican Party has equipment that does not work.  Their national identity does not have the ability to bring excitement and stimulate the imagination of the national electorate.  There are a few of the little things they do right.  They can get some of the small things done adequately, get us mildly interested.  However when it comes to the big show, it will end in disaster with a lot of soul searching and finger pointing.

Tired of the impotency metaphor.  Let's move on.

The modern Republican Party has built a brand that works in carved out legislative districts, and states that have local Democratic parties who do not know how to win elections (see the reasons Democrats have failed in state elections here.) I want to address the issue of branding in the local districts. While the republicans worked to get majorities in state houses, and in turn created districts that look like a 4 year old was coloring way out of the lines, the Democratic Party worked on a national messaging and outreach programs.  The republicans created a brand that would cater to a slight majority of the people in these gerrymandered districts.  Their local brand became dependent on political rhetoric that would cause the majority to fear the minority.  Black lives matter, equal pay for women, transgender acceptance, gay marriage, and many more social issues became the fodder for republican attacks. Divide and hate were the core of republican rhetoric. 

While campaigning in the local districts, these wedge issues can help drive necessary voter turnout among certain segments of the white vote.  In addition to creating the majority fear, the local republicans worked very hard to create a narrative of Democratic party voter fraud.

Go ahead and look up cases of actual voter fraud over the last twenty years, I can wait.

Welcome back, I am sure you came across a few cases (the name Ann Coulter definitely came up) but for the most part there is an insignificantly small amount of voter fraud cases.  Why are the republicans so worried? It works in their narrative to protect the right to vote, and to deny the vote at the same time.

These dividing tactics have served the Republican Party very well in the local elections, and helped push their message through a lazy corporate media.  Why do they not work at the national level? The answer is quite simple. They cannot sell their majority fear to a large nation. The urban areas have actual power in the national election.  Very few big states, like New York and California, can give a candidate a sizable electoral advantage (plus Texas is clearly in the national Democratic Party sights, watch out).  The Democratic party has been less than desirable on their social messaging, just look at Hillary Clinton, but they are not publicly speaking out against these emerging minority groups.  When Caitlyn Jenner makes news, Mike Huckabee makes a moronic joke about dressing like a girl to shower with girls in high school. He completely gave up any chance to win a national election with that comment, and he does not care.  It is more important for Mike Huckabee to be appealing to an out of touch voting block who will vote republican no matter what a candidate says.  When the scion of the Duggar clan admits to molesting young girls, including his own sisters, most of the national republicans do not condemn.  Instead they spend their time pushing false equivalence narratives to again protect a voter base that will never abandon them.  I know the argument will arise that you need the out of touch hate groups of the party to win the primary.  Even if that is the case, what you say to appeal to the hate groups will live on through the election (see Romney and 47%).  

I want you to think about what I just explained, the republicans need the out of touch hate groups.  Regardless of what the Fox News pundits say, America has always been socially progressive.  We have a number of amendments giving people rights, and we have only one taking away rights (plus that amendment was repealed so chalk up one more to giving rights). The electorate has expanded for one group when we acknowledge the minority rights. The early Republican Party (Lincoln's party, not Reagan's) saw an influx of voters after the 15th amendment.  The republicans again saw a voter influx after the 19th amendment.  The USA is the melting pot, we want your huddle masses yearning to breathe free.  Where in the hell does intolerance fit into that narrative.  There is no law demanding that anyone get married, so why do you want to deny marriage? There is no law dictating ones gender, so why do you care what someone feels in their soul?  The Republican Party seems to care about these issues, and that is why they are always fighting uphill in the national elections.

This is where my impotence metaphor is valid.  The republicans have all the right equipment, and it works for the most part.  The issue lies in a very important action, the republicans cannot achieve the ultimate satisfaction (the Presidency I mean of course).  Their grass roots of intolerance does not allow for them to reach out to an audience that does not buy the social division.  The Democratic Party has been sleep walking for decades on governance and strategy.  Their greatest advantage is the disdain for the Republican Party. Social division will always drive the disenfranchised urban centers to turn out (usually barely enough) for the elections that matter to them.  Without Ralph Nader, Al Gore would have been the President. George W Bush needed that Democratic Party division in one particular state to win the election with his light hate. Time has moved forward, communication technology has improved, and the Republican Party has continued their policy of division and hate.  

The first Republican to learn that all Americans can vote will be the person the Democrats have not been prepared to face.

RD Kulik

RD Kulik is the Head Editor for Seed Sing.  He is flabbergasted that people who openly hate other Americans will be featured on Meet the Press this Sunday.  Come write for us to express your ideas. Join us.