Did Eisenhower Kill The GOP?

In a November 8, 1954 letter, President Eisenhower wrote a personal letter declaring that the GOP needed to move toward the political center in an effort to win elections even though the country was heading in a dangerous direction.

Now it is true that I believe this country is following a dangerous trend when it permits too great a degree of centralization of governmental functions. I oppose this–in some instances the fight is a rather desperate one. But to attain any success it is quite clear that the Federal government cannot avoid or escape responsibilities which the mass of the people firmly believe should be undertaken by it. The political processes of our country are such that if a rule of reason is not applied in this effort, we will lose everything–even to a possible and drastic change in the Constitution. This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon “moderation” in government. Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.

This strategy of moderation has always been the GOP’s plan of attack. It existed long before Eisenhower but he certainly raised the white flag of surrender to the growing centralization of power. Your standard GOP leader will talk about the supposed brilliance of reaching out to moderates and independents. We need to have a big tent party. After all, you don’t legislate unless you win elections!

This strategy sounds intelligent but it’s very short-sighted. It’s held true and preached by folks in the GOP who are not as wise as they think they are. In fact, this strategy has doomed the GOP in the long run.

I discus the long-term consequences of this strategy in my article with OCR, Why the GOP Lost 2012 and Why It Will Continue to Lose. In discussing this strategy, I reasoned that

The GOP has been guided by a short-sighted approach of recognizing that a party cannot legislate unless it wins elections while simultaneously believing that the GOP’s base will always come out to vote. The consequence is that the GOP, for the last century, has always tried to reach out to moderates and independents at the expense of squashing the fallacies of statism. Obama is merely the result of a century of the GOP’s failure to stop America’s gradual acceptance of the need for an expanding government to cure the alleged shortcomings of capitalism.

With multiple generations of Americans being taught that a large government is the solution to our problems, a party that supposedly stands on a platform of limited government is slowing committing suicide. It’s literally like a heroine addict taking lager and larger doses to avoid a relapse with no awareness of the unavoidable overdose. As I asked:

Such wise decision makers never asked the simple question: after a century of permitting statism to develop in America, why would the people want a Republican big-government, anti-capitalist when there was already one in the White House who was bigger and better at it? Obama and his resounding promises of curing America from the purported consequences of capitalism did not need to be replaced. The Obama presidency was the required cure according to generations of Americans who have been taught that more government was the solution to our problems.

The GOP will die unless it admits that it is no longer a party of limited government or if it changes it strategy to a long-term approach of squashing the myths of statism. If the former is chosen, the GOP should die. If the latter is chosen, there will be short-term losses but the GOP will save itself and our country.