Who Speaks for the Right?

After blogger Andrew Sullivan announced last week that he was "leaving the right," I argued that there is no longer much room on the political right for conservatives in the original sense of the term. Conservatives who favor gradual change and take a modest view of what governments can accomplish are being pushed aside in favor of more radical, activist conservatives, who want to transform the country into their particular idealized image of what it should be. And after eight years of wild deficit spending under President Bush and—for the most part—a solidly Republican Congress, it is difficult to see Republicans any longer as the party of smaller government. It's not, of course, that there are no small-government conservatives left in the Republican Party, but rather that they are increasingly marginal figures.

Consider that a recent 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll found that 26% of Americans considered radio commentator Rush Limbaugh the most influential conservative in the country. Fox News host Glenn Beck got the second most votes, with 11% of respondents saying he was the most influential, followed by Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney with 10% each. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) came in last with 4%, after Sean Hannity, which isn't surprising since most Americans probably don't even know who Boehner is. While the poll didn't include a number of other notable conservatives—and 15% of the respondents said none of the people listed were the most influential—there probably aren't many more who should have been included. John McCain, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee could all have been added, although I doubt any of them are either popular enough or have a clear enough vision to compete with Limbaugh. Political commentators like David Frum and Bill Kristol clearly don't have enough of a following or enough influence. Probably James Dobson, the evangelical Christian founder of Focus on the Family, would have gotten some votes.


All of the figures at the top of the poll—Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, and Cheney—have devoted, passionate followings. It would be a mistake to dismiss any of them, since they are all smart and extremely gifted politically. But as popular as they are among a certain part of the Republican Party, none of them have much broad appeal. As much as Limbaugh's followers love him, Pollster concluded earlier in the year that just 25% of Americans have a favorable impression of him, about half as many as have an unfavorable one. Former Vice President Cheney is similarly unpopular. Sarah Palin is the most widely-liked of the bunch, with 40% of American having a favorable impression of her. Nevertheless, even more—48%—have an unfavorable impression of her, with only 29% of independents saying she would be an effective President.

None of those figures have much appeal to moderates or even to a majority of Americans because their ideas are generally so far from the mainstream. Limbaugh, of course, was recently dropped from a bid to buy the St. Louis Rams when many players said they wouldn't play for a man who had said, among other things, that professional football often "looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips." Even Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele dismissed Limbaugh as merely "an entertainer" whose rhetoric was "ugly"—although Steele took back what he said after facing a firestorm of criticism from Limbaugh's followers. Glenn Beck, meanwhile, was described in a recent Time profile as having "a knack for stitching seemingly unrelated data points into possible conspiracies"—he has said, for example, that President Obama's support of health care, college aid programs, and environmental programs is part of a secret plan to get reparations for slavery. Beck's disingenuous technique of "just asking" implausible questions as a way of legitimizing them was recently parodied on both South Park and The Daily Show. Cheney's extreme views on national security and executive power helped him rival Dan Quayle as least popular modern Vice President. And Sarah Palin, as I wrote before, doesn't seem to have much to say at all, and typically comes off sounding, as Jon Stewart put it, like "a conservative boiler-plate mad-lib."

Yet these are the most prominent voices of the right wing. They may speak strongly to the sizable alienated minority that feels that "the real America" is being destroyed by demographic changes, but they don't offer a coherent philosophy of government with any real broad appeal.

LinkedIn meets Tinder in this mindful networking app

Swipe right to make the connections that could change your career.

Getty Images
Sponsored
Swipe right. Match. Meet over coffee or set up a call.

No, we aren't talking about Tinder. Introducing Shapr, a free app that helps people with synergistic professional goals and skill sets easily meet and collaborate.

Keep reading Show less

4 reasons Martin Luther King, Jr. fought for universal basic income

In his final years, Martin Luther King, Jr. become increasingly focused on the problem of poverty in America.

(Photo by J. Wilds/Keystone/Getty Images)
Politics & Current Affairs
  • Despite being widely known for his leadership role in the American civil rights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr. also played a central role in organizing the Poor People's Campaign of 1968.
  • The campaign was one of the first to demand a guaranteed income for all poor families in America.
  • Today, the idea of a universal basic income is increasingly popular, and King's arguments in support of the policy still make a good case some 50 years later.
Keep reading Show less

Why avoiding logical fallacies is an everyday superpower

10 of the most sandbagging, red-herring, and effective logical fallacies.

Photo credit: Miguel Henriques on Unsplash
Personal Growth
  • Many an otherwise-worthwhile argument has been derailed by logical fallacies.
  • Sometimes these fallacies are deliberate tricks, and sometimes just bad reasoning.
  • Avoiding these traps makes disgreeing so much better.
Keep reading Show less

Why I wear my life on my skin

For Damien Echols, tattoos are part of his existential armor.

Videos
  • In prison Damien Echols was known by his number SK931, not his name, and had his hair sheared off. Stripped of his identity, the only thing he had left was his skin.
  • This is why he began tattooing things that are meaningful to him — to carry a "suit of armor" made up the images of the people and objects that have significance to him, from his friends to talismans.
  • Echols believes that all places are imbued with divinity: "If you interact with New York City as if there's an intelligence behind... then it will behave towards you the same way."
Keep reading Show less