There's an old adage that the key to a successful business is location, location, location. I think it goes for politics as well. Nixon achieved electorial dominance by overcoming the Democrat's grip on the deep south. Clinton won the so-called 'New South' back and won two elections. George Bush's win over Al Gore turned out to be all about Florida, where Republican control of state government helped swing the electoral vote in a deadlocked state towards Bush.
And so this past weekend, Idaho's Republicans and Democrats gathered in two very different locations for their annual party conventions. The Republicans met in Sandpoint, the Democrats in Boise (okay, technically Garden City, but close enough). What could be more telling about the mindset of each party, and which is better positioning itself to take advantage of the future?
Here's a hint. It is not the Republicans. There are elements within the 'Grand Old Party' in this state that would prefer to see it stay 'old' and an exclusive 'party' even if it means it won't be quite so 'grand.' The rebellion against Party Chairman Kirk Sullivan was headed by conservative Rod Beck, who wants a primary system closed to all but registered Republicans reportedly because he feels the party's open primary system cost him the nomination for a legislative seat. But with Beck, it's really all about location. Where he lives, it is hard to imagine Beck winning an election even if he limited voting to Rod Beck supporters. Remember when he ridiculously ran for Boise mayor? Beck badly misjudged the changing political dynamics of the city and got trounced.
Now that Sullivan is out and Norm Semanko (who Beck supported) is in, Republicans should to be asking bigger questions. How do closed primaries help a party where independent voters are growing so fast? Do you really want to create a system where just a few months before the general election, the only people Independents can vote for in a primary are Democrats? Even with their substantial majority now, can the Republican party thrive by appealing to Idaho's rural factions while being openly hostile to its growing urban needs? If you were betting on the most effective path to political success, would you rather win over the voters around Boise ... or Sandpoint?
Idaho Republicans are already talking with some trepidation about how the census of 2010 will skew the state legislature even further towards urban interests. By 2020, it looks to be an outright rout and Democrats are primed to use redistricting to maximum advantage. They've already leveraged growth into a core of solid blue Democratic districts around Boise, areas Republicans don't have a prayer of recapturing in November. With the potential for turnout for Barack Obama in November, Democrats see the chance to pick up even more seats.
And if Democrats can position themselves as the party of urban Idaho ... the party that takes transportation needs seriously ... the party that is willing to trust the voter when it comes to issues like option taxes ... the party that believes in education and investing in our public schools ... they stand to see the kinds of big gains moderate Democrats in other western states have made over the past decade.
But growth represents an opportunity for Republicans as well. The statistics indicate that many people who move to Idaho (and will continue to do so, especially once the economy rebounds) are receptive to the Republican message of fiscal conservatism, smaller government and lower taxes. The problem is they tend to be more moderate than traditional Idaho Republicans and are moving into urban areas, not rural ones. It's hard to vote for candidates you aren't confident will help solve problems where you live.
Idaho Republicans seem fixated on preserving their dominant past rather than building for the future. If the state Republican party really believes they can continue to dominate by ignoring the Treasure Valley, defending the state's rural interests over urban ones and thus appeal to a declining constituency rather than finding ways to embrace an emerging one, then they have their heads firmly buried in the Sandpoint.
Comments