When Republican state committee members come together this evening for a long-delayed vote on whether to endorse the national Republican platform — a document wildly out of step with most Massachusetts voters on social and economic policy — the decision will be a referendum on the future of the local party. Will it take an independent course by explicitly rejecting the hard-edged conservatism of the national party? Or will it choose to maximize the contrast with local Democrats by seconding even the most extreme of the national party’s stances?
For its sake, and the state’s, the Massachusetts GOP should pursue an independent course. The party’s national platform features, among other provisions, a ban on abortions without exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother, and a refusal to consider any deal on the federal budget that contains new tax revenues.
Comments
We will be watching closely. Make the right decision or more will unenroll.
I get the impression that Mr Jacoby does not agree with this editorial.
Seems a bit like shutting the barn door after the cows have gotten out.
Thanks for weighing in, Globe; you earned respect for your opinion on this by endorsing both Brown and Tisei. I have no inside information here, but am confident that most members of the Republican State Committee will reject this really dumb idea; it's probably good to have the vote to show the public how small this fundamentalist group is within the Party.
This comment has been removed.
Dsrn, you're right, lesval! I was so delighted by the endorsement of Tisei that I extrapolated, since I see the two being similar independent thinkers. In fact, the Globe was really endorsing against Tierney, who was so bad that even some knee-jerk Democrats couldn't deal with it. Thanks for the correction.
This comment has been removed.
I question whether Massachusetts Democrats are open-minded enough to imagine a Repubulican not toeing the party line, since the vast majority of Democrats do.
Your post would make perfect sense except for:
Senator Scott Brown
Governor Mitt Romney
Senator Ed Brooke
Governor Bill Weld
etc.
Mass Democrats are plenty open minded when they're not voting for climate change denial, divinely approved rapes, trickle down economics, homophobia, etc
When a liberal Democrat tells us what we should do the answer is clear. Exactly the opposite. The smugness of this editorial is beyond the pale. You can continue to subjigate your morality, ethical and religious standards and pander to the party of no responsibility. Don't ask me to lower my standards because you have. The current Democratic party has become the party of do whatever it takes to win...no matter how low, slanderous, deceitful or untrue. We may have lost, but our souls are intact. You've sold yours for an election. Think about what you've won the next time some abortion doc pops a drill into the head of a seven month old fetus in the name of womens' health.
Not sure whether to laugh or cry at this post. it has elements of both comedy and tragedy.
This is a ridiculous op/ed. The Commonwealth will liberalize itself out of business without the GOP Nat'l Program having any impact at all. Most Progressives could care less.
Work on the message, because this is sort of a ridiculous comment.
What rubbish. The Commonwealth's formula of high taxes, excessive regulation, government dependency, “progressive” totalitarianism, and terminal corruption as a result of decades of one-party dominance is causing businesses either not to stay away, leave, or cut existing jobs. And against this backdrop, Globe editors, and local pols, cannot countenance a Republican Party that offers voters a real alternative to the old ways of doing things. Instead, all they can do is cavil about the local GOP's relationship with national Republicans, which are termed too "hard-edged" conservative. (By the way, when have you ever read of a Globe editor or reporter using the phrase "ultra Left" or "hard-edged" to describe a person or thing that is too "progressive"?)
In point of fact, the state GOP could ally itself with Stalinists or Fabians, or even the Red Army Brigade, and local Democrat demagogues would still paint the party and its candidates as too conservative. Example: Scott Brown ran as the Senator from Planned Parenthood, was invisible during the Republican convention, eschewed the label Republican, and was still (incorrectly) labeled a serf of the national GOP. Example: Richard Tisei campaigned as if he were seeking the Congressional seat from Key West, or Mikanos, and Tierney (of all people) still referred to him, incredibly, as a Tea party Republican.
The national GOP will do what it will. But just maybe Massachusetts’ "social and economic" malaise is a result of there not being enough, rather than too much, healthy differentiation between the parties, because there are not enough, rather than too many, people thinking "outside the box", because there is not enough, rather than too much, choice at the ballot box (ideologically and personally), with the result that nothing changes.