There is no Reagan Coalition

A lot of talk lately has been about whether the "Reagan Coalition" is breaking up, or is already dead (see Jonah Goldberg in the Washington Post for an overview of this). Ed Rollins, who is working for Mike Huckabee, seems to be the author of the idea that the divide between economic conservatives, national security conservatives, and social conservatives is too great for any candidate to bridge. But the idea is dead wrong - the Reagan Coalition isn't dead, because there is no "Reagan Coalition" - there never was.

There was a "New Deal Coalition" when Franklin Roosevelt used the expansion of the federal government to build support among interest groups - Social Security for seniors, the Wagner Act for Unions, the PWA and WPA to attempt to buy votes, etc. (pick up Amity Shlaes' The Forgotten Man for an analysis of how many New Deal programs were designed to win in 1936).

But Reagan and conservatives had no such "coalition," simply a set of principles. Rush Limbaugh beat me to the punch on this issue today:

Conservatism is a philosophy. It's not a scheme. It's not a plan to figure out what the American people need and want, and then give it to them. That's populism! Conservatism is a philosophy based on God-given natural rights.

Reagan didn't build a coalition by appeal to group interests, he championed ideas and a vision for the future that appealed to Americans. Reagan talked and wrote - even before campaigning for president - about getting government out of our daily lives, about reducing the size of government, about cutting taxes, about promoting economic growth and free markets, about looking to private solutions, about restoring values, about the right to life, about a strong military to oppose communism and the cold war.

I feel like I've given short shrift to Reagan's vision, but the only way to articulate it would be to extensively quote Reagan - because the strength of Reagan was his ability to communicate his vision and his principles of government. It was this vision - not a "coalition" - that led to his victory. Voters - including "Reagan Democrats", fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, and on and on - responded to that message, and agreed with those principles.

The problem with the Republican party is not a rise of "Big Government Conservatives" (even those who call themselves Crunchy or Heroic) - at least not principled "Big Government Conservatives". The problem is the abandonment of conservative principles as a part of election strategy.

Karl Rove's plan to build a "permanent majority" through "compassionate" conservatism is a key example of ignoring (or not understanding) conservative principles and enacting a populist agenda to try to win votes. It didn't work for long. Unfortunately, Republican candidates for president are trying this same method of coalition building. Running a campaign that you can appeal to all three legs of the Reagan Coalition (hint to Mitt and Fred) is a loser.

The candidate that wins will be the first to say with conviction: "Here are my principles, here is my philosophy of government, this is what I believe" and to do so - like Reagan - in a manner that persuades and appeals to fiscal, social, and defense conservatives, libertarians, moderates, independents, Reagan Democrats, and anyone who would rather vote for a principled conservative than a pandering politician.