As implied by my previous post, the discussion on the future direction of conservatism continues over on Slate. The best, most direct point so far that sums up the GOP’s current predicament (from Doug Kmiec):

One needs a philosophy of governance in addition to honoring the constitutional structure. Barack Obama’s philosophy of government provides service for needs unmet by the market. And the Republicans’ philosophy?

I got the impression over the past year that my Republican friends (at least those who voted for McCain) were supporting the ideas that the GOP represented in the past–specifically, a more pragmatic, efficient government that balances the costs and benefits of its actions–against a strawman representing the Democrats of the past.  But the Democratic Party is the one that emodies this practical, free market philosophy now, and the GOP has become the party of social conservatives.  The right’s throwaway “all tax cuts all the time” line provides no real governing philosophy, and no real solution to widely-acknowledged problems. (It is the mantra of an opposition party, at best.)  The party of ideas driven by William F. Buckley and, later, Newt Gingrich no longer exists. The GOP is a parody of its former self.

The Democrats need an intellectual challenge to their own plans and ideas in order to govern well. Here’s hoping the Republicans get their act together quickly enough to provide one.

Tucker Carlson on what the GOP needs to do to regain the majority:

Finally, after the party has settled on what it believes, it ought to go shopping for a leader. I recommend someone who speaks fluent English. This matters, it turns out, and not just for aesthetic reasons. In a democracy, eloquence is a basic condition of leadership. A president has a moral as well as a political obligation to explain his program. His constitutional powers are limited to just a few (war, the veto). His real authority comes from persuasion.

It helps if you can talk.

Slate magazine is hosting an online discussion (in the form of back-and-forth posts, not a live chat) on the future of conservatism in the new Obama era.  Tucker Carlson, Ross Douthat, Douglas Kmiec, Jim Manzi, Kathleen Parker, and Christine Todd Whitman contribute. Definitely worth checking out.

Slate magazine’s final electoral map projection puts 273 electoral votes in the “safe Dem” column.  There’s a very good chance this election will be the sort that my generation has never seen: one that is decided early.

As an economist, I believe that competition drives the parties to adapt and market themselves to evenly divide the electorate (thank you, game theory).  But something happened this time to give us a different result: The GOP miscalculated.  It’s like Coca-Cola’s experiment with “New Coke”–they simply misjudged what people wanted, and they are going to pay, big time.  Like Coca-Cola, the GOP has enough brand recognition to bounce back from this, but it’s always odd to see a big player make such a huge misstep.

I am a newly-religious follower of Ross Douthat’s blog on conservative politics, because I’m very curious to see whose heads roll, which new leaders take the helm, and how the Republican platform changes to attract more voters.  The next 8 years should be very interesting, and very fun.

Chris Buckley–son of the father of the modern Conservative movement–loses his National Review column after endorsing Obama.  An interesting footnote in the transformation of the Right from entirely intellectual to anti-intellectual.  What would his father have done if he still ran the magazine?

Were his pup still alive, Buckley said, “what my dear old dad probably would have done is taken out two pages and had me roundly denounced, carcass tossed out on the sidewalk. It would have been journalism. It would have been interesting.”