Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

The Seattle Times

Politics & Government


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Postman on Politics

Chief political reporter David Postman explores state, regional and national politics.

E-mail| About the blog | From the archive| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

August 11, 2008 9:38 AM

Top 2 Primary: The roots of Republican rebranding

Posted by David Postman

On this month’s primary ballot, 26 Republicans, including gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi, have dropped their common party identification and instead are listed as preferring the “GOP” or “GOP Party.”

It’s an obvious effort, at least on the part of some, to avoid the tarnished Republican brand. But state Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser says “GOP” and “Republican” mean the same thing - synonyms that voters understand.

I don’t think it’s going to make a dime’s worth of difference. I used it when I ran for office to refer to myself. It’s an academic question.

For academic questions, we turn to Will Mari, Times editorial intern and Friend of the Blog. After the jump, read Mari’s report on the birth of the GOP and how the archaic term may help Republicans this year.

“I have never seen a political party actually despised by so many Americans as the Republicans today,” said Bryan Jones, a professor of political science at the University of Washington and the director of the Center for American Politics and Public Policy.

By “avoiding the most toxic term,” Rossi is being politically savvy, Jones said.

“The only chance that Rossi has is to separate himself from the national party and blame Gregoire for the coming hard times,” he said. “GOP is kind of like ‘progressive’ rather than ‘liberal’ for Democrats: just a little less controversial.”

At this point, mental associations are key.

“‘GOP’ is used because any reference to ‘Republican’ brings forth images of George W. Bush as one of the worst presidents in history, while ‘GOP’ may avoid those images and leap back to the great ‘GOP presidents’ — Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt,” said Walter Williams, a professor emeritus of public policy at the UW’s Evans School of Public Affairs. Williams is a Democrat.

The history of the Republican Party’s alternative name can be traced back to the Civil War, said Margaret Pugh O’Mara, a visiting professor of American history and politics at the UW, and a Democrat. The acronym originally referred to the “Gallant Old Party” when it first appeared in the 1870s.

From the immediate post-Civil War era of Reconstruction all the way up through the turn of the century, the Republican Party was ascendant on the national stage, she said.

In this earlier, headier period of the party’s history, there was a somewhat vague but still calculated association with the Grand Army of the Republic, the patriotic organization for Union army Civil War veterans, said Bill Rorabaugh, a UW professor of 19th century American social history.

The group was closely allied with the GOP, meeting in state and national encampments every year from 1865 until the last veterans died in the 1930s, he said.

That’s also when the use of the phrase began to fade. It survives today as the legacy of the long connection between the Grand Army of the Republic and the Grand Old Party.

“There were close ties for a long time between Union army service, the GAR and the GOP,” Rorabaugh said. “A grand association, one might say.”

Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

Submit a comment

*Required Field



Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Posted by Turbine

9:52 AM, Aug 11, 2008

Hey Postman, Why did your "Truth Squad" stop refreshing the comments screen on Gregoire and the State Income Tax? Why didn't your Newspaper give a link to the YOU TUBE Video of Gregoire stating she is for an Income Tax to the SR editorial board? As a political commentator, doesn't it bother you that your publication calls something a "Half-Truth" when it is easily demonstrated to be a fact? Who is the Truth Squad? Who is on it? What is the criteria they use to determine objective truth?

Posted by JimD

10:10 AM, Aug 11, 2008

(staying on subject)

I don't have a problem with this.
If democrats were in a similarly unfortunate position and had an alternative brand affiliation they could use, I'm sure they'd do the same thing.

The question is - will the GOP brand be similarly tarnished with a continuation of the disastrous policies and behaviors that have ruined the republican brand?
I don't see any significant change - in either the McCain or Rossi campaign for example.
At this point, even relatively detached voters will no doubt conclude that GOP is just new lipstick on the same old pig.

Posted by Liberty Bell

10:25 AM, Aug 11, 2008

Hey Byron?
You missed our FIRST REPUBLICAN?
Your SHORT history lesson of our best Republicansin not really that confusing!
"I hope the education of the common people will be attended to; convinced that on their good sense we may rely with the most security for the preservation of a due degree of liberty."
Thomas Jefferson to James Madison
You missed our First and Second Republican Presidents!
See what haoppens when we leave our professors behind!

Posted by Bothsides

11:48 AM, Aug 11, 2008

If someone is informed enough to know that Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were GOP/Republicans, they sure as hell know that Dino Rossi is GOP/Republican and one in the same. This is a non-issue, and JimD's reference to lipstick on the same old pig is offensive. The Republican party is hardly in ruins, that is a leftist talking point that sounds like a broken record. Because GWB is not so popular, does not mean that conservatives abandon their principles and run and hide. The current status of the Republican party is continually beaten down by the left leaning media, it's an uphill road even in a 50/50 race.

Posted by Liberty Bell

12:50 PM, Aug 11, 2008

"...I remember once being much amused at seeing two partially intoxicated men engage in a fight with their great-coats on, which fight, after a long, and rather harmless contest, ended in each having fought himself out of his own coat and into that of the other. If the two leading parties of this day are really inentical with the two in the days of Jefferson and Adams, they have performed about the same feat as the two drunken men.
But soberly, it is no child's play to save the principals of Jefferson from total overthrow in this nation..."
Lincolns letter to the Boston Republicans, 1859

And Jeffersons Republican Attorney General Levi Lincoln?

Confusing those "Mystic Cords of Memory"

Posted by HowBiasedOfYou

1:30 PM, Aug 11, 2008

Let's see, for a history of the Republican Party whom does Postman ask? Why a bunch of Democrats of course.

Yup no bias there at all. Par for the course Mr Bias Postman.

Posted by JimD

3:12 PM, Aug 11, 2008

"...Because GWB is not so popular, does not mean that conservatives abandon their principles and run and hide..."

What "principles"?
Seriously - please explain what these supposed republican "principles" are in today's republican party.

Posted by Liberty Bell

4:56 PM, Aug 11, 2008

What Principals?

How about these so called Republicans on their way to a Federal Penal Institution?

See what happens when you think your a republican, but are a democrat in disguise.

www.community.adn.com/node/112569

Posted by Bothsides

5:01 PM, Aug 11, 2008

Same as they were in yesterday's Republican party, I don't think it's necessary for me to spell them out JimD, you're perfectly capable of looking them up, I can certainly see the Dems principles, don't agree with them, but I know what they are.

Posted by JimD

7:48 PM, Aug 11, 2008

I thought as much.
You don't know either.

Kind of sad - I come from a long line of republicans when "republican" and "GOP" actually meant something everyone could articulate and understand without having to hit the history books.
Now it's anything goes - reckless and irresponsible spending, growing government, huge deficits, mediocre foreign policy, contempt for the working and middle class, guns, eliminating regulation on food and product safety, nasty, hysterical screaming and temper tantrums on talk radio and conservative cable channels....and oh yes, total obsession with the most dangerous threats to the country - monogamous homosexuals and stem cells.

Posted by FormerDemocrat

11:18 AM, Aug 12, 2008

"Kind of sad - I come from a long line of republicans when "republican" and "GOP" actually meant something everyone could articulate and understand without having to hit the history books."

Funny thing. I come from a long line of Democrats when being the party of the people actually meant something, not party of the letch and the liar as it is today. Gov McGreevey, Bill Clinton, Gov Elliot Spitzer they all cannot keep it in their pants. ANd apparently they also like raping litle girls like form Democrat gov Neil Goldschmidt of Oregon. And then we have the likes of Democrat William Jefferson who gets caught taking bribes and what does the Democrat Party do? They promote him to the Homeland Security Committee.

Posted by Bothsides

11:50 AM, Aug 12, 2008

"Now it's anything goes - reckless and irresponsible spending, growing government, huge deficits, mediocre foreign policy, contempt for the working and middle class, guns, eliminating regulation on food and product safety, nasty, hysterical screaming and temper tantrums on talk radio and conservative cable channels....and oh yes, total obsession with the most dangerous threats to the country - monogamous homosexuals and stem cells."

My oh my JimD, let's talk about a temper tantrum (see above).

Since when does the Republican party have contempt for guns, I think you've got that backwards, it's the D's that have the contempt, except for Hillary, why, her father taught her how to shoot that rifle when she was just a little girl (stated in that southern drawl that she drags out on command). Of course the D's have much to be proud of if one is to believe that abortion is the murdering of unborn children.

Posted by Leslie Bloss

12:34 PM, Aug 12, 2008

I am also a GOP/Republican--I certainly didn't think the designation would confuse anyone!

www.blossforthe36th.com

Posted by JimD

2:04 PM, Aug 12, 2008

Bothsides -

I admit it's not particularly well-written but note the comma after "...middle class".

"...mediocre foreign policy, contempt for the working and middle class, guns, eliminating regulation on food and product safety,..."

"Guns" was part of a list, not an additional object of contempt.

You do like to over-simplify things, Bothsides.
The fact is, the majority of american DO believe abortion is, at least, manslaughter.
But a majority ALSO believe it's a woman's right to commit that violence to the life they're carrying.
This conflicting view of life is not unique.
Many believe the death penalty is murder, but support it - poor analogy to the life of an unborn, but you get the point.
It's not just a matter of taking a life, but whether a particular individual - pregnant woman, hangman, soldier or cop - has the right to commit the act.
That's why the LEGAL concept of abortion revolves around preserving the mother's choice.

Anti-abortion and but pro-choice is not a conflicting belief.
In fact it's exactly where most Americans stand on the issue right now.

Posted by jan

3:20 PM, Aug 13, 2008

If this stunt helps Rossi we deserve no better.

Posted by Ted Evans

4:20 PM, Aug 13, 2008

I'm voting Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

I'm voting Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

I'm voting Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.

I'm voting Democrat because I'm not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe three or four pointy headed elitist liberals need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe that when the terrorists don't have to hide from us over there, when they come over here I don't want to have any guns in the house to fight them off with.

I'm voting Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.


Makes ya wonder how anyone would EVER vote Democrat , now doesn't it?

Posted by KS

6:54 PM, Aug 14, 2008

Next thing we sorely need is term limits. It's time for the career politicians (particularly those in Seattle) to actually contribute to society for a change instead of defile it.

Posted by JimD

10:42 AM, Aug 15, 2008

We have term limits.
They're called "elections".
Last thing we need is more republican control of our choices....

Recent entries

Aug 13, 08 - 03:56 PM
I'm away from the blog

Aug 12, 08 - 08:06 AM
Local firm tied to Alaska scandal

Aug 11, 08 - 05:03 PM
Off-duty cops boot Demo cameraman from Rossi event

Aug 11, 08 - 10:37 AM
Hughes leaves World for history

Aug 11, 08 - 09:38 AM
Top 2 Primary: The roots of Republican rebranding

Advertising

Marketplace

Advertising

Advertising

Categories
Calendar

August

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Browse the archives

August 2008

July 2008

June 2008

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

Advertising

Buy a link here