Red and Purple: How Republicans Can Prevail in PA
Why, Newsweek recently asked, do “Republicans Keep Losing in Pennsylvania”? Multiple answers could be offered. Pennsylvanians are notoriously independent, known for split-ticket voting and a healthy skepticism of out-of-state carpet-bagger candidates. And Pennsylvania Republicans are unlikely to win any close elections until they solve the dilemma of the mail-in ballot and catch up to Democrat voter turn-out.
Another answer has broader implications, both for Republican politics in Pennsylvania and for the national GOP: Republican voters, especially the conservative base, tend to see issues (and therefore candidate selection) in black and white, in terms of ideological purity. This is not a bad thing in itself; principles matter. But perhaps Republicans need to see the political world as less black and white and more red and purple.
This isn’t a call to sacrifice principle but to acknowledge and accept political reality. Some districts in Pennsylvania are deeply red. In these places, strong conservatives easily win general elections. But whether conservatives like it or not, the state is also loaded with swing districts where moderate Republicans can win and hold seats – think U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick in Bucks County, or former U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent in the Lehigh Valley – while more conservative candidates struggle to find success.
Republicans from the moderate and conservative wings of the party should reflect on this reality in Pennsylvania. Any serious political strategy would treat these two situations quite differently. Below are a few thoughts worthy of reflection for both moderate Republicans and deep-red conservatives, in Pennsylvania and beyond.
Conservatives must respect the demographic realities of purple districts and figure out how to work with them. This leads to two practical applications. First, conservatives need to take a serious look at purple districts and apply the William F. Buckley Rule: in any election, conservatives should support the “rightwardmost viable candidate.” Put differently, the question is: Who is the most conservative candidate who can actually win the election? This is a matter of prudence. It is not a call simply to support moderates – as some moderate Republicans argue for doing, even in districts where more conservative candidates could find success. By analyzing the electorate in each election, conservatives should realistically decide who can actually win a general election in the particular circumstances.
It’s no good nominating conservatives who check all the right boxes on policy positions and then get slaughtered in general elections: see Doug Mastriano for Pennsylvania governor. Mastriano is quite capable of winning and holding a State Senate seat to represent Franklin and Adams Counties. But the writing was on the wall throughout 2022 that, for reasons ranging from policy positions to communication style to inadequate fundraising and campaigning, he could not win a statewide election in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Republicans picked the wrong candidate for the race, period. When choosing primary candidates, conservatives should think carefully about the political realities of the race. If a moderate incumbent is not producing good results, for example, they should decide whether a more conservative candidate can win that seat before the base calls for a primary challenge. Replacing a moderate Republican officeholder with a more conservative Republican challenger who loses the general election is not a win. Ousting a “RINO” only to wind up with a Democrat is a bad deal.
Second, in safely red districts, conservatives should be more selective about the type of conservative candidate they select. In these situations, the question is not about whether the candidate can win but about how successfully he will implement conservative policies once in office. A far-right ideology alone does not make an effective conservative policymaker. Consider the wide variety of congressmen that make up the U.S. House Freedom Caucus. The group consists of both shrewd, savvy, effective legislators and bomb-throwers who don’t seem to have much of a plan to implement conservative policies. All have very conservative views, but they get very different results, for reasons other than ideological purity.
In safely Republican districts, then, conservatives looking for good candidates should not simply be searching for rock-solid conservative ideology, for checkmarks next to all the correct policy positions. Policy positions matter, of course, but there is much more to consider. An effective legislator understands the second- and third-order consequences of short-term political decisions. He knows that there is a time to push hard for a conservative priority, a time to create coalitions and make deals, and a time to accept that a desired outcome is not politically feasible or prudent. He knows how to use the rules of parliamentary procedure to get bills passed, or to block bad legislation. In a word, conservatives in safe red districts should be looking for ideological conservatives who possess a deep political understanding of how the legislative process works and how to get things done. They should be fearless but also prudent and wise so that they don’t waste political capital unproductively.
For their part, moderates should appreciate and work with the Republican conservative base, rather than dismiss it. They do make a legitimate criticism about how the conservative base is too eager to challenge moderates in primaries, supporting more right-wing candidates who wind up losing to Democrats in the general election. On the other hand, they need to recognize that the GOP is a conservative political party. A 2021 Gallup poll found that 74% of Republicans identify as “conservative,” with just 22% identifying as “moderate” and 4% as “liberal.” The percentage of Republicans who identify as conservative has increased in recent years.
With the conservative nature of their party in mind, Republicans ought to make the Buckley Rule their guiding principle: support the most conservative viable candidate for a general election. This means that nominating very conservative candidates will be the norm, but also that concessions will be made for more moderate candidates in swing districts where conservatives tend to lose. Red districts should support conservative candidates, and the state GOP should keep this principle in mind: conservative is the default, moderate is a concession as needed.
Deep-red states may be able to purge their Republican caucus of moderate candidates and hold to a purer ideological line while maintaining comfortable majorities. Purple states like Pennsylvania can’t afford that luxury. If the GOP is to hold together a coalition that can actually govern and defeat Democrats, both in Pennsylvania and nationwide, both wings of the Republican Party must learn to live with these political realities.
Sometimes politics is a matter of uncompromising principle, and it is proper to see things in black and white. But for the Republican Party to win and govern, especially in a state like Pennsylvania, it will need to start seeing politics in red and purple.
