Before I ask my real question, I want to lay out what I see as the two major differences between the Democrats and the Republicans.
- Believe that the government has an important role to play in American society
- The government should take most of the responsibility in carrying out its programs in the name of equality.
- Believe that the government has a very minor role to play in American society
- When, in the rare cases, the government must take a bigger role, it should be done as much as possible through the free market.
Republicans have to make a decision. When responding to democrat proposals do they use principle 1 and oppose it altogether, or do they use principle 2 and accept the expansion of government while pushing to allow as much freedom as possible?
By framing the parties in this way, we may analyze the republican response to individual issues
Obama supports socialized medicine (eventually). Should the GOP oppose all attempts at the expansion of universal healthcare, or should it accept the expansion and push for universal health insurance (or some free-market variation there-of)?
Saving the Banks
Obama supported the original bailout and will likely support another. Should the GOP oppose all bailouts, or should it accept the necessity of intervention but propose alternative ways of doing it?
Obama supports stimulus. Should the GOP oppose all stimulus, or should it accept its necessity and propose tax cuts instead of govt. spending.
This type of analysis can be applied to pretty much every major issue. So what do you think? Should it pick and choose positions on each of these major issues, should it universally oppose all of them or should it suggest free-market improvements to democrat proposals?
(or secret option #4, pull a John McCain and just support everything the dems say.)