This nails the GOP’s core pathology. Republicans win ballots, then apologize for it. Democrats lose elections and govern anyway. Power hates a vacuum, and the left fills it without hesitation—through media, culture, and bureaucracy—while Republicans ask permission to use authority voters already gave them. Leadership isn’t rudeness; it’s ownership. Trump understood that instinctively, which is why he terrified both Democrats and timid Republicans. The base doesn’t want caretakers. It wants architects. If you act like a renter, expect eviction. Confidence isn’t cosmetic—it’s communicative. When one side projects certainty and the other projects doubt, the outcome is baked in. Power is performed, or it’s forfeited.
I think it's logical that the truly competent will at least appear to lack the kind of confidence that psychotic megalomaniacs who think they know everything seem to have. There's real competence that knows its limitations and then there's egotistical wackos who don't think limits of any kind apply to them.
It's a sign of our social pathology that people are sofa king stupid they vote for the latter and disdain the former. Though it's probably always been this way, it's why even thousands of years ago wise observers warned about demagogues in particular and "democracy" in general.
Republicans generally take their oath to the constitution seriously, exuding an attitude of constraint that voters see as lack of confidence.
Democrats swear in with their fingers crossed behind their backs; their true allegiance is to the top-40 culture of the moment. To them, the Liberty Bell is just a relic that had one good ring.
Part of the problem is us, the voters. Most of my conservative friends just want to be left alone. We get out for the Nov elections but never even hear about anything else. Shtf when they try to take our guns. BTW - I'm soon moving out of socialist Virginia. Too old to fight it.
This piece's premise is excellent, but I'll take exception to the one example. Dems outperform in special elections - lots of reasons, but mainly, their voters never stop caring or paying attention. But don't let's get distracted from the facts. The Texas state Senate runoff election last week only fills the position until the next regular election in November - at which point, Dems will have hundreds of other races to focus on. I expect to see that seat flip back when the election isn't held on a SATURDAY at the end of January, following a November special election which had two Republicans who together claimed a majority, but neither winning an outright majority. So - "special, runoff, on a Saturday in January". With 15 percent voter turnout. Not exactly a bellwether for the national GOP. Also the Texas legislature doesn't reconvene this year at all - January 2027 is their next scheduled session. So I hope the new state senator isn't measuring for new drapes. But don't expect to find that information anywhere in extemporaneous reportage.
I understand the current excuses - actually, they are not contemporaneous, because I've heard them all my life - but if we know this is the pattern, we also know how to break it. Just because this is the way it has always been, doesn't mean it is the way it has to be. If Republicans were really concerned about controlling an agenda, they would turn out. That's the point.
There is a natural asymmetry between Democrat and Republican rasion detre. Democrats’ DNA is totalitarian control, just like the goal of socialism is communism. They never stop.
Republicans’ end game is limited government and free markets.
There are other factors at play; the culture of the national political scene is elitist. The media, the university, and elected Democrats all practice the religion of the Democratic Party. Republicans may want to lead, but in their day-to-day actions, they are always swimming against the current.
The Republican electorate lives a different existence. They lead in their businesses, churches, civic groups, and families. They don't practice power for the sake of power, which is the religion of the elite Washington class.
They are aware of Washington politics, issues, and elections, but they don't view any of them individually as existential threats. That said, they can be a deciding force in national elections.
I am not sure that there is a cure for this unless we can break, and I mean precisely that, break the Democratic Party. The current version of the Democratic Party would rather exercise power in a weak United States than risk losing power in a strong United States. And I say that because policies that make the US strong weaken Democrats' domestic power.
Almost everything said about the Republicans here is true, in both the post and the comments. One non-trivial problem, though--particularly regarding the culture: The left has infiltrated the culture over nearly the last century, beginning with their control of education and extending to communication, labor authority via unions, and some other aspects of culture, so that we are effectively at the point where it will take more than merely winning elections and then acting like victors to assume control. One of the things it will take is time; another is a long view that is willing, simultaneously and below the surface, to wait and to fight.
Sharp observation about governance as performance. The owner-vs-renter framing clarifies why Republicans win elections but lose culture wars - they act tentative when voters handed them legitimacy. The social contract angle is interessting too; legitimacy flows from projected confidence as much as actual electoral mandate. Once saw this play out locally when city council member got elected but governed like they were apologizing for it. Lost next cycle to someone with half their qualifications but double the conviction.
Its a dichotomy the Republicans do not handle well. They are correct in that their job is temporary and they should only be tenants of government.
Unfortunately, to get people to vote or support you, you need to act the confident leader with a plan and authority, not the whimpering apologist. I would argue that the republican base *does* want caretakers, but it wants caretakers that will fight to secure our rights. The base does not want caretakers that stand their fumbling when there *is* work to be done.
One of your most astute pieces. Bravo! The psychology is so important behind politics. Few Republicans are aware of it or give it the validity it deserves. I've often thought Dems hire psychologists as they target emotions primarily--in their tactics.
I looked into the phrase "The meek shall inherit the Earth" --and was surprised by its meaning. And many Republicans tend to be religious--as opposed to Dems--and certainly Far Leftists.
This nails the GOP’s core pathology. Republicans win ballots, then apologize for it. Democrats lose elections and govern anyway. Power hates a vacuum, and the left fills it without hesitation—through media, culture, and bureaucracy—while Republicans ask permission to use authority voters already gave them. Leadership isn’t rudeness; it’s ownership. Trump understood that instinctively, which is why he terrified both Democrats and timid Republicans. The base doesn’t want caretakers. It wants architects. If you act like a renter, expect eviction. Confidence isn’t cosmetic—it’s communicative. When one side projects certainty and the other projects doubt, the outcome is baked in. Power is performed, or it’s forfeited.
Dunning-Kruger politics.
Those with a clue hedge.
Confident idiots do NOT.
NEVER EVER assume "Confidence is Competence."
Ever deal with a West Pointer? Confident as all get out. And utterly fecking WORTHLESS.
Why can't Republicans be competent AND confident?
I think it's logical that the truly competent will at least appear to lack the kind of confidence that psychotic megalomaniacs who think they know everything seem to have. There's real competence that knows its limitations and then there's egotistical wackos who don't think limits of any kind apply to them.
It's a sign of our social pathology that people are sofa king stupid they vote for the latter and disdain the former. Though it's probably always been this way, it's why even thousands of years ago wise observers warned about demagogues in particular and "democracy" in general.
Republicans generally take their oath to the constitution seriously, exuding an attitude of constraint that voters see as lack of confidence.
Democrats swear in with their fingers crossed behind their backs; their true allegiance is to the top-40 culture of the moment. To them, the Liberty Bell is just a relic that had one good ring.
Part of the problem is us, the voters. Most of my conservative friends just want to be left alone. We get out for the Nov elections but never even hear about anything else. Shtf when they try to take our guns. BTW - I'm soon moving out of socialist Virginia. Too old to fight it.
This piece's premise is excellent, but I'll take exception to the one example. Dems outperform in special elections - lots of reasons, but mainly, their voters never stop caring or paying attention. But don't let's get distracted from the facts. The Texas state Senate runoff election last week only fills the position until the next regular election in November - at which point, Dems will have hundreds of other races to focus on. I expect to see that seat flip back when the election isn't held on a SATURDAY at the end of January, following a November special election which had two Republicans who together claimed a majority, but neither winning an outright majority. So - "special, runoff, on a Saturday in January". With 15 percent voter turnout. Not exactly a bellwether for the national GOP. Also the Texas legislature doesn't reconvene this year at all - January 2027 is their next scheduled session. So I hope the new state senator isn't measuring for new drapes. But don't expect to find that information anywhere in extemporaneous reportage.
I understand the current excuses - actually, they are not contemporaneous, because I've heard them all my life - but if we know this is the pattern, we also know how to break it. Just because this is the way it has always been, doesn't mean it is the way it has to be. If Republicans were really concerned about controlling an agenda, they would turn out. That's the point.
Absolutely. Well said.
There is a natural asymmetry between Democrat and Republican rasion detre. Democrats’ DNA is totalitarian control, just like the goal of socialism is communism. They never stop.
Republicans’ end game is limited government and free markets.
There are other factors at play; the culture of the national political scene is elitist. The media, the university, and elected Democrats all practice the religion of the Democratic Party. Republicans may want to lead, but in their day-to-day actions, they are always swimming against the current.
The Republican electorate lives a different existence. They lead in their businesses, churches, civic groups, and families. They don't practice power for the sake of power, which is the religion of the elite Washington class.
They are aware of Washington politics, issues, and elections, but they don't view any of them individually as existential threats. That said, they can be a deciding force in national elections.
I am not sure that there is a cure for this unless we can break, and I mean precisely that, break the Democratic Party. The current version of the Democratic Party would rather exercise power in a weak United States than risk losing power in a strong United States. And I say that because policies that make the US strong weaken Democrats' domestic power.
Almost everything said about the Republicans here is true, in both the post and the comments. One non-trivial problem, though--particularly regarding the culture: The left has infiltrated the culture over nearly the last century, beginning with their control of education and extending to communication, labor authority via unions, and some other aspects of culture, so that we are effectively at the point where it will take more than merely winning elections and then acting like victors to assume control. One of the things it will take is time; another is a long view that is willing, simultaneously and below the surface, to wait and to fight.
Sharp observation about governance as performance. The owner-vs-renter framing clarifies why Republicans win elections but lose culture wars - they act tentative when voters handed them legitimacy. The social contract angle is interessting too; legitimacy flows from projected confidence as much as actual electoral mandate. Once saw this play out locally when city council member got elected but governed like they were apologizing for it. Lost next cycle to someone with half their qualifications but double the conviction.
Its a dichotomy the Republicans do not handle well. They are correct in that their job is temporary and they should only be tenants of government.
Unfortunately, to get people to vote or support you, you need to act the confident leader with a plan and authority, not the whimpering apologist. I would argue that the republican base *does* want caretakers, but it wants caretakers that will fight to secure our rights. The base does not want caretakers that stand their fumbling when there *is* work to be done.
One of your most astute pieces. Bravo! The psychology is so important behind politics. Few Republicans are aware of it or give it the validity it deserves. I've often thought Dems hire psychologists as they target emotions primarily--in their tactics.
I looked into the phrase "The meek shall inherit the Earth" --and was surprised by its meaning. And many Republicans tend to be religious--as opposed to Dems--and certainly Far Leftists.