Brad from The Crossed Pond has responded to one of my posts at The Art of the Possible on Brad's idea of a single term promise from John McCain, among other suggestions for the struggling Republican Presidential candidate. Brad, tag, you're it now.

Now as Brad says, you have to be "preternaturally preoccupied with evangelical issues (either by being an evangelical, or by being particularly concerned with them) to view them as being central to the general election either by presence or by absence." As a libertarian Democrat, and therefore someone who has affiliated with the Democratic Party largely out of my opposition to the Religious Right and its affiliation with the Republican Party, I think I fit the bill of being "preternaturally preoccupied."

My argument is taht while evangelicals failed to mount a significant challenge to John McCain, they did manage to mount a significant challenge (against the will of the leaders of the movement) to Mitt Romney as the presumptive frontrunner and propelled Mike Huckabee into the top tier of the nomination fight. The nomination fight has already been dominated by stories of unhappy evangelicals and conservatives. Now, in the general election, there seems to be a weekly schedule of new stories about how evangelicals are not excited about John McCain.

Perception, in politics, is more important than fact. So I disagree with Brad's own perception that:

Even as far as the media is concerned “evangelical mobilization” is “out” as an election year theme. Though “Obama wins evangelical support” will likely be a back-page story that pops up here and there.

I think that the tug of war between Obama and McCain over evangelicals has already played a major role in media coverage of the race. But could John McCain win if only he could rally the Republican base and connect with evangelicals?

No.

The Republican brand itself is in such disarray, and the county is demographically more Democratic than it was four years ago, that the same base strategy of Karl Rove will not operate successfully for John McCain. Ultimately, George W. Bush went down a pathway in his first term that undermined his own reelection (he underperformed based on historical expectations based on the economy). Now, four years later, are we surprised that we are heading towards a Democratic landslide?

There are plenty of ways that the Republican Party could turn itself around, although a number also depend on the Democrats imploding once in power. I'm not entirely sure about which direction the GOP will take, but I don't think we can rule out that the failure to energize evangelicals and social conservatives as a possible scapegoat.

My latest at the Art of the Possible on McCain's shrinking chances at victory.

The Art of the Possible blog has been home to some great debates over the American Revolution. Was it justified? Was it overly idealistic? Was it, ultimately, a failure?

The narrative of the American Revolution is of course fascinating for libertarians. As I've argued in the past, the Constitution is hardly a libertarian document. It represents the triumph of the centralizing Federalists over the more decentralized Anti-Federalists. The ratification of the Constitution was the political end to the original libertarian instincts of the revolution; the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion was a more direct military end to the remaining libertarian impulses in the population of small farmers and tradesmen. Can we learn anything from this episode of American history?

Check out the map at the Beyond Red and Blue blog of third party strongholds from 1976 to 2004, when third party candidates tended to be liberal or libertarian protest candidates--for all you can say about Perot, he was certainly not interested in social conservatism. The South is where third parties go to die. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in a year with not one but two former Georgia Congressmen running for the Presidency as third party candidates.

Tonight at 7 PM (EDT, Wednesday), Mona will be posting the first chat over at The Lobby at The Art of the Possible. Hope you all can make it!

Check out the interview with Rick Williams and Trevor Lyman of StrangeBedfellows at the Art of the Possible.

Some blog posts of interest:

Rojas at The Crossed Pond takes the liberal blogosphere out to the woodshed over Kansas Democratic Senatorial nominee Jim Slattery. The liberal blogosphere is just focusing on "more Democrats" on this race and not on the "better Democrats" that they often parade around as an added slogan when taking on the Joe Liebermans of the party. Slattery won't win, but it does seem like a waste of resources.

Matt Stoller, typically a pretty partisan progressive, takes on the old school in the Democratic Party on the issue of transparency and the internet.

Transparency is one of the few places where there really is a bipartisan alliance. Newt Gingrich created Thomas, the web resources for legislation, and the Republicans do have a history of advocating for open government and new models of communication, including C-Span, direct mail, and web communication. Some progressive Democrats do as well, but the old school top-down Democrats elected under the good government influences of the 1970s tend towards restricting political participation.

. . .

For instance, when all data can move over any wire, it makes no sense to regulate cable TV and telephone wires as if they serve different purposes, as Google lobbyist Rick Whitt argues in his seminal work on modern communications policy. When email is costless, it makes no sense to regulate it as if it is mail. When the cost of political participation drops to near zero, it makes more sense for the government to encourage more participation than try to restrict the participation of labor and corporations. In other words, it's time to reject the entire framework of the 1970s good government groups and their approach to campaign finance reform. These groups are wrong, they always have been wrong, and instances like members of Congress being unable to tweet or use video on their official websites are only the most obvious places where their stupidity and elitism shows itself.

Emphasis added.

Finally, Nevada Democrat Jill Derby comes out in support of the Supreme Court's ruling in Heller. The Nevada state chapter of the ACLU similarly comes out in support of the individual right to bear arms, the first state chapter to do so. Liberal blogs freak out.

Rasmussen has conducted a poll of the American public to determine their fiscal and social views (by self-identification, strike one) and their voting preferene in the upcoming presidential election. I think there are serious problems with relying on self-identification at a time in which the Republican brand, and arguably conservatism, are in the mud. But you comment on the poll you have, not the poll you want.

While the poll offers voters the chance of identifying as conservative, moderate, or liberal (or not sure) in both social and fiscal issues, the poll found that the vast majority of Americans fall within seven main groups. Right off the bat, "populists" as defined as fiscally liberal and socially conservative don't make the cut. That alone should be encouraging to libertarians, even if they are the smallest of the seven main groups at only 4%.

John McCain leads among the conservative base: those that are both socially and fiscally conservative, and the two bordering groups of combining conservatism on one issue with a moderate view on the other. Barack Obama leads in all groups that are socially liberal, forging a libertarian-liberal alliance that also throws in moderates.

Overall, some encouraging news for libertarian Democrats.

The opening shots of the coming civil war in the GOP?

Senator John Warner (R-Virginia)--not to be confused with his soon to be successor Mark Warner (D-Virginia)--is proposing a return to 55 MPH speed limits in order to reduce the demand for gasoline. I expect to see a number of proposals as the high price of gasoline continues that would slowly cut into "excessive" consumption of gasoline. Could government regulation of NASCAR be far behind?

Utah's shift to a four day work week for its government is another example of government action to try to cut down on oil consumption. Could a four day school week be far behind? Many public schools nationwide have already cut down to four days for summer school. Daylight savings was sold as a way to save energy resources, could the government of tomorrow require four day weeks?