The Republican Party has three problems: it's on the wrong side of history, it's on the wrong side of ideology, and it's on the wrong side of demography.
It has slowly disintegrated as a long-term, viable and competitive presidential party. It has lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. The reason for the Republican Party's contraction as a national presidential party is not the personality of its candidates, but its policies.
That's why it may be best for the future of the United States and for the future of a viable American two party system that the Republicans are on the road to nominating a candidate who embodies what the it has become, who represents what the Republican brand has become - either Trump or Cruz.
Neither can be elected. Neither will likely get 40% of the popular vote. Either would likely lose the Electoral College three to one.
As a political scientist, a committed Democratic and an American, I want the narrative on November 9th to be that the US electorate resoundingly rejected an aberrant ideology, not just the obnoxious personalities who are now leading in the Republican race. And from there the GOP and America will be able to move on.
Since 1964 the Republican Party has systematically purged itself of its moderate wing. The party of Rockefeller, Javits, Case, Keating, Lindsey, Brooks,Lugar, Castle and Lynch is no more.
As E.J. Dionne has pointed out in "Where the Right Went Wrong," the modern Republican Party has turned its back on Eisenhower's view of the positive role of government, Goldwater's libertarianism, Nixon's policies on the environmental policies, Jack Kemp's tolerance and outreach to minorities, and George Herbert Walker Bush's internationalism. With the possible exception of Barry Goldwater, the Republican presidential candidates from 1952 to 2012 could not be
nominated by the Republican Party of 2016.
The Republican Party has earned its mantra as "the party of no" because it's defined by what it is against, not what it's for. The party of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt has become racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Hispanic, anti-Asian, hostile to women. It continues to defy science and reality, denying the existence of climate change. The party that was once socially libertarian and fiscally responsible has become a doctrinaire vehicle that aims to repress personal freedom and to dictate how people should live and love, what they should say and what they should read. It sees no positive role for government other than national defense. It does not speak of what it will do, but rather what it will undo, e.g., the right to health care and voting rights.
Donald Trump and Ted Cruz embody substantial elements of this new Republican Party. Either will be defeated in an electoral tsunami that will most likely bring down Republican control of the Senate, and could possibly threaten Republican control of the House. The electoral debacle will ripple down to governors, state legislators and local officials. Commentators and analysts will question the continued existence of the party as we now know it on the national level.
But a positive consequence may be that the debacle will be a wake-up call to remind the GOP of what it once was, and what it could be again. Maybe it will serve to shift the party from the wrong side of history, ideology and demography. It could trigger a redirection to a responsible center-right coalition that is capable of being elected and governing.
Of course the Republican Right may attempt to rationalize a Trump electoral catastrophe merely as a repudiation of Trump's often bizarre personality and not of the radically conservative policies of the grassroots Republican base and rigid ideology. This will almost certainly be the mantra if Trump pivots to the center in his rhetoric and platform. That could postpone the Party's self-examination, and that would be unfortunate.
The future of the two party system may very well rest on the Republican Party's response to yet another crushing rejection by the American people. In the inevitable "autopsy" that the RNC will conduct, the Republican party will once again seriously examine what went wrong, and what needs to be made right. Unlike the autopsy following Mitt Romney's 2012 decisive loss, maybe this time the party will begin to adopt the policy changes and outreach that will make a traditional Republican case to moderate voters and those sustain its viability as a national political party.