Deja vu: Republican Party on the ropes?

I like The Hugh Hewitt Show, it is always interesting and Hugh's form of Conservatism takes on a particularly intellectual and pragmatic tone, which I appreciate. Hugh has always been a "a party man", but it is no secret that Hewitt has been cheerleading for Mitt Romney; so when you see Hewitt writing things like this, the writing is indeed on the wall:

There are seven reasons for anyone to support the eventual nominee no matter who it is: The war and six Supreme Court justices over the age of 68.

Folks who want to take their ball and go home have to realize that even three SCOTUS appointments could revolutionize the way elections are handled in this country in a stroke, mandating the submission of redistricting lines to court scrutiny for "fairness."

"It is undeniable that political sophisticates understand such fairness and how to go about destroying it," Justice Souter announced in his diseent in Veith v. Jubilerer, the Pennsylvania redistricting case in which the Court declined by a vote of 5 to 4 to immerse itself in the details of the partisan redistricting of Pennsylvania.

If Democrats control the White House and gain even one of the five seats held by the center-right majority of current justices, this and many other crucial issues are up for legal grabs. When activist judges are more than willing to rewrite rules of long-standing, periods of exile should never be self-imposed "for the good of the party." Exiles can go on a very long time indeed. Ask the Whigs.

They can go on indefinitely when enforced by courts.

The GOP as well is the party committed to victory in Iraq and the wider war. A four year time-out would be a disaster, a period of time in which al Qaeda and its jihadist off-shoots would regroup in some places and continue to spread in others. Iran, even if punished in the months before November, would certainly continue and accelerate its plans under the soft pleadings of a President Obama or Clinton 2.0.

These aren't the years to wish a pox on your primary opponents' heads beyond June.

The GOP as well is the party committed to victory in Iraq and the wider war. A four year time-out would be a disaster, a period of time in which al Qaeda and its jihadist off-shoots would regroup in some places and continue to spread in others. Iran, even if punished in the months before November, would certainly continue and accelerate its plans under the soft pleadings of a President Obama or Clinton 2.0.

These aren't the years to wish a pox on your primary opponents' heads beyond June.

I don't expect the principals to let up on each other in the two months ahead, and I am especially looking forward to the Ohio and Texas votes.

But it is very possible to play full contact politics without the threat of going home if your team loses. The stakes in the fall are far too high for that.

The man has a point.

Still, with all of those facts being what they are, I am not feeling good about our winning the Presidency this fall.

Yes, I will vote for whoever the nominee is. In all likelihood that will be McCain, and if so my vote will not have enthusiasm behind it--other than enthusiasm against Hillary or Obama. And that is the problem; in elections this big, enthusiasm is vital--especially when the media is stacked so solidly against any Republican.

With McCain, the base of the Republican party will have very little to be "for", only a lot to be "against". The GOP's best chance at getting out the vote this fall will be to go heavily negative against the Democrats. And that is not a position of strength.

Sadly, this set of circumstances reminds me very much of 1976. And we all know what happened then.