The Big Question is a feature where influential lawmakers, pundits and interest group leaders give their answers to a question that’s driving discussion in news circles around the country.
Some responses are gathered via e-mail, while others are gathered in person via tape recorder.
Today’s Big Question is:
Are the Republicans’ recent struggles more than typical, post-election turmoil?
See responses below from Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Celinda Lake, William Redpath, Lanny Davis, Tom McClusky.
Read the last Big Question here.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said:
The election showed that the American people wanted change. Its clear they are trying to figure out who the leader is and what direction they want to go in.
Celinda Lake, president, Lake Research Partners, said:
Definitely in part because they have no leadership. And the leaders are factionalized.
William Redpath, chairman, Libertarian National Committee, said:
Yes. The Republican Party is still suffering fallout from a very unpopular recent President. They should take heart, however, from the knowledge that Barack Obama entered the White House with the highest approval ratings for a new President since Jimmy Carter. Since the American public does not (unfortunately), up to now, seem to look much outside the two major parties… Read the full response here.
Lanny J. Davis, former special council to President Clinton, said:
Yes. Remember 1964. And then 1968?
Tom McClusky, senior vice president of FRCAction, said:
No, the Republican’s recent struggles are not more then post-election restructuring. Put simply: debate is healthy. Debate means there is substance and hopefully ideas flowing, and from debate real change happens. Are Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele good mouthpieces for the Republican Party? That is up for others to decide, though the conservative movement could certainly use a new William Buckley… Read the full response here.