Can Spain's Popular Party win upcoming elections?

In his well-known Sunday editorial published on November 18, “PP Can Still Win the Elections,” Pedro J. Ramírez, executive editor of the newspaper El Mundo, discussed the need for a “centrist and liberal” project which he feels PP should carry out between now and March, in order to increase its chances of winning the general elections. He suggests they can win over Zapatero if they offer this project as an alternative to socialism.

This project would be characterized by at least four changes in the attitude of the party representing the Right. Firstly, they can no longer oppose homosexual marriage, which already has the support of the socialists. They must also begin supporting human embryo research as well as Civics classes (EPC). It is important that they abandon their defense of a “Natural Law,” which remains supposed and undetermined, and “face the secularism that is invading.” In relation to Zapatero’s negotiations with ETA, Ramírez states that the negotiations of the so-called “peace process” have finished without the worst fears regarding concessions to ETA coming to fruition. Therefore, PP must reduce its opposition to PSOE’s policies regarding ETA to regain support.

In his article, Ramírez concludes: “Nobody will win elections playing the extremism card. If the Socialists now seek to define themselves with civil Republicanism and loyalty to the Monarchy in order to clean up their act, ¿why wouldn’t the Popular Party persevere in that magnificent invention such as the reformist center, and forget – at last – those Pleistocene truisms which will only end in the reenactment of the “Honor Without Ships” operetta?” (El Mundo, November 18, 2007)

Does this abandonment represent a reaffirmation of Liberalism* – such as the journalist states? It is first necessary to remember that, in his article, Pedro J. Ramírez was referring to a fundamental politics problem; the link between principles and practice; between political beliefs and inevitable electoral obligations. The Popular Party and PSOE are equally affected by this inherently problematic interaction. They realize there are flaws in their system; however, they always seem to believe there is no life outside their respective parties, and cling to the belief that their own bad administration is preferable to the adversary’s good administration. No politician is able to balance principles with practice in such a way as to completely satisfy his/her ideological conscience.

Irresolvable issues such as this can be seen in all areas of political activity and result from the ever-present relativism. Is it necessary that the Popular Party stop “irritating” as the Socialists claim? Could this be the secret of success for the 2008 elections? Should the Popular Party embrace real liberalism? This seems to be the opinion of El Mundo’s executive editor as he urges PP leaders to renovate the reformist center.

Ramirez’s analysis is centered on two main questions; To what extent can the PP’s political principles be modified without losing the integrity of their foundational beliefs? At what juncture does winning an election become a surrender of oneself? At what point does liberalism stop being liberalism? That is to say, in today’s Spain, what is the link between liberalism and moderation?

On the other hand, the politician anxious to grab power, campaign managers and analysts are all posing the same question every four years; does “moderation” guarantee an electoral win?; and more than that, at what juncture does moderation become immoderation?; where does the moderation principle lie?; who or what determines the moderation criterion?; would things go better for the Popular Party if th