The Republican governors conference last week in Miami was the first post-election chance for party leaders to assess the results and begin discussing a strategy for the future.

Even Americans who were ecstatic that Barack Obama and the Democrats soundly defeated John McCain and the Republicans see the need for at least two healthy political parties. Competitive parties put starch and spice into elections, foster a national dialogue on issues and give voters an alternative.

But the Republican Party has fallen on hard times with the latest eleciton. First, it has no obvious leader. President George W. Bush will go to a much-welcomed retirement in January. The 2008 nominee, Mr. McCain, is not likely to run for president again because of age.

The party can choose to rely on its current base, including the religious right, white voters, the changing South, the elderly and the affluent for its support when the next elections roll around. Or it can seek to broaden its appeal toward the center, including a new pitch to the young and non-whites.

Longtime members recall the days when the party and its leadership had more progressive, so-called Rockefeller Republicans. These have not been entirely purged from prominence and leadership (look at Sen. Arlen Specter), but when the time came for Mr. McCain to choose a running mate, at least one viable candidate, former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, was eliminated from consideration primarily because of his pro-choice view on abortion. Yet Mr. Ridge's overall portfolio of positions is consistent with his party's.

In the end, the governors' conference produced no clear idea of where the party will go next. It was probably too soon after the elections in any case to interpret fully the voters' call for change.

Given the party's history, which started in 1854 and later had Abraham Lincoln as its first elected president, there is every reason to believe it will get its act together again. Those who believe in a strong two-party system are counting on it.