The GOP has a massive, historic choice to make. Now

Most speeches are not historic. And those that are seldom earn the title immediately. But the words of Rep. Paul Ryan Tuesday night are in contention to be important markers of a defining and potentially historic moment for the Republican Party. (You can watch the speech below.)

By the time Ryan took the podium, reporters had already tweeted, typed and buzzed out the news: He would agree to become Speaker of the House, but only if the different factions of his party agree to unite behind him by Friday. The former vice presidential candidate also stipulated that he would not sacrifice time with his family for the job.

READ MORE: Ryan to seek speakership if GOP will support him

Those will be the headlines today. But there is more — and it may be historic — living deeper in his words.

“First, we need to move from being an opposition party to a proposition party.”

Ryan is far from the first to state an obvious GOP problem — the lack of a clear, comprehensive agenda. (Agenda being different from beliefs.) And Republicans have become known for trying to repeal programs rather than start them. But he represents a once-in-a-generation chance to cleanly assert a new agenda. Ryan’s accidental rise, which comes without the traditional voter turnoffs of self-promotion and convenient promises, offers this Republican reset. The party’s nominee for president, of course, will be another factor in any reset. But that nominee could benefit more than anyone, should Ryan’s vision take hold with voters.

“It is our duty to make the tough decisions this country needs to get back on track.”

In a single sentence, Ryan touched on the many tough, no-win, complicated problems that have stymied Congress for well over a decade. But of course, this means different things to Republicans and Democrats. And that brings us to the next quote.

“Global terror . . . wars on multiple fronts . . . a government grown unaccountable, unconstitutional and out-of-touch . . . persistent poverty, a sluggish economy, flat wages and a skyrocketing debt.”

This is the Ryan agenda, part of a what would be an expanded conservative approach. It is not original to Ryan, hailing in part from his mentor, Jack Kemp. Democrats may notice issues not on that list, like immigration, health care, and disparity. But Republicans should see some critical voting groups that both Kemp and Ryan have long sought: Blue-collar workers with flat wages and urban voters who live near the most concentrated pockets of poverty. This comes at a time when the GOP’s conservative base is shrinking and the percentage of moderates is growing.

“We have become the problem.”

For years, members of Congress and presidential candidates have pointed to “Washington” as the problem, a kind of jedi mind-trick on voters. But voters understand that the critics of government gridlock are themselves the operators of government gridlock. Here Ryan is offering a sober statement to his fellow Republicans, one that is not unique to Ryan. And it is not clear what difference this will make. But it is significant coming from a Speaker-in-waiting who is trying to lay out new philosophic rules of the road.

“I believe that the ideas and principles of results-driven, common-sense conservatism are the keys to a better tomorrow—a tomorrow in which all of God’s children will be better off than they are today.”

Two points here. The phrase “Common Sense”, as many may know, goes back to founding father Thomas Paine. In part thanks to the Tea Party movement, the phrase grew to become a near must-say in Republican speeches in the 2010 to 2013 years. But it was left largely undefined. What is “common-sense conservatism?” Ryan is setting forth the outlines of meaning here. Second point, Ryan’s common-sense conservatism goes hand-in-hand with discernible measures of success. It is “results-driven.” This is important for both parties to notice, a phrase that could mark a new critique of social welfare programs on the left and also that could demand more scientific approaches on the right.

“A commitment to common sense . . . to compassion . . . to cooperation — when rooted in genuine conviction and principle — is a commitment to conservatism.”

Again, “common sense” appears. But in what might be one of the most important sentences in Ryan’s remarks, so does the word “cooperation.” He did not elaborate on who needs to cooperate with whom, but it is not hard to infer this is at least partially a note to the hard right in the House. For years, the prime split among Republicans had been tactical — with the most conservative wing refusing to give any ground on their demands, citing that as a matter of principle. Here Ryan is saying cooperation, possibly a more politically-correct word for compromise, can co-exist with principles. Some in his party vehemently disagree. Others are cheering, saying this is how Republicans can return to the business of good governing.

“I have left this decision in their hands”

Ryan is doing something new here, putting forth demands in order to sign up for the House Speaker job. But it is significant to note that he already has strong opposition. Last night, the group Tea Party Patriots tweeted out that Ryan is “not the guy” and also unveiled a web video that questions Ryan’s support of the 2008 stimulus bill.

That’s why this may be an historic juncture. Republicans need to determine the future of their party — how to keep conservative philosophy viable. And how to find voter groups to grow it. That dilemma has grown for decades to what is quite literally a crisis point inside the U.S. House.

All of this, but shorter: In choosing whether to back Ryan, Republicans may be charting the course for their party. And determining how, and if, that party survives for decades to come.