GOP running scared over primaries?

posted at 11:36 am on November 3, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

We’ve seen an inordinate amount of handwringing over the campaign of Douglas Hoffman in NY-23′s special election today, as some in the party have openly wondered whether conservatives will split into a third party for the 2010 general elections.  That consists entirely of empty speculation, as no one has even tried that — and the Hoffman example doesn’t apply as a precedent anyway.  Now, Politico reports that the hysteria in the GOP over conservatism has now made them scared of a perfectly normal and legitimate intraparty mechanism — the primary.  Either the GOP needs to get some testicular fortitude or Politico needs to dial down the hyperbole:

In what could be a nightmare scenario for Republican Party officials, conservative activists are gearing up to challenge leading GOP candidates in more than a dozen key House and Senate races in 2010.

Conservatives and tea party activists had already set their sights on some of the GOP’s top Senate recruits — a list that includes Gov. Charlie Crist in Florida, former Rep. Rob Simmons in Connecticut and Rep. Mark Kirk in Illinois, among others.

But their success in Tuesday’s upstate New York special election, where grass-roots efforts pushed GOP nominee Dede Scozzafava to drop out of the race and helped Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman surge into the lead on the eve of Election Day, has generated more money and enthusiasm than organizers ever imagined.

Activists predict a wave that could roll from California to Kentucky to New Hampshire and that could leave even some GOP incumbents — Utah Sen. Bob Bennett is one — facing unexpectedly fierce challenges from their right flank.

“I would say it’s the tip of the spear,” said Dick Armey, the former GOP House majority leader who now serves as chairman of FreedomWorks, an organization that has been closely aligned with the tea party movement. “We are the biggest source of energy in American politics today.”

“What you’re going to see,” said Armey, “is moderates and conservatives across the country in primaries.”

Oh, my goodness, it’s such an unprecedented “nightmare”!  Why, who would have guessed that more than one candidate might run in primaries?  That’s so wild, one has to dig far back into the memory banks to remember that  the GOP holds a primary in every normal election cycle for every political race.

Even the examples Politico uses are entirely laughable.  Charlie Crist, Rob Simmons, and Mark Kirk aren’t incumbents.  Crist and Kirk will run for open seats, while Simmons will try to pick off Chris Dodd.  Furthermore, Simmons is actually a conservative candidate; the other person running in that seat is Linda McMahon, wife of the wrestling impressario Vince McMahon, who’s also a conservative.  It may be one thing to mount a primary challenge against a well-established incumbent, but in races for open seats, it would be very strange not to have multiple candidates.  And Rubio, at least, has already said that he will support the winner of the primary in Florida.

Meanwhile, the Hoffman precedent is nothing of the sort.  The Conservative Party in New York is not a “third party” of the sort envisioned by Politico or hysterical Republicans.  They routinely endorse Republicans for office, much more often than they run their own candidate.  The reason Hoffman had to run on the CP ticket was because the special election didn’t allow for a primary, and the county GOP leaders didn’t have the sense to pick someone who didn’t win the Margaret Sanger Award, didn’t back Card Check, and didn’t back the stimulus spending bill that has already proven itself a very expensive flop.

In fact, primaries exist precisely to settle these kinds of questions.  They’re healthy exercises that allow people within the particular state or Congressional district to determine which kind of candidate represents their best interests and those of the party, rather than have party bosses handpick candidates without any kind of accountability.  That used to be called American democracy rather than being cast as the basis for the next Stephen King novel by hysterics within the party or hyperbolic journalists looking for a story.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

“What you’re going to see,” said Armey, “is moderates and conservatives across the country in primaries.”

Says a lot about the current guys in office, now, doesn’t it?

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 11:39 AM

They better be. A bunch of us are already out pounding the pavement in full ‘RINO Hunter’ mode (this from someone who was a GOP County Chair in the 80s).
We’re cocked and locked and there ain’t no limit on this big-game hunt!

michaelo on November 3, 2009 at 11:40 AM

GOP running scared over primaries?

I think the Dems have a lot more to worry about, but it’s good to see that conservatives are shaking things up in both of the major parties.

UltimateBob on November 3, 2009 at 11:40 AM

First thing is to close all GOP primaries.

SirGawain on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Politico, the other Democratic spin media.

upinak on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

No incumbent should ever go unchallenged.

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Uhmmm…. If the Conservatives split off, the the GOP will be the third party.

Kasper Hauser on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

RINO hunt! We have to knock them off before we can take on the socialists.

james23 on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Furthermore, Simmons is actually a conservative candidate; the other person running in that seat is Linda McMahon, wife of the wrestling impressario Vince McMahon, who’s also a conservative.

I still can’t believe Linda McMahon is considering a Senate run. Can you imagine the attack ads the DNC will be able to come up with if she’s on the ballot?

Doughboy on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

I completely agree. That’s the point of elections.

I think, however, that several GOP congresspeople do express their “fears” openly and frequently. They seem to be very unsophisticated with the press. They don’t know they don’t have to answer every stupid question posed or find a way to deflect it.

As a result, they feed the “divisive” meme.

Frankly, if they are this lacking in political savvy, I think they should find a different line of work.

But that’s what I think is the problem with the GOP. When I saw McCain taking advice from Schmidt and suspending his campaign, I couldn’t believe the incompetence factor.

If I’d been in a swing state, I bet I would have voted for Obama. The only reason McCain got my vote is that it didn’t matter.

Competence matters. It matters far more than even the particular political position. Bush was skewered for the surge. Hey, he stuck to his guns. It worked.

I am a huge believer that’s how most successful ventures really work. It doesn’t have to be the “perfect” idea. It does require commitment.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

STOP RESPONDING TO DEM MEMES

/gaga

faraway on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

I think Republicans should be worried about two things. The first is that while me may be a nation of economic conservatives, we’re increasingly socially liberal, primary victories by Palin-drone types will turn off exurban moderates who have gay neighbors and whose friend had an abortion Sophomore year. And the second is that this will only have an effect in a handful of races, but that the result will be Dems holding both houses for two more years, until Obama’s Reagan-like comeback in 2012.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Rubio!

Rubio!

Rubio!

Enoxo on November 3, 2009 at 11:44 AM

Hey Politico, we conservatives have nothing to fear but I bet the RINOs are shaking in their boots.

Conservatives stand for something. RINOs are more like silly putty.

fogw on November 3, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Politico is nothing more than an arm of the Democrat Party…heh

d1carter on November 3, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Think you just slam dunked em, Ed. Good job. Now, fellow tea-partiers, it’s up to us. Support conservative candidates, not the RNC.

Christian Conservative on November 3, 2009 at 11:45 AM

I really hope you’re right, Ed. And that Politico is over-reacting. That’s my gut feeling, but it ain’t always right. Seems a lot of conservatives are even more pumped up for a party split these days tho.

JetBoy on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Excellent post, Ed.

cs89 on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

I think Republicans should be worried about two things. The first is that while me may be a nation of economic conservatives, we’re increasingly socially liberal, primary victories by Palin-drone types will turn off exurban moderates who have gay neighbors and whose friend had an abortion Sophomore year. And the second is that this will only have an effect in a handful of races, but that the result will be Dems holding both houses for two more years, until Obama’s Reagan-like comeback in 2012.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

I personally think that Palin will break the hearts of those making abortion or gay rights the center of their voting decisions.

I listened to her in the election. She is personally tolerant.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

No incumbent should ever go unchallenged.

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Amen. It’s truly sad that redistricting has created so many districts where the incumbent isn’t even challenged in the general, let alone the primary.

BadgerHawk on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Hey, Politico is bring up the issues on people’s minds. Nothing wrong with that.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:47 AM

Here in Texas we have an upcoming contested primary for Governor. But in this case the sitting Republican Governor, Rick Perry, is fairly reliably Conservative (and has been fairly effective) whereas the upstart candidate is Kay Bailey Hutchison, a longtime Senator who is a little more on the squishy side and certainly to the left of Perry.

Maybe we should be scared of ‘moderate’ intrusions into the primary system rather than a Conservative revolt.

JonPrichard on November 3, 2009 at 11:48 AM

….. Obama’s Reagan-like comeback in 2012.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Dumbest comment ever. On so many levels.

fogw on November 3, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

I think the left has done a very, very good job in recent years of convincing people that social issues are more important than fiscal ones, and that the GOP’s stance on the former are somehow dogmatic and way out of line with mainstream thought.

BadgerHawk on November 3, 2009 at 11:48 AM

History (1992) always repeats itself.

jake-the-goose on November 3, 2009 at 11:48 AM

I think that’s the beauty of Democracy. We get to actually communicate through our vote, usually on representative/local levels.

That doesn’t mean instant changes nationally, but it’s like a “feeder” method.

That’s representative government, and we have a fairly flexible and responsive system.

Direct democracy is pretty scary. It’s too subject to mob thinking.

Our system actually is better.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:49 AM

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Nurse – Mr. Bleeds Blue is in the computer room again !!!

jake-the-goose on November 3, 2009 at 11:50 AM

primary victories by Palin-drone types will turn off exurban moderates who have gay neighbors and whose friend had an abortion Sophomore year.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

As evidenced by Bob McDonnell’s pitiful performance.

(“WHAT ABOUT HIS THESIS!!!!!!11111!!!!!”)

notropis on November 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Dumbest comment ever. On so many levels.

fogw on November 3, 2009 at 11:48 AM

He hasn’t yet reached acceptance. It takes a while to cope with loss. Give him time.

The first is that while me may be a nation of economic conservatives, we’re increasingly socially liberal

Too bad for socialist democrats that economics is front and center, now isn’t it? If only republicans would moderate their social bull-crap. But can’t get everything.

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM

I want to be part of the Dick Armey.

Sorry.

Cicero43 on November 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM

“What you’re going to see,” said Armey, “is moderates and conservatives across the country in primaries.”

What I think we are going to see is a segment of the electorate that has been sitting at home and not showing up becoming energized and going to the polls in large numbers.

People like Palin, movements like the Tea Party, events like the recess “Town Halls”, and rhetoric like that from Beck are convincing people that if they stand up and show up, they CAN make a huge difference. There is a feeling of empowerment among average folks who before felt they were simply being steamrolled by the system.

STAND UP, SHOW UP, CAST YOUR BALLOT!

Even if there are no major offices up for election in your precinct today, VOTE ANYWAY. Vote in tax propositions, school boards, whatever is up for a vote. Kick these “big government” people out of office at ALL LEVELS of government all the way down to dog catcher.

We are the ones motivated to show up at the polls in this “off-off year” and many places are having votes today on important local issues. I am going to vote against (another) parcel tax in my jurisdiction and vote out some incumbent school board members.

crosspatch on November 3, 2009 at 11:52 AM

The only ones that have anything to “fear” are the ones that still DO NOT understand or agree with what the tea parties were/are about.

This is NOT about a party, it is about our country. This is about our constitution.

This is about a political ruling class trying to “fundamentally change” this democratic republic into a socialist state.

The axe is going to fall on BOTH sides of the aisle.

Talon on November 3, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Cicero43 on November 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Republicans are tolerant. But you’ll have to ask permission first. :P

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 11:54 AM

Furthermore, Simmons is actually a conservative candidate; the other person running in that seat is Linda McMahon, wife of the wrestling impressario Vince McMahon, who’s also a conservative.

Hey Ed did you forget someone?

Theworldisnotenough on November 3, 2009 at 11:54 AM

I know mostly about the last CA referendum. We were facing bankruptcy. The situation was dire.

And the vote was overwhelmingly a message to Sacramento. NO MORE TAXES.

Fix it, folks, through spending.

They can’t. But that didn’t matter. Voters spoke. That’s that.

Arnold got the message.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Both major parties have become more enamored of winning elections then they have standing for a certain set of principles. Nobody believes what these clowns say on the campaign trail, but the truly interested ones will dig in to find out what their past actions might reveal about a candidate.

Anybody who did even a cursory glance at Barry O’s past actions knew how he would act and could pretty much tune out what it was he was saying in his stump speeches.

This is what happened in the NY-23 district. Scozzafava had a track record, which the powers to be chose to ignore, instead wanting to win took over. Most Americans will vote for somebody who stands for something and the coming elections I think we will see more people paying attention to and highlighting the actions of the candidates rather then their latest 15 second soundbite from the campaign trail.

Just A Grunt on November 3, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Seems a lot of conservatives are even more pumped up for a party split these days tho.

JetBoy on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Not a party split, but a party restoration. The Republican party is about to have a come to Jesus moment and will come out the better for it.

jimmy2shoes on November 3, 2009 at 11:56 AM

the result will be Dems holding both houses for two more years, until Obama’s Reagan-like comeback in 2012.

brilliant. now tell me , how will the market close tomorrow: up or down ? c’mon give it a go.

runner on November 3, 2009 at 11:56 AM

There seems to be a revolution brewing to turn the Republican Party into the People’s Party while the Democrat Party is becoming more and more the Royalist Party.

MB4 on November 3, 2009 at 11:56 AM

“What you’re going to see,” said Armey, “is moderates and conservatives across the country in primaries.”

Yeah – that’s the general idea.

gwelf on November 3, 2009 at 11:57 AM

“Obama’s Radicalism Scaring Away Voters”

faraway on November 3, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Forget the pundits and use your dollars as leverage. Once the RNCC realizes money is going directly to candidates instead of into their coffers, they’ll be more willing to listen. It’s the only way. They won’t be convinced by argument.

a capella on November 3, 2009 at 11:57 AM

the other person running in that seat is Linda McMahon

She had this awful role on WWE one time. Where she was supposed to be in a coma or something, and they dragged her onto the stage, where Vince made out with one of the super hot wrestling babes. After a few minutes, she got up and beat the tar out of Vince and the chick. It was funny, but the run up to that event was just awful. I really think Vince is pure evil, and uses the WWE mask a real mental disorder.

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Thanks for the tips!

I love to get “don’t throw me in the briar patch, br’er fox” advice from “progressives” about how Republicans can take power.

Lehosh on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

I think Republicans should be worried about two things. The first is that while me may be a nation of economic conservatives, we’re increasingly socially liberal, primary victories by Palin-drone types will turn off exurban moderates who have gay neighbors and whose friend had an abortion Sophomore year. And the second is that this will only have an effect in a handful of races, but that the result will be Dems holding both houses for two more years, until Obama’s Reagan-like comeback in 2012.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

The problem with Republicans is that social conservatives hijacked the party. Moral issues are not a concern for someone running in a national election.

The problem with Democrats is that fiscal liberals hijacked the party. Fiscal issues ARE a concern for someone running in a national election.

Moral issues are for States to decide. The fact that being pro-choice or gay or whatever else breaks from the social conservative line makes you immediately unfit to be a “Republican” is nonsense and has been one of the driving forces behind the fall of the GOP.

Republicans are supposed to be for fiscal restraint and limited government. Limited government = personal choice. Libertarians are more Republican than Republicans.

uknowmorethanme on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

Furthermore, Simmons is actually a conservative candidate; the other person running in that seat is Linda McMahon, wife of the wrestling impressario Vince McMahon, who’s also a conservative.

And Peter Schiff runs there too.

the_nile on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

Hey Ed did you forget someone?

Theworldisnotenough on November 3, 2009 at 11:54 AM

That’s what I was thinking…

BadgerHawk on November 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM

Kasper Hauser on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Exactly right. It is good to shake things up and they are so shaken, neither the Dems nor the GOP really knows who has more to worry about.

ORconservative on November 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM

Seems a lot of conservatives are even more pumped up for a party split these days tho.

JetBoy on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Not a party split, just a power shift back from the Moderates of Bush to the Conservatives of Reagan.

Its time for Change within the Republican party.

portlandon on November 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM

— and the Hoffman example doesn’t apply as a precedent anyway.

The Hoffman example is a clear shot across the bow. There are many conservatives who understand that the Vichy Right take our votes for granted and, third party or not, we are not going to be a rubber stamp for their liberal candidates. The 2008 Presidential was the watershed. Many, many of us still backed the GOP – because the Indonesian imbecile was such a dire threat to our nation, especially given the monetary storm that came over our nation, but now there is nothing left to lose. This nation has been sold out and is quickly heading towards the end. Conservative voters are now released to vote their consciences and nothing else, since, of the many Vichy GOP candidates, a vote for them is a vote to help the Dems and their ineligible Precedent deliver the death blows to this nation.

The GOP has helped the treasonous left to put this nation on death ground and now they are going to have to deal with the resultant reaction of the conservatives.

Michael Steele really needs to resign this week (along with much of the GOP leadership and the morons over at the NRCC). Conservatives need to start seeing some movement within the GOP, away from the Vichy and towards true conservativism.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM

I still can’t believe Linda McMahon is considering a Senate run. Can you imagine the attack ads the DNC will be able to come up with if she’s on the ballot?

Doughboy on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

It would be a target rich environment. Especially since she gave more money to the DNC than the Republican party, helping to defeat Simmons and Nancy Johnson in 2006. She may not be a Scozzafava but she’s a johnny-come-lately Republican.

jnelchef on November 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM

uknowmorethanme on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

Heretic!

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 12:00 PM

Arnold got the message.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Arnold is a dummkopf.

MB4 on November 3, 2009 at 12:00 PM

SirGawain on November 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM

I couldn’t agree more. The sooner we can keep non-GOPsters out of the primaries, the better. If Michael Steele would only focus on that aspect of the checklist of things to be accomplished during his tenure, he won’t be a disappointing failure.

One more thing: END EARLY VOTING. I’d even go for a federal holiday to facilitate all eligible peoples to vote if we could keep it to a single calendar day, and we have photo IDs to boot. Is that asking too much??

itzWicks on November 3, 2009 at 12:01 PM

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Thread officially hijacked at 11:43 a.m.

Knucklehead on November 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM

until Obama’s Reagan-like comeback in 2012.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Keep hittin that bong, buddy. Obama will be lucky to make it to 2012

loudmouth883 on November 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM

uknowmorethanme on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

There’s only one problem with what you say. Conservatives don’t care what goes on in your bedroom, they do care about messing with traditions though. The majority of the country is socially and fiscally consevative with abortion being the only problem and most people have no problem saying that killing a baby by sucking out the brain is wrong. One thing, Obama and his radical views, like killing a baby, are the best thing that ever happened to this country and conservativism.

ORconservative on November 3, 2009 at 12:03 PM

Knucklehead on November 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM

no kidding.

ORconservative on November 3, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Simmons had a 100% NARAL rating and I’m sure McMahon will too.
While they may be right leaning on some issues, calling them conservative is a bit of a stretch.

McMahon can forget about it anyway, unless the R’s only criteria is how much cash ya got. The time an effort needed to rehabilitate her image is just wasted time that could be used going after Dodd.

Foley is also running.

Rocks on November 3, 2009 at 12:04 PM

The downfall of the GOP is due to social conservatives who oppose abortion and gay marriage? Really? I thought is was the fact that the GOP leaders failed to actually govern on fiscally conservative and small government principles.

Blaming social conservatives (most of whom – like me – are also fiscal conservatives) for this tells me too many have bought the distortions of the liberals on this matter.

gwelf on November 3, 2009 at 12:05 PM

Furthermore, Simmons is actually a conservative candidate

Huh? Simmons is a moderate at best, call him a Blue Dog Republican.

Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 47% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 58% by the NEA, indicating a mixed record on public education. (Dec 2003)
Rated 70% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 46% by the Christian Coalition: mixed voting record on families. (Dec 2003)
Rated 50% by CATO, indicating a mixed record on trade issues. (Dec 2002)
Rated 33% by SANE, indicating a mixed record on military issues. (Dec 2003
Rated 27% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 58% by NTU, indicating “Satisfactory” on tax votes. (Dec 2003)

Theworldisnotenough on November 3, 2009 at 12:05 PM

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Thanks for the tips!

I love to get “don’t throw me in the briar patch, br’er fox” advice from “progressives” about how Republicans can take power.

Lehosh on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

Bleeds Blue is just full of tips … … … or something.

Brer Rabbit on November 3, 2009 at 12:06 PM

Thread officially hijacked at 11:43 a.m.

Knucklehead on November 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM

Well, hijack it back! LOL*

Nobody can “hijack” unless the conversation turns that way.

I don’t see anyone particularly agreeing with me, btw.

Just my 2 cents here.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:06 PM

primary victories by Palin-drone types will turn off exurban moderates who have gay neighbors and whose friend had an abortion Sophomore year.

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

As evidenced by Bob McDonnell’s pitiful performance.

(”WHAT ABOUT HIS THESIS!!!!!!11111!!!!!”)

notropis on November 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Yeah, but McDonnell is running entirely on centrist issues like transportation and completely avoiding his reactionary social philosophy. He knows he can’t win as a “conservative” (OK, maybe against Deeds).

The problem with Republicans is that social conservatives hijacked the party. Moral issues are not a concern for someone running in a national election.

The problem with Democrats is that fiscal liberals hijacked the party. Fiscal issues ARE a concern for someone running in a national election.

Moral issues are for States to decide. The fact that being pro-choice or gay or whatever else breaks from the social conservative line makes you immediately unfit to be a “Republican” is nonsense and has been one of the driving forces behind the fall of the GOP.

Republicans are supposed to be for fiscal restraint and limited government. Limited government = personal choice. Libertarians are more Republican than Republicans.

uknowmorethanme on November 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM

On the other hand, the successful Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign out social issues that the center. And Republicans running on “fiscal restraint” is a little tougher given the gallons of red ink they themselves spilled for eight years — and that pesky little recession they gave us.

Besides, Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter (as Dick Cheney thoughtfully reminds us).

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 12:07 PM

Arnold is a dummkopf.

MB4 on November 3, 2009 at 12:00 PM

Well, I think he can’t win. Nobody can. The issues here are core issues.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:07 PM

Yeah, but McDonnell is running entirely on centrist issues like transportation and completely avoiding his reactionary social philosophy. He knows he can’t win as a “conservative” (OK, maybe against Deeds).

Interesting. It clearly worked.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:08 PM

I can’t say much about Crist and Rubio in Florida, but I live in CT and Rob Simmons is an excellent choice to take on Chris Dodd. Connecticut is generally a blue state, but has elected Republican Governors (John Rowland and Jodi Rell) four times in a row.

Simmons, who represented Eastern Connecticut for three terms in Congress, is known as a fiscal conservative, and a staunch defender of the military, while he tends to avoid taking strong stands on social issues. His first election in 2000 surprised everyone, when he ousted long-term Democrat Rep. Sam Gejdensen, by campaigning on support for the submarine base in Groton, CT and (surprisingly) support for the Mashantucket Pequot Native Americans, who run two major gambling casinos in that district.

Simmons is probably the strongest candidate against Dodd, since he already has an electoral base in Eastern Connecticut, and support for him could spread by word-of-mouth into the Hartford suburbs. He could probably win relatively conservative northwest Connecticut, and the rich suburbs of Fairfield County in the southwest. The large cities of Bridgeport, New Haven, and Hartford will probably vote for Dodd, but the race will probably be won or lost in the swing cities of Waterbury and Danbury, which have long traditions of Republican mayors, sometimes tainted by corruption. Simmons may be able to win by attacking Dodd on his “sweetheart” loan deals, while touting his own record as a fiscally responsible member of the House.

I have seen a lot of campaign flyers for Linda McMahon in West Hartford, but it is not clear what she stands for, and does she have the statewide support and name-recognition that Simmons could enjoy as a three-term Congressman? Even if there was a primary, it would seem like Simmons would be heavily favored, and could beat the tainted Dodd in 2010.

Steve Z on November 3, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Now, Politico reports that the hysteria in the GOP over conservatism has now made them scared of a perfectly normal and legitimate intraparty mechanism — the primary. Either the GOP needs to get some testicular fortitude or Politico needs to dial down the hyperbole:

Politico will never dial down the hyperbole because Politico IS HYPERBOLE. That’s their schtick, that’s their deal, that’s what the “source” is all about: hyperbole, dialed way up.

Expecting or even considering the possibility that Poltico may, might or could dial down the hyperbole is like expecting a cobra not to bite anyone. Cobra’s bite, Politico hyperbolates. That’s the way things are.

Lourdes on November 3, 2009 at 12:08 PM

I personally think that Palin will break the hearts of those making abortion or gay rights the center of their voting decisions.

I listened to her in the election. She is personally tolerant.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

I think so too , but she’ll let those decisions be made at the state level pointing at the Constitution. See how that works.

the_nile on November 3, 2009 at 12:09 PM

Good post, Ed.

NY-23 was different in that: (a) there was no primary; and, (b) the GOP “leaders” screwed the party over with DIABLO Dede.

Granted, a few hard-core Conservatives will try and push the party “purist” line per Allahpundit’s nightmare scenario, but the vast majority are simply out to try and purge true RINOs and their ilk who would do the party more harm than good if they were elected.

This is the whole point of having primaries in the first place! To help keep the party focused on core principles and not let the ‘R’ label drift towards irrelevance.

munchnstuf on November 3, 2009 at 12:09 PM

Furthermore, Simmons is actually a conservative candidate

Simmons is a moderate. Very strong on National Security and Foreign Policy, pretty reliable on fiscal and economic issues. He is mixed on energy policy, weak on immigration (supported the minutemen and the fence but voted for Shamnesty and voted against requiring hospitals to report illegal immigrants they provide healthcare to illegals) and he has a radical pro-choice record (100% NARAL record).

He may not be a Rino but he is no Conservative.

Daemonocracy on November 3, 2009 at 12:10 PM

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:07 PM

Arnold can’t win what? He’s term-limited out of office in 2010. He can’t even run. Unless you’re thinking about another office?

cs89 on November 3, 2009 at 12:10 PM

But the GOP has to replace whoever it is in the Party is handling, managing and making possible so many repeat and routine RINOs. The voters don’t want the New Democratic Party in the GOP, the voters want unaffected individuals who understand service and are NOT “career D.C.” parkers in the Congressional lot.

There are more than enough Independents who are Independents today BECAUSE of the mundane Leftwingers in both parties, particularly in the people who make candidates possible.

Lourdes on November 3, 2009 at 12:11 PM

This is the whole point of having primaries in the first place! To help keep the party focused on core principles and not let the ‘R’ label drift towards irrelevance.

munchnstuf on November 3, 2009 at 12:09 PM

Ditto.

Lourdes on November 3, 2009 at 12:12 PM

I personally think that Palin will break the hearts of those making abortion or gay rights the center of their voting decisions.

I listened to her in the election. She is personally tolerant.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 11:46 AM

I’ve never really understood the caricature of Palin by leftists as a raving social con (or the canonization of her by social cons as some kind of living saint).

So “not getting a convenient abortion” is all it takes now?

How gay issues even came up in relation to Palin is a total mystery.

Lehosh on November 3, 2009 at 12:12 PM

Lefties really don’t understand how conservatives think. They believe that just because they worship the Democrat Party above all, that we must worship the Republican Party above all in a similar manner.

Speedwagon82 on November 3, 2009 at 12:14 PM

Seriously, why do you even post links to Politico anymore? I stopped clicking on them long ago.

sleepy-beans on November 3, 2009 at 12:14 PM

I love how libs try to coach conservatives on how we should think, act and believe. They give us bullet points to worry about & issues we should contemplate.

blue-balls: If I believed as you did, I WOULD NOT BE A CONSERVATIVE, I would be a lemming collectivist like you.

Funny how the left always calls the right “judgmental” when in actuality it is the complete opposite. BIZARRO world indeed.

Ris4victory on November 3, 2009 at 12:14 PM

The old saying that all elections are local is a good example. Watch who and what is elected today, that’ll give you a clue how 2010 goes.

The millions that have been unemployed for several months and remembering how much they paid in taxes while employed will hopefully lead them down a different path. If it doesn’t, there is no hope for this country.

24K lady on November 3, 2009 at 12:15 PM

The GOP needs to count its victories where it finds them; already the Party has one less RINO in upstate NY and all moderates in the GOP are on notice that conservative party plank philosophy does matter. So too, elder statesmen and stateswoman of the GOP – Romney, Palin, Thompson, Huckabee, et al. – will be paying more attention to conservative party beliefs not just lip service to political planks.

There are small victories here but success just the same!

IntheNet on November 3, 2009 at 12:15 PM

The super scary “right flank” is a democrat media narrative, and the GOP fools will play right into it. Political elites don’t learn. They just don’t. If the town halls this summer showed us anything, it was the clear contempt politicians have for the plebeians they represent — and there’s no reason not to believe that GOP Congressmen feel the exact same way about the unwashed masses in their districts that their democrat brethren put on display in the town halls. Face it, the majority of politicians don’t run for office to represent “the people” — they don’t want to be anywhere near the people — they run to enrich and aggrandize themselves. Democrat and Republican.

It used to be cynical to feel this way; now it’s just realistic.

Rational Thought on November 3, 2009 at 12:15 PM

I still can’t believe Linda McMahon is considering a Senate run. Can you imagine the attack ads the DNC will be able to come up with if she’s on the ballot?

Doughboy on November 3, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Well she isn’t fat. That seems to be the direction Democrat attack ads are going in.

Speedwagon82 on November 3, 2009 at 12:17 PM

If the public wants Conservatives elected as Republican Candidates, they will be. The Country Club Republicans had better order a second martini. The times, they are a’changin’.

kingsjester on November 3, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Politico is teh suxxor

pseudonominus on November 3, 2009 at 12:18 PM

The grassroots is dragging the GOP kicking and screaming in the direction that the GOP should be leading us in and if the GOP has to be restocked with fresh conservative blood its proving doable.

Speakup on November 3, 2009 at 12:18 PM

“If the trumpet gives an uncertain sound who shall prepare himself to the battle?”

So goes the age old question.

Moderates base their decisions on “what is good for the moment?” They do not base their positions upon principle. You cannot predict what they will do. Without principle or predictability they cannot be trusted. They are forever uncertain as to the proper course of action.

Conservatism is principle based. There is no uncertainty. People rally to the call when conservatives have the trumpet.

The Rock on November 3, 2009 at 12:20 PM

There appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding . . . the GOP should represent the will of it’s constituency instead of the constituency representing the will of the GOP. It’s the people that are in charge, not the political organizations.

rplat on November 3, 2009 at 12:21 PM

The grassroots is dragging the GOP kicking and screaming in the direction that the GOP should be leading us in and if the GOP has to be restocked with fresh conservative blood its proving doable.

Speakup on November 3, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Well, I would agree, but then I’m not even remotely informed about the GOP. I am not interested.

I am interested in real change.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:22 PM

“but McDonnell is running entirely on centrist issues like transportation and completely avoiding his reactionary social philosophy.”

And Deeds ran entirely on McDonnell’s “reactionary social philosophy,” with an almost daily front-page assist from the Washington Post. Lotta good it did him.

‘And Republicans running on “fiscal restraint” is a little tougher given the gallons of red ink they themselves spilled for eight years — and that pesky little recession they gave us.’

Which is why Republican party affiliation is down, while conservative affiliation is way up. The few people who still insist on identifying themselves as “Republican” are increasingly the die-hard “centrists.”

Also, of course, while deficits of $200 billion may be manageable, $500 billion – $1 trillion is not, and most thinking people, left and right, realize this. That’s why Bush’s approval numbers sucked, that’s why Reid’s and Pelosi’s suck, and that’s why Obama’s are on the road to sucktitude (54% already say his economic policies are on the wrong track.)

Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 12:07 PM”

notropis on November 3, 2009 at 12:22 PM

I think, personally, Obama was the Madison Avenue candidate. He tapped into “change.”

But he’s failed to deliver.

The fact is that people did really want change. They are stepping up the pressure.

There will be a large number of “Hoffmans” voted in. This is a year of “Vote the Rascal Out.”

And that will include incumbent GOP.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:24 PM

And that will include incumbent GOP.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:24 PM

We can hope.

Lehosh on November 3, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Which is why Republican party affiliation is down, while conservative affiliation is way up. The few people who still insist on identifying themselves as “Republican” are increasingly the die-hard “centrists.”

I agree. Moreover, those who complain about how the teaparty movement “hijacked” the GOP aren’t really getting the message.

They don’t particularly care that NY loses its long-time Republican label in that area.

They don’t care.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Expect more of this sort of hysteria and misrepresentation. As the conservative movement grows, so will need from both party establishments to characterize them as extremists dangerous to civic health. And the media will collude of course.

rrpjr on November 3, 2009 at 12:26 PM

We can hope.

Lehosh on November 3, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Actually, I think it’s more than just hope. This is a turning point.

If you’re willing to lose your home, your livelihood, etc., while paying taxes out the kazoo whether in the form of fees or direct taxes, OK.

but I trust that voters know where the breaking point is.

This is it.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:28 PM

The nice part about this is that the self identified conservatives are finally appearing not to give a sh** about party affliation.
I wonder when the GOP will figure that out.

ORconservative on November 3, 2009 at 12:29 PM

I do think the biggest challenge will come when the opposing energy must offer solutions.

I’ve never seen a single situation in my lifetime where anything good came from only opposing.

Either there are solutions offered, or it will just be one more case of a failed rebellion.

I wait to see.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:30 PM

The nice part about this is that the self identified conservatives are finally appearing not to give a sh** about party affliation.
I wonder when the GOP will figure that out.

ORconservative on November 3, 2009 at 12:29 PM

I think Gingich got it. He’s a bright guy. I think that articles will still pop up from elected officials. They aren’t so bright.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 12:31 PM

This is the whole point of having primaries in the first place! To help keep the party focused on core principles and not let the ‘R’ label drift towards irrelevance.

munchnstuf on November 3, 2009 at 12:09 PM

Exactly. And I believe in the past, only about 8% of registered voters on average vote in the primaries. That has to change.

mbs on November 3, 2009 at 12:31 PM

BadgerHawk on November 3, 2009 at 11:48 AM

I think the left has done a very, very good job in recent years of convincing people that social issues are more important than fiscal ones

The only problem with that assertion is that it is completely at odds with the political landscape.

let’s look at some of the more prominent social issues:

1) Abortion: Over the last two election cycles, the Dems have made big strides in traditionally red/purple congressional districts by electing pro-life Dems, like Bob Casey, Heath Shuler, Bobby Bright, and Travis Childers. Witness the problems Pelosi is having with PelosiCare over abortion provisos. Hardly painting pro-lifers as out of the mainstream.

2) Gay Marriage: Where this has been up on a ballot at the same time as Democrats on the same ballot, they have run as far and as fast from their gay constituents as possible, even in some districts in California, the HQ of the Gay Mafia. Hardly painting traditional marriage advocates as out of the mainstream.

3) Gun Control: As far as mainstream issues go, this one is about as dead as they get, not because of GOP triumph, but because of Dem acquiescence. Thirty years ago, the Heller decision would have prompted howls for impeachment proceedings from the left. Today… not a peep. Hardly painting gun owners as out of the mainstream.

The Left has seized the high political ground not by working to change the minds of middle America, but by admitting, after long last, that middle America, along with the Right, had it right all along, and making room for those positions in their caucus.

JohnGalt23 on November 3, 2009 at 12:31 PM

…primaries … allow people within the particular state or Congressional district to determine which kind of candidate represents their best interests and those of the party, rather than have party bosses handpick candidates without any kind of accountability.–EdM

The problem though, as exemplified by the Florida senate race, the GOP party bosses send Warchests full o’ cash to their annointed, long before the voters get an opportunity to express their choice of candidate in the primary.

Therefore the out of state RINO forces effectievly run electoral roughshod over the in-state Republican Voters. Candidate Marco Rubio should have been allowed to compete with Candidate Crist on a more even Republican playing field — both for GOP CASH as well as GOP VOTERs!

As for the non-sense emanating from the bowels of the Leftist Obagovmint spin media – when their mouthes move we know their lying.

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on November 3, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2