Bennett out in UT Senate race; Update: Primary for GOP

posted at 5:56 pm on May 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

In a humiliating end to his career, Senator Bob Bennett of Utah couldn’t get enough of his own party’s delegates at the Utah GOP convention to get past the second round of balloting for his re-election bid.  After coming in third in the first two rounds, Bennett was automatically eliminated for the third round of voting.  Earlier, he had pleaded with delegates to give him a second chance after coming under fire for supporting the TARP bailouts:

Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) has lost the battle for a fourth term in office after delegates to the UT GOP convention refused to renominate him on Saturday, a highly-placed source with knowledge of the vote count tells Hotline OnCall.

Instead, GOPers will choose between attorney Mike Lee (R) and business consultant Tim Bridgewater (R), who will advance to a third ballot. If neither candidate receives 60% of the vote, they will face off in a June 22 primary.

On the first ballot, Lee led with 28.75%, followed by Bridgewater’s 26.84%. Bennett finished third, with 25.91%. The remaining vote split among candidates who have openly opposed Bennett, making any comeback attempt a longshot to begin with.

Bennett, the 3-term incumbent with a largely conservative record, is the first victim of an angry GOP primary electorate, which is upset with his votes over TARP legislation and his work with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) to try and forge a health care consensus. He had been targeted by the conservative Club for Growth, which did not back a specific rival but urged delegates to vote against the incumbent.

Bennett’s not the only one with egg on his face after today’s votes.  Mitt Romney endorsed Bennett’s bid for re-election and introduced him at the convention, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell endorsed him as well.  Sen. Orrin Hatch tried rounding up delegates for Bennett at the convention.  However, the state’s GOP leadership declined to publicly back him and worked to keep the national party out of the convention fight as well.

This shows that the Tea Party movement isn’t about restoring a Republican status quo.  The movement’s activists want real change, and real action to reverse the growth of government and the profligate spending that has gone on for far too long in Washington DC.  Republican incumbents nationwide should consider this a wake-up call.

Bennett may not go quietly, however:

But Bennett could still have an impact in the contest. He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention. If Bennett, who is still popular among the larger UT electorate, were to run, he could have a chance at becoming the first successful write-in candidate since the late Strom Thurmond did it in ’54.

That would put the Utah GOP in a very tough position in the fall.  They should have no trouble beating the Democrat in a one-on-one race, as Utah is a deeply Republican state.  If Bennett tries splitting the vote with a write-in campaign, it may complicate matters for the eventual nominee.  However, as Bennett could only get 27% of the vote even in the second round, there hardly seems to be a groundswell of Republican support that Bennett can ride to a general-election win … and Democrats certainly won’t bother writing in his name on the line.

The Club for Growth released a statement celebrating Bennett’s political demise:

“Utah Republicans made the right decision today for their state, and sent a clear message that change is finally coming to Washington.  The media may report this as Bob Bennett’s loss, but we see it as a victory for Utah, for the United States Senate, and for the cause of economic freedom.

“Our goal all along was to ensure Utah Republicans knew about Bob Bennett’s true record in the Senate, so that they could make an informed decision today.  The results show that we succeeded in that effort, and I thank the delegates for taking their considered attention.

“Mike Lee and Tim Bridgewater are genuine pro-growth conservatives, and we wish both the best of luck in next round of balloting.”

I interviewed Mike Lee at CPAC this year, and he seemed very optimistic that he could derail Bennett even then. It turned out that he was right, although he may not win enough ballots to get the nomination outright. If not, Lee and Bridgewater will face off in a June primary. Here’s the interview with Lee, which was a bit choppy due to bandwidth limitations for my connection:

Update: Tim Bridgewater overtook Mike Lee in the final ballot, but could not reach the required threshold of 60%, falling just short at 57% to Lee’s 43%.  That means that the two will face each other in a primary on June 22nd.  The Democrats have the same problem in a Congressional race:

Utah Democrats forced Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) into a primary, giving the veteran congressman only 55% of the vote against progressive activist Claudia Wright, clearly blowback for Matheson’s votes against the Democratic agenda.

Hotline gives more background on the Democratic split:

Wright challenged the Blue Dog Matheson on his moderate voting record, and was particularly incensed by his vote against the new health care law. Matheson also voted against the cap-and-trade bill, and overall, he held the 25th most-conservative voting record for a Dem in ’09, according to NJ vote ratings.

Wright’s performance today is impressive, but her challenge in a primary will be much tougher. So far this cycle, she’s reported raising just $10K, and had just $9K CoH. In his pre-convo report, Matheson had over $1.4M CoH.

By most measures, this should be a top GOP pickup. Matheson’s CD gave John McCain 58% in ’08, and holds a Cook PVI rating of R+15. That rating is the fifth-highest for a Dem. This is strong GOP territory.

But Matheson’s voting record — which Wright and some liberals attack as too moderate — has proven to be a good fit for this CD. In Mar. — during the heat of the health care debate — Matheson registered a strong 57% approval rating. In addition, Matheson has only failed to reach 55% in a general election once — in ’02.

If the underdog Wright does pull off the upset on 6/22, this seat would again be in play, as her liberal positions are sure to put her a bit out the mainstream with the strongly GOP CD. But if Matheson’s the nominee, the CD will move much further down the GOP’s target list.

If Wright can bump Matheson out in the primary, the GOP may have a shot at grabbing this House seat.  However, in case any voters think about registering as a Democrat to engage in some strategic primary voting, the Senate primary for the Republicans will probably convince those to leave the Democratic race to the Democrats, as Dave Weigel suggests.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 3

They all must go…

Wade on May 8, 2010 at 5:59 PM

Couldn’t happen to a more arrogant guy.

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2010 at 5:59 PM

Bennett’s not the only one with egg on his face after today’s votes. Mitt Romney endorsed Bennett’s bid for re-election and introduced him at the convention

Ouch. Why did he even bother? Mittens has a lock on Utah in the 2012 primaries thanks to the Mormon vote. All this did was make him look like an establishment Republican; and to add insult to injury, he backed a loser.

Doughboy on May 8, 2010 at 6:00 PM

We’re scroomed by incontinent men/women in Congress and one narcissistic dude in the WH.

Throw them all out if this land is to survive any semblance of how we know her.

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2010 at 6:00 PM

Utah has spoken.

Mr. Bennett..You are the weakest link…Goodbye!

Chrisin206 on May 8, 2010 at 6:01 PM

YES!!! You could tell at the caucus that it was lights out for Bennett. Now I can’t wait for Orrin Hatch’s time to come up…he’s been there since freakin 1976!

diesirae on May 8, 2010 at 6:02 PM

You may not agree with Palin’s backing of Fiorina but Utah kind of puts Fiorina/DeVore in it’s proper context.

Chrisin206 on May 8, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Mitt can endorse Bennett but can’t pick a candidate to endorse in Cali…hum…fishy.

In any event, this should be a wake up call to every GOP-er out there…you have to EARN the vote, and we definitely want change.

deidre on May 8, 2010 at 6:03 PM

There had to be more to it than TARP. Paul Ryan voted for TARP. In truth I agree with Krauthammer on that subject. I think the initial response was necessary and it is ridiculous to think that government would just sit back and let the whole economic system collapse. Ronald Reagan would not have done that, conservative or not.

However, that initial money was a loan and most of it has been paid back and half of it was not even used. If that had been the beginning and end of it and the taxpayer had been reimbursed and the debt paid, I doubt if it would have been such a huge issue. It was all the other stuff that came after and the piling on of debt that really made people angry.

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:04 PM

I think Bennett should take it like a man and let it go.

myrenovations on May 8, 2010 at 6:06 PM

But Bennett could still have an impact in the contest. He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention. If Bennett, who is still popular among the larger UT electorate, were to run, he could have a chance at becoming the first successful write-in candidate since the late Strom Thurmond did it in ‘54.

If I were Bob Bennett, I would have a few townhall meetings throughout Utah before I tried this. He might find out that even though UT’s Convention format is decidedly unfair, it would be worse for him to look as though he’s trying to hang on at all costs.

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Hatch needs to go in the next round. He nearly wet his pants this week because Obama invited him to the WH to work him over to vote for his identity politics SCOTUS appointee.

Intelligence and independence are indignant.

Hatch pretends to possess both.

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2010 at 6:08 PM

I hope Bennett does not get vindictive and vote against the Repubs. Why can’t he & Specter say ” Ok I’ve had my run, put in a few good years,now it’s time to move on.”

Tasha on May 8, 2010 at 6:09 PM

The problem with TARP was that it was originally intended to absorb all the toxic assets that these banks had and allow them to get scored wait for the recession to pass and then eventually offload them.

TARP ended up becoming a roundabout way of nationalizing our banks whether they wanted the money or not. They bought shares of the stock. Government over-regulated itself to the point that when these big banks fail the smaller banks were limited in their capacity to pick up the pieces and take their place on Wall Street. Instead they got lumped in with the Lehman Brothers, Citi, Freddie, and Fannie.

Using TARP as a litmus test will only hinder the long-term goal of overhauling the Beltway in November. We can’t change history we can only try not to repeat it.

Chrisin206 on May 8, 2010 at 6:09 PM

If I were Bob Bennett, I would have a few townhall meetings throughout Utah before I tried this. He might find out that even though UT’s Convention format is decidedly unfair, it would be worse for him to look as though he’s trying to hang on at all costs.

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Yes, that is true.

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Resident Mittbot FlickeringFlame in another thread:

If he were to endorse a candidate, then everybody would know that the candidate he endorsed was the best candidate and would sink the other candidates. He will not abuse his power in that way.

FlickeringFlame on May 7, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Say, didn’t Romney endorse Bennett? Ouch.

ddrintn on May 8, 2010 at 6:09 PM

There had to be more to it than TARP. Paul Ryan voted for TARP.

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Different states, different constituencies. Ryan’s constituents wanted it (so Ryan says), Bennett’s didn’t. Yet he voted for it anyway.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:10 PM

Bennett will not rule a write-in candidacy…The Spectre of Spector

These pols get to Washington, drink the water, and feel entitled to stay there forever…

Gohawgs on May 8, 2010 at 6:10 PM

Take and be warned RNC, any bi-partisanship/collaboration with the progressive/communist party currently in charge will be met with rebuke and castigation…..Remember November!

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Damn, That was supposed read Take heed and be warned…

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 6:12 PM

Any Republican who had any fingerprints on Obamacare deserves to be fired. Ask Greece how socialized medicine worked out for them fiscally.
The RNC, if it actually had a working brain , they would make repeal the primary issue for November.

jjshaka on May 8, 2010 at 6:12 PM

He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention.

If Bennett does this, then there’s no question that he’s running for his greater good and not Utah’s or the Republican party in Utah.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:12 PM

Say, didn’t Romney endorse Bennett? Ouch.

ddrintn on May 8, 2010 at 6:09 PM

The reason why he (Romney) will not abuse his power is because he has no power to begin with. That’s why the next Senator from the State of Utah will NOT be Bennett.

Chrisin206 on May 8, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Ouch. Why did he even bother? Mittens has a lock on Utah in the 2012 primaries thanks to the Mormon vote. All this did was make him look like an establishment Republican; and to add insult to injury, he backed a loser.

Doughboy on May 8, 2010 at 6:00 PM

After this and his version of Obamacare in NJ, that lock just got picked.

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 6:14 PM

He better not be the Dems 60th vote on key bills!

LurkerDood on May 8, 2010 at 6:14 PM

A right-in candidate! This tells me alot about him. He has no respect for the people he represented. He is like Governor Crist; the lust for power is overwhelming.

amr on May 8, 2010 at 6:15 PM

I guess the SRM/MSM narrative will have to shift again. This kind of derails their Tea Party movement is only against Democrats meme.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:16 PM

But Bennett could still have an impact in the contest. He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention.

Typical “Me First” bullcrap from a GOP grandee who thinks the seat belongs to him.

Cicero43 on May 8, 2010 at 6:16 PM

If Bennett does this, then there’s no question that he’s running for his greater good and not Utah’s or the Republican party in Utah.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:12 PM

I suspect his positions on the issues would become noticeable more nuanced as well. Or as nuanced as a supposed conservative can get in Utah.

These guys who look out for Number One always seem to be able to do some “soul-searching” about their views when it’s politically convenient.

fiatboomer on May 8, 2010 at 6:16 PM

Bennett’s not the only one with egg on his face after today’s votes. Mitt Romney endorsed Bennett’s bid for re-election and introduced him at the convention, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell endorsed him as well.

Wonder why that dchisholm poster hasn’t commented yet about how awesome and spectacular Romney is.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:18 PM

I suspect his positions on the issues would become noticeable more nuanced as well. Or as nuanced as a supposed conservative can get in Utah.

These guys who look out for Number One always seem to be able to do some “soul-searching” about their views when it’s politically convenient.

fiatboomer on May 8, 2010 at 6:16 PM

Funny how elections do that to politicians. Good thing Utah has a long memory and holds their elected officials accountable!

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:19 PM

After this and his version of Obamacare in NJ, that lock just got picked.

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Massachusetts is abbreviated MA…. dude.

fiatboomer on May 8, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Massachusetts is abbreviated MA…. dude.

fiatboomer on May 8, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Commenting in haste, my bad.

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 6:21 PM

Isn’t this essentially what happened in NY-23? Dede was “chosen” (not elected) and Doug Hoffman said “FU!” and ran anyway.

The tea partiers supported Hoffman’s decision to “let the people choose”, but I’m guessing you won’t support Bennett “letting the people choose”…

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Wonder why that dchisholm poster hasn’t commented yet about how awesome and spectacular Romney is.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:18 PM

He’s busy sending out resumes to Charlie Crist and Arlene Specter.

Knucklehead on May 8, 2010 at 6:26 PM

“This shows that the Tea Party movement isn’t about restoring a Republican status quo.”

But that’s not what the media says…!

/

Seven Percent Solution on May 8, 2010 at 6:26 PM

OT

Julius Caesar of the Internet

MB4 on May 8, 2010 at 6:28 PM

I think Bennett should take it like a man and let it go.

myrenovations on May 8, 2010 at 6:06 PM

But it’s so darn difficult to get someone to remove that engraved golden nameplate off his chair.

GrannyDee on May 8, 2010 at 6:30 PM

I’m confused. Is it Bob Bennett or Arlen Bennett, or Arlen Specter or Bob Specter, or Charlie Bennett or Bob Crist, or Arlen Crist or…

petefrt on May 8, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone
And another one gone
The Tea Party does what it must
Not a servant to any politician’s lust

MB4 on May 8, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Isn’t this essentially what happened in NY-23? Dede was “chosen” (not elected) and Doug Hoffman said “FU!” and ran anyway.

The tea partiers supported Hoffman’s decision to “let the people choose”, but I’m guessing you won’t support Bennett “letting the people choose”…

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 6:23 PM

No it is nothing like NY-23. Bennett has been elected by the Republican party, then the State of Utah to the Senate three times before. Dede was in the NY State House, and a few party bigwigs met behind closed doors and just picked her without a primary for Republican voters to have their say. This is the primary voters having their say.

The situations are not analogous at all.

I would say nice try, but it wasn’t a nice try.

Brian1972 on May 8, 2010 at 6:34 PM

…UT’s Convention format is decidedly unfair…

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 6:07 PM

How so?

theperfecteconomist on May 8, 2010 at 6:38 PM

MB4 on May 8, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Cool pic, saved to HD thanks.

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 6:38 PM

All you other wussie liberal GOPs — we’re coming for YOU next.

Daggett on May 8, 2010 at 6:40 PM

Great win for the right side of things.
Bennett’s refusal to concede and step down is another example of both the astonishing sense of entitlement that multiple-term politicians develop and the disdain they have for the will of the people.

GaltBlvnAtty on May 8, 2010 at 6:42 PM

…UT’s Convention format is decidedly unfair…

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

MB4 on May 8, 2010 at 6:42 PM

Bennett’s refusal to concede and step down is another example of both the astonishing sense of entitlement that multiple-term politicians develop and the disdain they have for the will of the people.

GaltBlvnAtty on May 8, 2010 at 6:42 PM

Bennett should go on a hunger strike until his royalist’s entitled nomination and seat are restored.

MB4 on May 8, 2010 at 6:45 PM

He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention.

Why is it that these milquetoast pubbies never fight this hard against democrats?

Fletch54 on May 8, 2010 at 6:46 PM

No it is nothing like NY-23. Bennett has been elected by the Republican party, then the State of Utah to the Senate three times before. Dede was in the NY State House, and a few party bigwigs met behind closed doors and just picked her without a primary for Republican voters to have their say. This is the primary voters having their say.

The situations are not analogous at all.

I would say nice try, but it wasn’t a nice try.

Brian1972 on May 8, 2010 at 6:34 PM

Wow. I’m surprised you didn’t say “and by the way, Dede is a girl and Bennett is a guy!”

You *completely* missed my point about the processes. Tea partiers supported the voters having a say. Dede wasn’t elected the nominee by voters, and Bennett wasn’t voted OUT by voters.

I don’t know the ins and outs of the system in Utah, but it’s clear the voters had no choice in this decision.

Again, I’m not saying I like the guy. I’m just sick of double standards and I despise voters not having their voices heard (Dede, Bennett, and term limits included).

If you’d like to step off your soap box for a minute and respond without the attitude of a high school prom queen, please feel free to respond.

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 6:48 PM

So will Grassley get the same treatment? Curious minds and all that.

Siobhan on May 8, 2010 at 6:50 PM

I suspect we’ll see a lot more of this. And that’s good thing.

Bugler on May 8, 2010 at 6:51 PM

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Bennett was given the boot by a state party convention, not an informal meeting of a few local party leaders.

fiatboomer on May 8, 2010 at 6:52 PM

There had to be more to it than TARP…

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Check out his health care compromise bill he tried to push. It was clearly to the LEFT of the law Obama signed into law.

clement on May 8, 2010 at 6:53 PM

theperfecteconomist on May 8, 2010 at 6:38 PM

It locks out the vast majority of the primary voting electorate.

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 6:54 PM

Why did he even bother? Mittens has a lock on Utah in the 2012 primaries thanks to the Mormon vote.

Doughboy on May 8, 2010 at 6:00 PM

Actually a bit offended that you would imply I’d vote for someone based on their religion. Hardly.

sisterchristian on May 8, 2010 at 6:54 PM

Bennett is almost 77 years old. Why do these guys want to hang on so long? As an older baby boomer, I am glad we are getting younger blood in congress.

jeannie on May 8, 2010 at 6:55 PM

“Bennett may not go quietly…”

Do they ever?

rrpjr on May 8, 2010 at 6:56 PM

Sen Bennett got his answer today.He said on fox early this week that members of the rep party in the sen. had told him if he was not conservative enough none of them were.Well i hope they all got their answer today .A great day.

thmcbb on May 8, 2010 at 6:56 PM

Remember this is a GOP caucus, not a primary.

I doubt Bennett would have lost a primary. Understand, I’m not a Bennett supporter. I think he’s a nice fellow and a decent Republican, and a conservative, but he’s just been in Washington DC too long.

Mitt Romney endorsed him, probably for reasons of family loyalty. Bennett is a grandson of Heber J. Grant. The Grants and Romneys go way back. In fact Heber Grant was a major influence in getting Marion Romney (an influential Democrat at the time) to come out in opposition to FDR.

If Bennett was a true RINO it’d be one thing. But he isn’t. He’s just a conservative who got a little too used to DC and tried to “work with” the opposition to “find a compromise” instead of standing athwart the gate of history shouting “No!”

Sackett on May 8, 2010 at 6:57 PM

Unbelievably humiliating for Bennett.

His own party, in a state he’s represented since 1992, grandson of the 7th President/Apostle of the LDS church, can’t even get a top 2 at his convention.

Delicious.

November 2010 is going to be one hell of a time.

aquaviva on May 8, 2010 at 6:59 PM

Happy dance for me. This is the Tea Party and 912 movement having it’s impact. People are fed up.

I appreciate Bennett serving but it was time for him to go – he had lost touch with Constitutional principles.

batter on May 8, 2010 at 6:59 PM

Great job by the GOP of Utah. This was a much needed move. My question is more about who is advising Mitt Romney. Does Mitt have a competent staff surrounding him? The writing was on the wall with this one and Romney’s staff allowed him to fall on his sword by endorsing a losing candidate like Bennett.

Did the Romney staff really believe that the glistening shine of Romney’s hair would be enough to push this loser over the finish line? I question the judgement of this huge political blunder by Romney. Is this the type of judgement we can expect from a President Romney? Oh the horror.

Hey I am just saying. Every move Palin makes is scrutinized and questioned. Just trying to be fair.

chief on May 8, 2010 at 7:00 PM

Sackett on May 8, 2010 at 6:57 PM

I think this is spot on.

aquaviva on May 8, 2010 at 7:00 PM

PS I’m in Utah. I think Bennett could see the writing on the wall. Reports from the caucus meetings this April we not good for him.

batter on May 8, 2010 at 7:00 PM

Bennett was given the boot by a state party convention, not an informal meeting of a few local party leaders.

fiatboomer on May 8, 2010 at 6:52 PM

By a few thousand. Why do you tea partiers hate people choosing for THEMSELVES for a change? You only oppose bringing issues up for a full vote when it benefits your beliefs. Enough with the double standards already.

Almost 500,000 people voted in the last non-Presidential Utah election. About 900,000 voted in 2004. And everyone here is ok with 3,500 people choosing nominees like that?

If they had chosen Bennett, everyone here would be encouraging a third party run or a write in because “thats what is right!” but now its “HOW DARE BENNETT DO SOMETHING AS OUTRAGEOUS!!1!1!”

If you folks would stop using emotion and start using reason, you would probably agree with me. But that’s nothing new here.

I support letting EVERY voter decide. I believe Utah Republicans are smart enough to boot Bennett out, but I guess we’ll never find out.

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:06 PM

A turds a turd…..you need top flush the crap.

David in ATL on May 8, 2010 at 7:07 PM

TARP was like Y2K. If they worked, nobody would notice, and its proponents look like money-wasting alarmists.

But if either had failed … well, we’ll never know, will we.

YYZ on May 8, 2010 at 7:08 PM

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:06 PM

To be fair, the 2008 UT state GOP convention forced Rep. Chris Cannon to face Jason Chaffetz in a primary, who then proceeded to beat Cannon like a rented mule.

So an incumbent GOPer can lose in a primary in UT. I’m just in favor of letting a straight primary do the honors.

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 7:12 PM

We’re scroomed by incontinent men/women in Congress and one narcissistic dude in the WH.

Throw them all out if this land is to survive any semblance of how we know her.

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2010 at 6:00 PM

..Ryan? Bachmann?

The War Planner on May 8, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Some delegates, who tend to be more conservative than other Utah Republicans, were also upset he’s still in office after initially promising to only serve two terms when first elected in 1992.

Romney introduced Bennett on Saturday — to a mix of cheers and boos.

..Ryan? Bachmann?

The War Planner on May 8, 2010 at 7:12 PM

The exceptions always strengthen the rules.

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2010 at 7:15 PM

And everyone here is ok with 3,500 people choosing nominees like that?

At the GOP convention before the GOP primary before the general vote? Yeah.

theperfecteconomist on May 8, 2010 at 7:15 PM

You are right about the need for real change. A bunch of people in Washington who just lie to get votes, take bribes for their votes … not saying Bennett does these things, but he sure thinks he can say one thing at home and do another in Washington.

We need to restore the character of those who run, so you can trust what they say. Else it’s out the door. Maybe this will show we mean it.

tarpon on May 8, 2010 at 7:16 PM

The vote that started the whole anti-Bennett groundswell here in UT was his “yes” on cloture for amnesty a couple years ago.

aquaviva on May 8, 2010 at 7:19 PM

Bennett’s refusal to concede and step down is another example of both the astonishing sense of entitlement that multiple-term politicians develop and the disdain they have for the will of the people.

GaltBlvnAtty on May 8, 2010 at 6:42 PM

Indeed, indeed. See Crist, see Brown in England, and more to come. ‘Down’ with their heads!

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2010 at 7:19 PM

A word to all RINO’S everywhere.You cross that line to the other side one to many times to work with your good friends the democrats to spend more money and take more of our freedoms away.You forgot who you work for.Your time is up.(YOU ARE FIRED)

thmcbb on May 8, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Bye, bye @sshat! You and Harry Reid can cry together in the temple!

csdeven on May 8, 2010 at 7:21 PM

There had to be more to it than TARP. Paul Ryan voted for TARP.

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:04 PM

ROFL let Ryan run a national campaign and see what his vote for Tarp, the car bailouts and the stimulus gets him. He might get 2% of the GOP vote in the primaries.

The ponly reason people like Ryan atm is the way he is talking now. As soon as they find out about his you know actual record they will abandon him in droves.

TRAP was wrong the way it was passed was wrong, the fact that it saved the CEO’s was wrong, the fact that no elites took a hit becaus eof TARP was wrong.

while I have no problem with the gov trying to shore up the economy, the backroom deals, the arm twisting, the governmental takeover of an entire industry was wrong and unamerican and opened the doors to socialist govenrment of Obama.

unseen on May 8, 2010 at 7:23 PM

TARP was like Y2K. If they worked, nobody would notice, and its proponents look like money-wasting alarmists.

But if either had failed … well, we’ll never know, will we.

YYZ on May 8, 2010 at 7:08 PM

Sort of like GWB and invading Iraq……

Caper29 on May 8, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Yo, Bob. Ever hear of the phrase, “Bow out gracefully”? No? Well, you should learn it, live it and step aside. We’re done with you.

And, don’t count on your lifetime retirement fund either. That’s going away in 2013 along with the rest of you critters that have bankrupted our Nation.

Key West Reader on May 8, 2010 at 7:25 PM

To be fair, the 2008 UT state GOP convention forced Rep. Chris Cannon to face Jason Chaffetz in a primary, who then proceeded to beat Cannon like a rented mule.

So an incumbent GOPer can lose in a primary in UT. I’m just in favor of letting a straight primary do the honors.

BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Oh I’m not saying there may be some benefits to the convention. Trust me – I despise Bennett. I’m as Conservative as anyone else on here, I just don’t like double standards. Don’t complain about a government with too much control and then go and support term limits.

Flat out Primary elections are the best way to go, period. I’m not sure why so many folks on here are opposing that system, like:

At the GOP convention before the GOP primary before the general vote? Yeah.

theperfecteconomist on May 8, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Then whats the point of a primary election if your choice is going to be chosen anyway? Why do you tea partiers oppose individual freedom so much?

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Bennett’s not the only one with egg on his face after today’s votes. Mitt Romney endorsed Bennett’s bid for re-election and introduced him at the convention, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell endorsed him as well.

This just in: Big government, bank bail-outing beltway hacks run with big government, bank bail-outing beltway hacks.

Rae on May 8, 2010 at 7:27 PM

If Bennett, who is still popular among the larger UT electorate, were to run, he could have a chance at becoming the first successful write-in candidate since the late Strom Thurmond did it in ‘54.

Like Lieberman and Crist, yet another pol who will do a end around those that think they have it all figured out.

I’m not cheering them on, I’m just saying he’s hardly out in UT Senate race.

Moesart on May 8, 2010 at 7:29 PM

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Terrye, TARP was a farce. We knew it when they blew GWB away with the “sudden crisis” scenario. Bush is a Patriot and he felt he was doing the right thing. We knew it was a set up to put the glowbama in the WH.

We all witnessed a similar “crisis” last Wednesday when the Dow tanked by more than 1000 points. The problem originated in Chicago. It was a test.

We all need to wake up.

Key West Reader on May 8, 2010 at 7:30 PM

But Bennett could still have an impact in the contest. He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention.

Bennett could be referring to the primary, assuming neither of the other two candidates get 60% of the final vote at the convention.

agmartin on May 8, 2010 at 7:31 PM

When the results were announced, there was a huge ovation with shouts and yells of “He’s gone! He’s gone!” Delegates leaped to their feet, and embraced and waved “Do Not Tread On Me” flags.

“Ding Dong hmmm hmmm hmmmm hmmmm……..”

Bennett was in tears as he answered questions during an emotional meeting with reporters.

“The political atmosphere, obviously, has been toxic and it’s very clear some of the votes that I have cast have added to the toxic environment,” he said, choking up. “Looking back on them, with one or two very minor exceptions, I wouldn’t have cast them any differently even if I’d known at the time it would cost me my career.”

Enjoy your retirement, Bob.

aquaviva on May 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM

There had to be more to it than TARP. Paul Ryan voted for TARP.

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Different states, different constituencies. Ryan’s constituents wanted it (so Ryan says), Bennett’s didn’t. Yet he voted for it anyway.

conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 6:10 PM

Yes, I know, but the idea that the market would have just settled down and everything would have worked out like magic without it is naive. It seems to me there are two kinds of utopian thought out there..on the left there is the belief that government can fix everything and to some on the right is the belief that the market is some sort of benign angel that will fix everything given the chance.

I read Amity Shlaes’s book The Forgotten Man about the Great Depression..and she made the point that a lot of the New Deal programs did more harm than good, but she also made the point that the initial banking and regulation reforms that began under Hoover and continued under FDR actually helped. In other words, she differentiated between the reforms and the New Deal. I think people have conflated everything from the useless Stimulus plan and obamacare to the other Democrat spending with emergency measures taken in the short term in the face of a crisis. They are not the same thing.

Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 7:36 PM

The political atmosphere, obviously, has been toxic and it’s very clear some of the votes that I have cast have added to the toxic environment,” he said, choking up. “Looking back on them, with one or two very minor exceptions, I wouldn’t have cast them any differently even if I’d known at the time it would cost me my career.”
Enjoy your retirement, Bob.

aquaviva on May 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM

Well, Bob, your vote DID cost you your “career”. Don’t expect a pension, Bob. That $75k annual pension will be put back into the general fund in 2013 when Conservatives put this Nation back on track. And, don’t count on any speaking or lobbying jobs either. That is a conflict of interest because you will be enriching yourself at taxpeyer expense after holding elected office.

Got that, Bob? Good. Now, go tell the other critters to start packing their sh*t cause they’re all gone by 2013.

Key West Reader on May 8, 2010 at 7:37 PM

Oh, and Bob? Tell all of your colleagues to stop underestimating the American People, and Her Tea Parties.

Key West Reader on May 8, 2010 at 7:39 PM

I’m just in favor of letting a straight primary do the honors.arbitrarily choosing a process that will give me the outcome I wish.
BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Utah has the process they have chosen; they can amend it if they wish. Meanwhile, no matter how exclusionary you think it is, it worked as designed.

massrighty on May 8, 2010 at 7:39 PM

He’s just a conservative who got a little too used to DC and tried to “work with” the opposition to “find a compromise” instead of standing athwart the gate of history shouting “No!”

Sackett on May 8, 2010 at 6:57 PM

And the final answer is .. “find a compromise” will get you the same thing as “a wide stance” in the big boys’ stall. No more of that “reach across” crapola.

ontherocks on May 8, 2010 at 7:39 PM

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:06 PM

See your point. From this I assume you are in agreement with Crist’s choice to run independent in Florida?

chemman on May 8, 2010 at 7:40 PM

Utah has the process they have chosen; they can amend it if they wish. Meanwhile, no matter how exclusionary you think it is, it worked as designed.

massrighty on May 8, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Unless Bennett was nominated again, right?

The same can be said about NY-23. Did you support Dede’s nomination? That process worked the way it was designed too..

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:42 PM

Power is everything to these people. You’re 76 years old, Bob—retire already for cripes sake!

I hope when I’m 76 I’ll be playing with great-grandkids, traveling, and doing volunteer work.

IrishEi on May 8, 2010 at 7:42 PM

Tim Bridgewater (R) took 57% to attorney Mike Lee’s 43% on the final ballot. Primary to be held June 22.

agmartin on May 8, 2010 at 7:42 PM

Didn’t take long for Demint (and SCF) to come out and support Mike Lee.

http://senateconservatives.com/v1/index.php?p=post&id=93

clement on May 8, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Wow, some people still don’t understand that stealing is wrong.

TARP was theft. Crying and claiming “ignorance” is not an excuse. Sorry.

If you voted for TARP you are a criminal. I don’t care if you are Paul Ryan, Tom Coburn, or Ronald Reagan… you have to go.

It wasn’t your money. No politician is too big to fail.

tetriskid on May 8, 2010 at 7:46 PM

Then whats the point of a primary election if your choice is going to be chosen anyway? Why do you tea partiers oppose individual freedom so much?

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Precinct caucuses + state convention + primary + election + X(tea partiers!) = opposing individual freedom to some great degree

Amazingly, this system is remarkably similar to the one used by the Dems in Utah, too.

It’s a weird sort-of-trollish thing you’re trying to pull.

theperfecteconomist on May 8, 2010 at 7:47 PM

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:27 PM

There is no double standard. Its called a refinement system to put forth the best. There is still a primary, and this was far more open then NY 23.

Eventually I hope that we get rid of the primary / party system altogether, and use the internet to do it for us….but until then, learn this…battles are more often won by using leverage and not brute strength. Giving voters a lot of choices does not result in the best one winning.

And to whoever said Bob was conservative, you keep using that word, I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2010 at 7:48 PM

Unless Bennett was nominated again, right?

My answer would be the same; my point to Brad was that there is a system in place, which seems to suit the politically active in Utah (else they would have changed it.)

The same can be said about NY-23. Did you support Dede’s nomination? That process worked the way it was designed too..

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 7:42 PM

Yes, it did; however, there is a qualitative difference between “nomination by backroom huddle” (in NY 23) and a caucus system designed to allow/disallow the forwarding of candidates into a primary.

I live in a state where the process gets changed, whimsically, to produce an outcome that suits a few in power. I don’t see this in Utah’s case.

massrighty on May 8, 2010 at 7:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3