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

Not to be a party pooper, but I am sick of the word RINO. I have decided it means any Republican who doesn’t agree with ME. A Rino to one person is a patriot to another.

bopbottle on May 9, 2010 at 5:11 AM

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your relativism.

GWBush gave us bigger government and (to a degree) ushered in Obama.
McCain would have kept the kettle boiling hotter and hotter, and God only knows whom he would have shepherded in on the Dem’s side.

Lockstein13 on May 9, 2010 at 8:34 AM

As a conservative Utahn, let me only say this: you listening, Hatch? You’re time is also running out.

karl9000 on May 9, 2010 at 8:47 AM

Visit the wives.

davidk on May 9, 2010 at 7:15 AM

Cheap. Ignorant, as well.

karl9000 on May 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM

Since Mr. Bennett was ousted for voting with the Dems on some rather major stuff, does anyone worry that he will embrace everything on the Left wants to do with his remaining time in retaliation? There are several members of the leadership that need to wake up.

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2010 at 8:59 AM

O/T: Happy Mother’s Day to all.

publiuspen on May 9, 2010 at 9:17 AM

That is the real story. Crist was backed by the NSRC and now stabs the Party in the back. Bennett was endorsed by the Party regulars and may now turn traitor as well. This clearly proves the true nature of the GOP leadership, a bunch of selfish elitist bastards that stand for nothing but $$$ in their own pockets.

If Romney doesn’t publicly pressure his pal Bennett against screwing the Party and the Tea Party conservatives then he declares himself an anti-Tea Party elitist and any more “I’m a conservative” speeches will get the same boos he got standing up for Bennett.

rcl on May 9, 2010 at 7:55 AM

If Bennett goes “indie” then it’s one more stone on the political grave of Mittens. Romney is proving everyday that he’s a GOP Ayatollah with the rest of them that JUST DON’T GET IT.

HondaV65 on May 9, 2010 at 9:20 AM

Quite right Cindy.
They find themselves at odds with majority of the electorate because their actions are designed to profit themselves at our expense. The people are becoming aware of their malfeasance and are acting out appropriately.

Tony Soprano on May 9, 2010 at 9:21 AM

Not to be a party pooper, but I am sick of the word RINO. I have decided it means any Republican who doesn’t agree with ME. A Rino to one person is a patriot to another.

bopbottle on May 9, 2010 at 5:11 AM

There’s a pretty cut and dried definition of what a RINO is – if you’re confusing it in your mind … well, that’s your problem.

HondaV65 on May 9, 2010 at 9:21 AM

A RINO is an elected official who feigns conservancy and collaborates with those opposed to their constituencies concerns to line each others pockets.

Tony Soprano on May 9, 2010 at 9:33 AM

GWBush gave us bigger government and (to a degree) ushered in Obama.
McCain would have kept the kettle boiling hotter and hotter, and God only knows whom he would have shepherded in on the Dem’s side.

Lockstein13 on May 9, 2010 at 8:34 AM

GW Bush also tried to reform social security with very little support from the same people who cry about the size of government today…and I get tired of hearing people act as if we were lucky to get Obama instead of McCain. We would be far better off with McCain, warts and all. And if people wanted to work for smaller government they could have done that without allowing Obama to bankrupt the country.

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 10:00 AM

There’s a pretty cut and dried definition of what a RINO is – if you’re confusing it in your mind … well, that’s your problem.

HondaV65 on May 9, 2010 at 9:21 AM

I am not so sure about that. I recall that during Katrina, Michelle Malkin was working pretty hard alongside Democrats to demonize George W. Bush for his lack of hands on work down there on the Gulf. Never mind the fact that the locals were actually the people on the scene with the first responsibility to deal with the issues facing their states and regions. But then again, she invented a word for Bush, presocializing, to describe his efforts to stabilize the national economy in crisis. So it seems to me that there is some basic difference here. It has a lot to do with a person’s own politics.

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Since Mr. Bennett was ousted for voting with the Dems on some rather major stuff, does anyone worry that he will embrace everything on the Left wants to do with his remaining time in retaliation? There are several members of the leadership that need to wake up.

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2010 at 8:59 AM

I think time will tell about that, but he has an overall conservative rating of 80%, which means he did not vote with Democrats a lot more than he did vote with them. So, he might decide to bow out, or he might go independent.

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Bennett pledged to only serve two terms, but got caught up in the Beltway’s system of power-drunk entitled-to-the-job politicians. Or look at it this way: he’s six years overdue on his own plan for retirement.

n0doz on May 9, 2010 at 10:14 AM

Say hello to the new Democrat senator from Utah who will win this seat when Bennett splits the vote in November.

Republicans, cutting of their nose to spite their own face, once again.

Midas on May 9, 2010 at 10:30 AM

Say hello to the new Democrat senator from Utah who will win this seat when Bennett splits the vote in November.

Republicans, cutting of their nose to spite their own face, once again.

Midas on May 9, 2010 at 10:30 AM

On the contrary, Matheson’s loss yesterday and his replacement by a progressive lib (redundant?) pretty well guarantees another Dem loss in the House. Matheson’s district included that part of SLC that houses the University. Matheson was only able to retain his seat based on the liberal area of SLC, and his willingness not to piss off the rural southern areas too much. With him gone, and the new progressive running, it’s highly unlikely that the conservative south will go along with liberal SLC.

And if you think a Dem Senator can be elected based on a liberal area of SLC, you don’t know squat about Utah. Bennett made his choices contrary to what Utahans wanted and he’s living with the consequences. The Dems don’t have anyone in Utah who can run for Senate at the Federal level and expect to win. There are a LOT of us who don’t live in SLC, and we won’t vote in another Lib or Democrat at this point in time.

Now, WE will probably get rid of Hatch on the next cycle: he’s too willing to drink the Dem Kool-Aid. None of his sleeping with Dems has helped Utah one single bit.

The writing is on the wall.

karl9000 on May 9, 2010 at 10:58 AM

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Uhm … well we were talking about the word “RINO” … did Michelle Malkin call George Bush a RINO? If she did I’ve never heard it.

It’s pretty simple who a RINO is and here’s some examples …

Scott Brown said he was a conservative and welcomed Tea Party support and money. Once in office he starts voting with Democrats to spend money we don’t have. Now, he’s too embarrassed to take a picture with a Tea Party Grandma but he wasn’t too embarrassed to pose nude for Cosmo – this man is a RINO.

Olympia Snowe – pure RINO and I don’t need to explain it. She probably epitomizes the term.

Susan Collins – see Olympia Snowe.

Lindsey Grahamnesty – Camouflaged RINO. He’s the example of the “useful idiot” as far as Democrats are concerned because when they want a figleaf of bi-partisan support – they go to Grahamnesty …

And McCain.

LOL – It’s pretty easy to ascertain who a RINO is.

HondaV65 on May 9, 2010 at 10:58 AM

Say hello to the new Democrat senator from Utah who will win this seat when Bennett splits the vote in November.

Republicans, cutting of their nose to spite their own face, once again.

Midas on May 9, 2010 at 10:30 AM

So the upshot is to vote for all GOP incumbents even when they vote against your principles, on the fear that if they fail to win in a primary etc they will pull a tantrum and go independent.

I’m not buying that.

ddrintn on May 9, 2010 at 11:18 AM

So you essentially want to eliminate every amendment to the Constitution? Or do you, again, want to pick and choose depending on whatever floats your boat?

You know, there are quite a few good amendments to the Constitution, but apparently in AH_C’s world, black people are 3/5th human and women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

Good luck with that.

NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Oh pluueeze! First things, first – don’t extrapolate my specific comments on the 17th to mean a blanket diss on all amendments.

Otherwise, let’s turn the tables and suppose that based on your statements, you’re one of those that assumes the founding fathers were rich old white men that wanted to hang on to their powers and generally didn’t give a damn about slaves et al. Huh? Nevermind, back to the substance of your agrument.

As if every Amendment is right or just, likewise every decision handed down by SCOTUS. As if no Amendment nor SCOTUS decison were ever overturned.

Just what was the 17th supposed to fix? The unintended consequence of that are the career politicians who vote according to their desire for power, however benevolent.

And so we we toy with the idea of term-limits. And when we do impose term limits, these ‘law-givers’ find a way to yet again ignore the will of the people and overturn that. IIRC, Bennett was one of those who acted against term limits.

As for 3/5 rule, you obviously don’t understand why it was a good thing at its time and that it became moot after the Civil War and passage of 13th, 14th, 15th and the 19th tied up all the loose ends.

AH_C on May 9, 2010 at 11:27 AM

Say hello to the new Democrat senator from Utah who will win this seat when Bennett splits the vote in November.

Republicans, cutting of their nose to spite their own face, once again.

Midas on May 9, 2010 at 10:30 AM

A little early to be hitting the bottle, don’t ya think?

You obviously know very little about Utah politics. Bennett has no chance as an independent. Bennet’s overall approval rating among the general electorate is dismal.

Matheson is also toast. He represents the most liberal congressional district in Utah, which is still more conservative than most other districts in the nation and voted for McCain/Palin by a huge margin.

Big losers in all of this: RINOs, Dems & Mittens.

Norwegian on May 9, 2010 at 11:32 AM

When you think of Republicans Senators, Bennett’s name never seems to come and always have to stop a minute and think who is the other Senator from Utah as Orrin Hatch is known well.

What did he actually do? Occupy a seat?

Everyone knows what our two Oklahoma Senators are doing — they definitely represent our State well. Utah knows what Orrin Hatch is doing but Bennett?

PhiKapMom on May 9, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:16 PM

dczombie on May 8, 2010 at 11:08 PM

Thanks for covering my six. At first, I took ‘stopping myself’ to merely be uniformed, as in not having really thot the FF’s work thru. But now I see, it’s just a trool.

Pretty slick troll to come across as well meaning, but uneducated.

AH_C on May 9, 2010 at 11:50 AM

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Uhm … well we were talking about the word “RINO” … did Michelle Malkin call George Bush a RINO? If she did I’ve never heard it.

It’s pretty simple who a RINO is and here’s some examples …

Honda:

In fact she called him a lot worse than that. My point is that a RINO in Utah, might not be considered that in another state. It is subjective in many ways. In other words, there is Scott Brown in Mass, he would be a RINO to a lot of people, but I would rather have him in there than Kennedy and after all it is Mass. So yeah, it does depend on who is making the accusation. Here in Indiana, Coats won a few days ago in spite of the fact that some people called him a RINO, but in truth in this part of the midwest he is a pretty standard Republican conservative, which is why Pence supported him.

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Say hello to the new Democrat senator from Utah who will win this seat when Bennett splits the vote in November.

Republicans, cutting of their nose to spite their own face, once again.

Midas on May 9, 2010 at 10:30 AM

This is Utah, I doubt that a Democrat has a big chance there.

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 12:36 PM

Utah leads the way back. God bless you all.

scullymj on May 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM

Thanks for covering my six. At first, I took ’stopping myself’ to merely be uniformed, as in not having really thot the FF’s work thru. But now I see, it’s just a trool.

Pretty slick troll to come across as well meaning, but uneducated.

AH_C on May 9, 2010 at 11:50 AM

Thanks appreciated, but not required, its a pleasure to come to the aid of an articulate well reasoned POV. Look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.

Cheers!

Archimedes on May 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

Archimedes on May 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

You betcha :)

AH_C on May 9, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Now that is sweet,mmmmmm:)

ohiobabe on May 9, 2010 at 2:02 PM

As a conservative Utahn, let me only say this: you listening, Hatch? You’re time is also running out.

karl9000 on May 9, 2010 at 8:47 AM

God willing may that asshat disappear. As Judiciary Chair Hatch developed being a gutless push-over Republican into an art.

As for the usual BS from Midas about electing Democrats by purging RINOs; Yeah, and your point is?

Everyone agrees that taking the long view produces better strategy but then the “pragmatists” and “moderates” get weak knees when you have to take a hit to reach that long term goal. Harden the f*&^ up Midas!

rcl on May 9, 2010 at 4:13 PM

But then again, she invented a word for Bush, presocializing, to describe his efforts to stabilize the national economy in crisis. So it seems to me that there is some basic difference here. It has a lot to do with a person’s own politics.

Terrye

Maybe she was just reporting factually:

George Bush: “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system,” Bush told CNN.

xblade on May 9, 2010 at 4:38 PM

apparently in AH_C’s world, black people are 3/5th human and women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

NoStoppingUs

Can we safely assume then that you have no clue what the point of the 3/5th rule actually was?

xblade on May 9, 2010 at 4:43 PM

the sleeping giant is now being heard. Regardless political party, the People are getting rid of ‘career politicians’ that take financial contributions (actually bribes)& think they can ignore the voters.

ctcb05 on May 9, 2010 at 7:37 PM

This does look like some trouble for Romney. When he gets booed, by Republicans in the Redest state, in the Mormon capital of the world,…..Mitts got some trouble brewing.

portlandon on May 8, 2010 at 9:52 PM

That’s not true. People are able to distinguish their dissatisfaction with Bennett and still support Mitt Romney.

In fact, despite the fact that Mitt backed Bennett, Mitt Romney is more popular with all Utah Republicans than with the delegates.

And not surprisingly, Mitt Romney would crush Obama in 2012 by a huge margin: Romney 73% vs. Obama 22% in Utah.

Basically what you are saying is that it doesn’t really matter if you are a conservative or not, as long as you believe Joseph Smith spoke to angels and the White Jesus lived in America.

Mr Purple on May 9, 2010 at 1:50 AM

That comment was unnecessary. And the tone reeks of bigotry towards Mormons.

Unacceptable.

Visit the wives.

davidk on May 9, 2010 at 7:15 AM

Ummm…The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints haven’t been practicing polygamy since 1890s.

Other break off sects of the LDS Church, who have no affiliation or connection with the LDS Church, practice polygamy.

Get your facts straight.

Conservative Samizdat on May 9, 2010 at 8:14 PM

Way to go, Utah!
NEXT!!

Khun Joe on May 9, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Here’s a good article on Mitt Romney and the effect of his endorsement of Bill Bennett: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MWVlNWExMzhhMzJiMGQyMmRmNjBiMDk2MjExODE0MDI=

Conservative Samizdat on May 9, 2010 at 9:28 PM

Scalp Hatch next! Figuratively speaking.

MCGIRV on May 10, 2010 at 12:23 AM

Sometimes, a person with a certain political point-of-view will run, especially at the primary level, for an office, not because he/she thinks he/she can win, but to pull enough support from the leading candidates in an attempt to cause the leading candidates to shift closer to the political view desired.

Some say it’s a “damned outrage” that the TEA Party took down Bennett; he’s a conservative; he’s on “our” side.

But with the rejection of Bennett and the kind of politics and double dealing he has exhibited in his career, the people have spoken. We are not going to take the politics-as-usual politicians anymore.

We have seen McCain shift strongly to the right (which I don’t trust will translate into action upon a re-election).

Bennett’s demise will, I hope, be the first salvo launched agaisnt an entrenched politics that sees itself as above the people and not for the people.

Bennett is said to be considering a third party run. This to me just reinforces my conviction that politicians like him are not for the people. If he does run third party, I, living in Delaware, will support finacially, the conservative candidate that the people of Utah select.

I’m not the party of “no”–I’m the party of “hell no“.

davidk on May 10, 2010 at 6:59 AM

.

Was this (“Tea Party claims first Republican scalp?”) a literal reference?

.

papa_giorgio on May 10, 2010 at 7:14 AM

Bennett was a leading voice for amnesty back in 2006–he said the Utah home construction business would collapse without all those illegals willing to work for substandard wages.

That bothers me a lot more than his support for TARP.

funky chicken on May 10, 2010 at 9:44 AM

What is it with these politicians now-a-days? You lost, quit talking about running as an indie.(Same goes for upporters) All that blathering about cohesiveness and being “big tent” just get chucked out the window the moment the incumbent loses, or they switch parties. Your constituents were not happy with your performance and you are not indespensable, there are plenty of people capable of taking lobbyist funded, fact-finding trips to the shopping districts of Paris, London, etc. So, learn a little humility, go away gracefully, and if you feel you were robbed, come back and try your luck next election cycle.

This is not meant for Bennett alone. This is for all he ungracious losers in the current election cycle who can’t wrap their pointed little brain around reality.

TQM38a on May 10, 2010 at 9:49 AM

karl9000 on May 9, 2010 at 8:47 AM
You noticed that in the Des News this morning hatch is quoted as saying, it doesn’t effect him. “What the people want is for us to listen and I think I can do that”. Give me a break! He voted for cas sustein when everyone wanted him not to. He loves/loved teddy, etc., etc.
PS: think I mentioned it on another post, but the you tube “the government can” by Tim Hawkins is funny and says it all.

Bambi on May 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM

Chrisin206 on May 8, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Boy! Do I disagree! I hope to God what you’re saying doesn’t permeate GOP members with defeatism. I have every intention of pushing our GOP politicians to REPEAL ObamaCare. I have NO intention of “accepting” “history” and suck it up and living with it. I certainly hope that’s not what you’re suggesting here!

Sultry Beauty on May 10, 2010 at 12:23 PM

GW Bush also tried to reform social security with very little support from the same people who cry about the size of government today…and I get tired of hearing people act as if we were lucky to get Obama instead of McCain. We would be far better off with McCain, warts and all. And if people wanted to work for smaller government they could have done that without allowing Obama to bankrupt the country.

Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 10:00 AM

Agreed!!! If McCain had been President, he would have vetoed ObamaCare, and never would have nationalized General Motors and Chrysler, and probably would have used the electoral turmoil in Iran to foment a rebellion there. He would not have appointed lots of radical unelected “czars” without Senate approval.

While the chances of taking back the House would not have been as good under a President McCain as under Obama, it’s much harder to undo Socialism than prevent it from becoming law in the first place. Even if Republicans do re-take the House in 2010, they won’t have anywhere near a veto-proof majority, so 2011-12 will probably be years of government gridlock after the lurch to the left of 2009-2010, which can only be undone after 2013. If McCain had been President, the leftward lurch never would have happened.

Steve Z on May 10, 2010 at 2:31 PM

This does look like some trouble for Romney. When he gets booed, by Republicans in the Redest state, in the Mormon capital of the world,…..Mitts got some trouble brewing.

portlandon on May 8, 2010 at 9:52 PM

Your Mormon theory is crap. It has nothing to do with what happened in Utah.

Bill Bennett is a Mormon. So is Romney. However, Utah voters really like Romney but they didn’t like Bennett.

Orrin Hatch, who is also Mormon may also be in trouble in the next election.

Conservative Samizdat on May 10, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Unfortunately, dingy harry is also a Mormon. Maybe in name only, I don’t know.
Hatch is the one who recommended and said she would be acceptable to republicans – Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Maybe in his time). He voted for Geitner and said in a letter to me that he was the only one that could straighten the mess out. He voted for cas sustein (sp ?) even though many did not want him to saying, a pres deserves the cabinet he wants. So why do we need the senate? I do like Hatch, and I do like Bennett, but not as my senators. I also like Romney, and why they let him shill for bennett, I don’t know. If you had any insight into the electorate you would know we want rid of these men who not only work across the isle, but sleep with them (not really).

Bambi on May 10, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Bennett may not go quietly, however:

Get enough of these sore losers and it could backfire. Florida, Utah, and what was that state where the rejected GOP favorite threw her weight to the DEMs in a huff?

The common American feels he is getting used by the politicians. When politicans make moves to get around the voters in such a climate, watch out.

entagor on May 10, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Agreed!!! If McCain had been President, he would have vetoed ObamaCare, and never would have nationalized General Motors and Chrysler, and probably would have used the electoral turmoil in Iran to foment a rebellion there. He would not have appointed lots of radical unelected “czars” without Senate approval.

[SNIP]

If McCain had been President, the leftward lurch never would have happened.

Steve Z on May 10, 2010 at 2:31 PM

Yah. By jove I think you got it! Wait what was that?
1) McVain voted for McVain-Feingold to strengthen the electability of incumbents? That’s OK, He’s conservative and surely won’t trample our 1st Amendment

2) Where was McVain on SCHIPS, Medicare D etc? Yah, he wouldn’t do us in one fell swoop like ObamaCare, but he helped nickle and dime us with a thousand paper cuts.

3) But he shore tried mighty hard to ram amnesty down on us ignorant bigots, not once but twice.

4) And the list goes on with these bailouts.

While the election hung in balance, he was rushing around ready to help those too big to fail. Only after losing and sensing pushback from the nascent teapartiers did he start tilting against bailouts. Do you really believe that if he had won, he wouldn’t continue to take the advices of those advocating more Keynesian policies? Why not? After all he did admit he’d didn’t know jack about economics and took their advice to vote for TARP.

As for radical unelected czars, just who was that Juan Whathizface (Hernandez??), the slick talking smoke & mirrors lawyer from Mexico doing on McVain’s campaign staff? Special advisor for immigration, eh?

Nope, we’re getting scalded by Obama bucket brigade, but this is infinitely better than us nonchanlantly doing a slow boil in the Euro hot-tub that Dubya helped build.

AH_C on May 10, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Unfortunately, dingy harry is also a Mormon. Maybe in name only, I don’t know.
Hatch is the one who recommended and said she would be acceptable to republicans – Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Maybe in his time). He voted for Geitner and said in a letter to me that he was the only one that could straighten the mess out. He voted for cas sustein (sp ?) even though many did not want him to saying, a pres deserves the cabinet he wants. So why do we need the senate? I do like Hatch, and I do like Bennett, but not as my senators. I also like Romney, and why they let him shill for bennett, I don’t know. If you had any insight into the electorate you would know we want rid of these men who not only work across the isle, but sleep with them (not really).

Bambi on May 10, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Your response is a prime example why a person’s religious affiliation is irrelevant when voting for a politician.

You will find liberal Mormons, Christians, Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Hindu and etc. You will also find the same religious people in conservative circles.

And just because a Mormon (or any other person of a different faith) says he’s conservative doesn’t mean he’s actually one.

So, some people rejected Bennett because he wasn’t conservative enough despite his affiliation with the religious majority of the state of Utah. Most of the people of Utah have embraced Romney, not because he’s Mormon, but because they like his style of conservatism.

What happened in Utah is a good lesson for 2012. Focus on the candidates policies and values, not his religion.

People will get rejected or elected based on what they stand for, not what faith the adhere to.

Conservative Samizdat on May 11, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3