The GOP’s and Fox’s political purge
One high-profile Republican strategist, who refused to be named in order to avoid inflaming the very segments of the party he wants to silence, said there is a deliberate effort by party leaders to “marginalize the cranks, haters and bigots — there’s a lot of underbrush that has to be cleaned out.”
For establishment Republicans, this is all about survival, after two straight elections that saw extremely conservative candidates blow Senate races Republicans should have won. For Fox, it’s about credibility: The cable network, while still easily the top-ranked in news, has seen its ratings dip since the election, in part, conservatives tell us, because a lot of Republicans felt duped by the coverage…
But a senior Republican operative said the party has two huge, unresolved impediments to the top leaders’ grand plans: “suicide conservatives, who would rather lose elections than win seats with moderates,” and the “many groups on the hard right that depend on direct mail fundraising that requires a high degree of audacity, and borderline shrillness.”
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
What’s the establishment’s plan?
We’ve been electing establishment Republicans for a half-century now … and this nation is on the precipice of socialism.
So yeah … win elections … and do … ????
Do what?
Sit on your ass? Compromise with Dims on just how far to the LEFT we take this nation … today? Spend, a bit less money than Dims? Propose new entitlement programs like Medicare Part D that were unfunded … like the Ayatollahs did when the GOP had complete control of government?
And then what? Do all that … lose elections because the GOP stands for nothing … and then bi*ch about Dimmocritic spending?
No thanks.
HondaV65 on February 7, 2013 at 9:52 AM
To keep the great unwashed in line. Good grief, is your view of the party establishment that Pollyannaish?
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 9:52 AM
Boehner, GOP Leaders Purge Conservatives from Powerful Committees
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/03/Boehner-GOP-leaders-purge-conservatives-from-powerful-House-committees
sharrukin on February 7, 2013 at 9:54 AM
Your squishy demigod won the nomination and lost anyway as we said he would. Who do you want next time, Lincoln Chaffee?
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 9:54 AM
I could have believed that at one time, but not with all these stories coming out about party purges. It seems clear to me that the GOP has informally decided not to be a conservative party anymore and is acting accordingly to get rid of people they now regard as embarrassments and baggage.
Don’t know who they think is going to vote for them unless the plan is to replace the party base with Hispanics.
Doomberg on February 7, 2013 at 9:55 AM
ROFL…which strategy will leave the GOP about as big as the Constitution party.
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 9:56 AM
Yes, yes and more yes! Yes, please throw out the shrill “suicide conservatives” who would rather lose elections than nominate someone who wasn’t 100% ideologically pure.
I hate to say it, but there are a lot of commenters at this very site who fit that description. It’s time to clean house. It’s time to take control back from the cranks.
Just wanted to add to my previous comment…
Sarah Palin draws from a fan base of people who are especially susceptible to the shrieks of the cranks and the haters, I’m sorry to say. Also, he may be entertaining, but the divisive, shrill Mark Levin does more harm than good.
bluegill on February 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM
How big is President Mitt’s fan base now?
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 9:58 AM
There’s a couple of possible reasons. First, the GOP could be trying to scare conservative candidates from running in elections. Second, they could be trying to send signals to big donors who may want the party to move further to the left. Third, the GOP may think that conservatives – social, fiscal, foreign policy, whatever – are such a tiny minority that they can win without them in elections.
Of course, I also think that the party is already irretrievably fractured anyway, and we might as well get it over with and done rather than dragging the process out for a decade or two.
Doomberg on February 7, 2013 at 9:58 AM
The modern GOP and all it’s media organs are pretty much get rich quick schemes.
The right’s focus on taxes and money has made it extremely myopic… especially on immigration. The pro-life movement was noble, but pre-natal testing will kill it and someone needs to tell them that they’re fighting a lost cause.
Someone needs to tell the invade the world, invite the world crowd that if you may have trouble convincing people to invade the world if you want the world to invade you. Looking at you Max Boot and Robert Kaplan.
ninjapirate on February 7, 2013 at 9:58 AM
I may be wrong about this though… the amount of ridiculous pro-aggressive foreign policy that passes on this website from Allahpundit on down is absolutely embarrassing.
ninjapirate on February 7, 2013 at 9:59 AM
Who are the “cranks” and “haters” we nominated in 2010 and 2012 who lost? And who should we have nominated in their place? And how do you juxtapose that with the so-called moderates and liberals the GOP nominated who also lost?
Doughboy on February 7, 2013 at 10:00 AM
I wonder who is one such person who might somewhat fit that description… Cough, cough…
bluegill on February 7, 2013 at 10:00 AM
Yep. I used to keep the TV on with the news playing in the background even when I wasn’t really sitting and watching. Now the TV is on…next to never.
lynncgb on February 7, 2013 at 10:01 AM
We aren’t just talking about the people who were nominated. We are speaking of opinion makers as well. But if you want names, how about Sharron Angle. And how about Ken Buck and Joe Wilson.
bluegill on February 7, 2013 at 10:01 AM
Oh, Dear Lord.
Bluegill’s off her medication…again.
kingsjester on February 7, 2013 at 10:02 AM
Make that Joe Miller up in Alaska.
bluegill on February 7, 2013 at 10:02 AM
Seriously? The Vichy Right has been badmouthing the Tea Party to everyone, ever since we pushed them back into power in 2010. The Weeping Boner conducted his own purge of committee assignments just a couple of months ago. The Weeping Boner and the rest of the Vichy leadership never had anything nice to say about the Tea Party – even conceding many of the left’s lies about us – but the crybaby had no problem declaring that he ‘understood’, who were so insane they didn’t even understand themselves.
This article, no matter what rag it comes from, isn’t saying anything that hasn’t been on full display for over two years. Heck, the first thing the idiots in the GOP did after the major sweep of the 2010 elections was to collude with Barky and the dems on that criminal lame duck session and then they moved to cave on every budget/debt-limit issue and allow Barky and the dems to continue doing everything they wanted to do, right through the election campaign of 2012. And now, Boner and his idiots act as if the Sequester was dropped on us by aliens and has been doing everything his pea-brain could come up with to avoid it, even though he had crowed so much about it as such a “great deal” when that was what he “got” back from Barky and the dems in return for another trillion and a half of debt to continue their un-Constitutional spending through the election campaign.
It doesn’t matter who wrote this article and who this alleged insider was. We have been watching this play out and we have been attacked by the Vichy Republicans for years, now.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 7, 2013 at 10:03 AM
Staring at you every day in the mirror.
sharrukin on February 7, 2013 at 10:04 AM
Two items.
One: this is an article meant to destroy the republican party.
Two: democrat lite leads to annihilation of our country.
NOTHING will make republicans have good coverage from the media. They are enemy number one. Sharon Angle would not have been a problem as a Democrat. Even McCain was demonized. Christie would be too.
We do need to better vet candidates though. Akin wasn’t tea-party but we should have known how bad he was before the media smeared us over him while protectin child rapist Menendez.
Our root problem is not tea partiers but the media who characturizes them.
GardenGnome on February 7, 2013 at 10:05 AM
What? Your guy won the nomination. How’d he do? Did you get a front-row seat at Mitt’s inauguration?
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 10:05 AM
How about the Suicide RINOS who lose elections that could have been won like Whitman and Fiorina in CA, Scott Brown, BOD DOLE, HW Bush, John McCain in 2008 and just now Mitt Romney in what was history’s biggest gimmee.
With Romney, the GOP blew the Mother of All Gimmees in the single most important election in this nation’s history.
How about this- we can’t afford another DeDe Scozzafava. How about we can’t afford another Lisa Murkowski, who lost her primary and then ran against the GOP’s rightful nominee.
Mourdock, Akin, O’donnell, Angle, who all cleanly and honestly ousted the vanilla RINO only to be stabbed in the back by the GOP Establishment who did everything they could to tank their chances.
The Tea Party was the GOP’s last opportunity at redemption. They’ve rejected it, we should reject them and accept their invitation to leave and form our own party.
sartana on February 7, 2013 at 10:05 AM
And Jim Vandehei and Mike Allen continue Politico’s efforts to turn Republicans against Republicans. Divide and conquer in action.
jnelchef on February 7, 2013 at 10:06 AM
Thank you for your thoughtful and reasonable response…unlike an egotistical, ahole who obviously has no friends.
Vince on February 7, 2013 at 10:06 AM
I agree – get rid of the cranks like Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and John Cornyn.
HondaV65 on February 7, 2013 at 10:06 AM
Destruction is probably all that that feckless outfit deserves. They spend more time destroying their own members than they do going after Democrats.
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM
I just love this. Your guy lost, so let’s do more of the same cause we didn’t do enough last time!
gryphon202 on February 7, 2013 at 10:09 AM
Did we lose the election because Obama was the better choice or because people stayed home?
Vince on February 7, 2013 at 10:15 AM
Yep.
22044 on February 7, 2013 at 10:16 AM
I always try to give reasoned responses when people seem to be open to debate.
Doomberg on February 7, 2013 at 10:16 AM
More than that. Their guy lost, so obviously the solution is to chase away more conservative voters and noteworthy conservative political figures that they desperately need.
Doomberg on February 7, 2013 at 10:18 AM
And there are too many useful idiots on our side who are happy to help Politico…
mnjg on February 7, 2013 at 10:19 AM
CurtZHP on February 7, 2013 at 10:20 AM
Obama does not want to destroy the GOP- what better opponent could he wish for. Boenher knows Obama is not after him or his party. What Boehner was saying with his public pronouncement of Obama’s intentions, was that in order for the GOP to survive, they must destroy the Tea Party. It’s obvious that the White House and the GOP elites have come to some agreement some time ago. As can be seen with this Amnesty push, they’re both working for The Transformation.
The Tea Party is the only is the only sign of resistance to the agenda which both parties have committed to and they need to be dealt with.
This is all Kabuki Dinner Theatre and we’re the main course.
sartana on February 7, 2013 at 10:21 AM
I am so moved when Politico decides to help the GOP. It’s… sorry, I’ve got to go as I’m tearing-up too much to type.
8=^(
andycanuck on February 7, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Its like conflicting crime families finding an agreeable arrangement over turf wars so they each retain respect and power in the “old ways”.
Mimzey on February 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM
2008…
http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-limbaugh/evangelicals-a-drag-on-or-essential-to-the-gop.html
there were 4.1 million fewer Republicans voting this year than in 2004, some of whom he believed turned independent or Democratic for this election, which might validate Kathleen’s thesis, except that Rove says that most of those 4.1 million “simply stayed home.”
2012…
http://washingtonexaminer.com/estimated-6.6-million-fewer-white-voters-showed-up-to-vote-in-2012/article/2513069#.UOysro76TMM
Estimated 6.6 million fewer white voters showed up to vote in 2012
sharrukin on February 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM
Re: Fox News. Just because Fox got rid of Sarah Palin and Dick Morris doesn’t mean Fox is “purging” conservatives from the network. Sarah Palin was probably too expensive, and Dick Morris was just awful. That said, Fox does need to take its “fair and balanced” moniker more seriously. They were starting to become like MSNBC.
Re: The GOP. I am sick and tired of Republicans throwing the Tea Party under the bus. Excuse you, Republicans, but the Tea Party is your base, which you have abandoned in your quest to become “Democrats-lite.”
Nor is the Tea Party some group of whackos. So far as I can tell, the Tea Party made two bad candidate picks–Christine O’Donnell and Ken Buck, both in 2010. Sharron Angle was not a good candidate, but neither was the candidate the Establishment pushed. Todd Akin was not a Tea Party candidate. Richard Mourdock was a good choice, until he tragically stepped in the giant dump Todd Akin left in the middle of the road. . .
Compare those failures to the Tea Party’s successes. Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Scott Brown, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz–none of these people would have been elected to the Senate but for Tea Party support. The same is true for at least 50 House members.
The GOP “kills” off the Tea Party at its own peril.
Outlander on February 7, 2013 at 10:26 AM
REWRITE…
For conservative Republicans, this is all about AMERICA’S survival, after two straight presidential elections that saw establishment Republicans blow Presidential races that should have been won.
Conservatives are going to start a third party and will pursue candidates who care more about America’s survival than their own.
fight like a girl on February 7, 2013 at 10:29 AM
When the initial election results were released (I mean the overall numbers, and not just “who won”), the first noteworthy thing was that voters on both sides stayed home. The second thing to note was that Romney won independents by 5%. The third thing worth noting is that turnout in the Republican primaries was way down this year despite conservative activists’ terror of Obama.
So this would seem to lead to the conclusion that the Tea Partiers which turned out in 2010 chose to stay home this time around. Why did this happen? The Republican House passed everything Obama wanted after some kabuki theater, and we ran a candidate in 2012 that was not popular with the base.
I believe there was some other evidence as well that the party base failed to turn out, but I don’t want to cite facts I’m not sure of.
Doomberg on February 7, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Romney lost the election because he didn’t win with a large enough number to beat the margin of fraud. The actual result of this election was probably decided formally, behind closed doors, back in 2010. Romney was never supposed to have ginned up enough support as he did after that first debate, and came close to upsetting the plan, but backed off in the final stretch, allowing those fraudulent results to seem just believable enough.
The proof of the fraud was Florida- the Dems weren’t supposed to steal that. Made it too obvious. The proof of how Florida was stolen can be found in the shenanigans surrounding the West recount and the same for the other swing states.
Not that anyone’s going to do anything about it.
sartana on February 7, 2013 at 10:30 AM
Great catch! I’d forgotten that number.
Doomberg on February 7, 2013 at 10:32 AM
So this story turns out to be more complicated. In 2004, Bush got 62,040,610 votes to Kerry’s 59,028,044. In 2008, McCain got 59,948,323 votes to Obama’s 69,498,516. In 2012, Romney got 60,929,152 votes to Obama’s 65,899,660. Looking just at those national figures, you could argue that the RINOs underperformed Bush.
But remember that Presidential elections are decided in battleground states. If half the Republicans in California and New York stay home, it reduces the national vote total for the GOP candidate but doesn’t change the electoral math.
I took a look at four major battlegrounds–Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and Colorado over those 3 elections. In FL, VA, and CO, Romney got more votes than Bush in 2004 or McCain in 2008. In OH, Romney got less than both Bush and McCain. But Romney lost all four of those states because the Democrats turned out way more voters, most of which were black or Hispanic.
Outlander on February 7, 2013 at 10:33 AM
It’s been getting worse and with Obama losing so many of his voters, 2012 should have been a blowout.
sharrukin on February 7, 2013 at 10:34 AM
Nonsense. People duped themselves. Fox had lots of Democrats on who predicted things differently than Rove and Morris (Joe Trippi & Kirsten Powers come to mind immediately).
rhombus on February 7, 2013 at 10:36 AM
Funny how the Tea Party and conservatives won the overwhelming majority of the house and senate races in 2010 and the establishment republican presidential candidates lost in 2008 and 2012 and lost down ballot as well, and the conservatives are blamed. Time to start a new party and show these ruling class elitist jerks who really has the power.
fight like a girl on February 7, 2013 at 10:37 AM
The “margin of fraud” is generally understood to be 0.25-0.5%. Obama cleared that margin in all of the battleground states. Pushing these kinds of conspiracy theories is not helpful.
Outlander on February 7, 2013 at 10:37 AM
So what you are saying is that Romney didn’t lose because the self-anointed real conservatives stayed home. That will bust a few balloons.
rhombus on February 7, 2013 at 10:39 AM
True, but Fox spent an inordinate amount of time criticizing every media poll based on its sample weighting (suggesting Democrats were oversampled), but there’s no real evidence that Fox ever drilled down into why those samples were selected the way they were. Instead, the network just assumed that the 2012 electorate couldn’t possibly look like the 2008, so obviously the polls must be wrong. That’s cheerleading, not journalism.
Outlander on February 7, 2013 at 10:43 AM
Once again, TruCons, if you are so convinced of your superiority in all things political, please go form your own party.
If you are right about the appeal of your ideas and your ability to bring voters to your side, you should thrive. Leave the Republican Party to the right-of-centers who abhor the extremists–on both sides.
Almost everyone running in the last presidential party harmed the party in some way, but none more than the candidates who so easily played into the Dems meme that R’s are stupid (Perry), crazy (Bachmann), and religious zealots (Santorum).
And no one harmed R presidential prospects more than the “shrill” Palin, with her fervor to draw out the nominating process. To selfishly see if she had enough influence to gum up the works.
Good luck, TruCons. Palin, Akin, O’Donnell, et al. await your call.
Meredith on February 7, 2013 at 10:46 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »