Conservatives Pushing Back: Illinois, Florida and California
Tuesday, January 26th, 2010This will be a good year for not just Republican gains, but for conservative gains. Consider Marco Rubio in Florida:
Marco Rubio, who began last year as a total unknown, has pulled ahead of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist in the Florida Senate Republican primary for the first time, in a new Quinnipiac poll released today.
The poll shows Rubio leading Crist by three points, 47 to 44 percent – a lead within the poll’s 3.8 percent margin of error. In last June’s Quinnipiac survey, the little-known Rubio trailed Crist by 31 points.
Crist still is viewed favorably in Florida, though his approval ratings are on the decline. A bare 50 percent majority approved of his performance in office — down from 59 percent last October — with 38 percent disapproving.
And then, there’s the Illinois race where Mark Kirk is trying to portray himself as conservative–while he voted for Cap-N-Trade. Patrick Hughes is the obvious choice here, too. Over at Furthermore:
The simple mention of Kirk’s name has consistently drawn louder boos at IL Tea Parties than the names of Dick Durbin and Roland Burris. For the record, Kirk voted YES on Cap and Tax, NO on the Surge and he is NO friend of gun owners. Kirk also was against the partial birth abortion ban!
But, we are down to seven days. That’s 7! I sure hope the Tea Parties can act together in time to help! Conservatives across the country are seriously considering a last minute ‘air drop’ of support into Illinois for Pat Hughes. Please help.
A money bomb today over at Hugh’s site.
And then there’s California where Carly Fiorina speaks Democrat lingo:
Former Hewlett-Packard CEO and Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina found herself in political hot water Friday after speaking warmly of Jesse Jackson and saying democracy won’t be “truly representative” until “at least” half of elected officials are women.
In a speech that became public Friday, Fiorina fondly recalled the Rev. Jesse Jackson — a controversial figure across the political spectrum but anathema to many on the right — “very graciously” visiting her at HP years ago, when the two worked together to boost diversity among Silicon Valley’s work force.
“I like to remind people that women are not a constituency — women are a majority,” Fiorina said during her Wednesday night speech in Sacramento, hosted by California Women Lead, a nonpartisan group that encourages women to seek public office. “Women are the majority of voters and we will never have a truly representative democracy unless women make up half, at least, of our elected representatives.”
At a time Fiorina is seeking to appeal to conservatives, the most reliable voters in Republican primaries, her remarks could prove costly. Critics on the right, including one of her opponents in the GOP Senate primary, argued that her speech smacked of identity politics and bristled at her ties to Jackson.
And Chuck De Vore has been there, from the beginning, laying the groundwork for a conservative to capture Barbara Boxer’s seat.
The wonderful thing about these hardcore primary challenges is that establishment, bloated-government Republicans are having to answer for betraying the Republican brand (whatever that is).
Ultimately a new slew of “Reagan conservatives” will remake the party into a more fiscally restrained, responsive party.
The general election will also be bruising and rigorous. Good. Both Democrats and Republicans have been way too self-satisfied and unresponsive to their voters–they give the impression that the only way to have influence is to buy it.
Maybe a serious threat to their seat will wake politicians recognize their role as a representative, not an imperious leader.
Relying On Republicans: It’s Always Darkest Before It Goes Pitch Black
Monday, November 23rd, 2009I mean, it’s always darkest before the dawn. Yeah, that’s what I meant.
Do you have any confidence that the Republicans will fight passage of this disastrous health care bill? With 60% of America against this bill, one would think this fight would be pretty safe fight. That is, people are on your side. The Democrats are the ones controverting the will of the people. They’re the ones who should be afraid and defensive. But it might be impossible to overstate the craven nature of Republican legislators. And it might not just be cowardice. It could also be a pathological desire to intervene and “make it better” and “have a voice”.
I might just be overly pessimistic. Glumness tends to set in whenever I watch Republican Senators in action. Karl is working the odds over in the Green Room and says:
My primary quibble would be with his assessment of reconciliation as an option. Reid has currently taken reconciliation off the table. That in itself would not be a big deal, but we are also starting to hear lefties like Sen. Tom Harkin explain why reconciliation would not be a good thing for liberals. I also think that Hennessey underestimates how bad it would look politically if — after several weeks of normal debate — the Democrats tried to shift to reconciliation. Even the establishment media would be unable to avoid the narrative that Democrats were trying to ram an unpopular bill through the Senate after failing under the normal rules. Public opinion polling consistently shows very bad numbers for a “go it alone” approach. It is hard to think of anything the Democrats could do that would instantly make ObamaCare 10-20% more unpopular than to try passing it via reconciliation.
My secondary quibble would be with the notion that no bill is more likely than a minor bill. If the Democrats fail on a comprehensive bill, they will (imho) fall back to a minor bill of some sort. The reasons for this merit their own post, but we can start with the Democrats’ perception that they will be punished (at least by their base) if they fail to pass something.
My primary reason for thinking that something will pass is as follows:
1. This is about Obama’s ego. He has staked his reputation on this legislation. This is about doing what the Clintons couldn’t. This is about remaking America. He will strong-arm every fence-sitter.
2. This is about Democrat majority relevance. What is their point if they can’t change things and make history when they have a chance? That’s why so many Democrats seem to be willing to take one for the team. This is about irrevocably pushing America left and they will do it.
3. Most of all, there is momentum. At many different steps in the process, the Democrats should have lost steam. Yes they’ll have to do some gymnastics to get this thing passed, but Democrats are concerned about the bigger principle: giving Obama and the Democrat brand “a win”.
Even if the legislation is a horrible failure (and it will be), that’s not the point. The point is that Democrats care for people and they are urbane and as good as Europeans. Seriously. The Dems want to be the world’s “cool kids”. They feel ashamed for the backward, capitalistic nature of America. It’s so gauche.
And as lame as Democrats are about health care, the Republicans who don’t vociferously and vehemently fight it will be deemed worse. Because if you can’t show some spine to the whiny, appeasing kid, what are you? The Republicans need to fight and push and they also need to make clear to their own (hello Maine ladies) that there will be price paid for voting for this monstrosity. I’m not sure the Republicans have the gumption to do it.
Election: Democrats Should Be Nervous, Republicans Should Wake Up
Wednesday, November 4th, 2009Quick takes:
Hoffman loss: What She said. Michelle Malkin nails it:
Conservatives owe NY-23 candidate Doug Hoffman immeasurable gratitude. He overcame impossible odds (single digits just a month ago) to come within two points of defeating Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman had zero name recognition. National Republican Party officials dumped nearly $1 million into the race on behalf of radical leftist GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava, who then turned around, endorsed Owens and siphoned off 5 percent of the vote with her name still on the ballot after she dropped out.
More here.
New Jersey: This election could have gone any way. New Jersey, Chicago, Philadelphia, New Orleans are cess-pits of electoral despair. Corrupt. So a Christie win is a surprise. Will NJ reduce taxes and turn from their evil ways? Somehow, I doubt it. Still, President Obama put his pride on the line and campaigned there. And the Democrats were not buoyed by his transfixing personality… So, I’m guessing that everyone is back to politics as usual.
Virginia: Now this election will cause some Democrats heartburn. Barack Obama won handily here and guess what? The Virginians ain’t buyin’ what he’s currently sellin’.
Finally, there’s the little talked about California 10 election. This is a solidly liberal district and it very nearly fell to a Republican who got no big money help. Republicans need to stop giving ground and writing off the coasts. There are many conservative spots that would turn Republican. American citizens are sick of the inside-the-beltway types dictating from on high. Everything is up for change. In that environment, everything needs to be fought.
Republicans & Identity Politics: Scozzafava Campaign Demonstrates How The Two Don’t Mix
Saturday, October 31st, 2009Just up is a piece I wrote for Pajamas Media–before the news of today and had to update it–about identity politics in the Republican Party. Here’s part of it:
Maybe it will take another generation for the novelty of women in power to wear off so that women can be looked at for the content of their character and their achievement. Women are more than their reproductive organs.
The Republican Party should help this process along by supporting and promoting deserving candidates with solid accomplishments and sound ideology. These candidates can be of any stripe. If the candidate is black and male and fills this bill (Michael Williams), great. If the candidate is Hispanic and male and fills this bill (Marco Rubio), great. If the candidate is white and female (Liz Cheney), great. If the candidate is white and male (Doug Hoffman), great.
The Republican Party has decided that the party needs more women. A woman, any woman, will do. Enter Dede Scozzafava. She seems to have all the credentials the Republican Party is looking for: female reproductive organs. She supports abortion, big government, ACORN, and unions. In most places, hell, even in New York, that makes her a Democrat. Dan Riehl has a shocking behind-the-scenes post detailing the thought process:
The very same GOP old hands opted for insider Jim Tedisco over Betty Little in that race and Tedisco got beaten, hindsight suggested Little would have won hands down. And, interesting enough, up pops Tom Reynolds to comment, again. It’s argued that instead of any genuine insight into politics on the ground these days, they didn’t want to repeat the Tedisco mistake, judged it based upon purely out-dated male/female lines, and were going to go with a female no matter what.
Why is the Republican Party, the party that champions merit over name, going Democrat and choosing identity over ideology? Riehl’s piece also emphasizes cronyism and national control rather than local Republican and grassroots cooperation in candidate selection. And in fact, it seems that cronyism and money trump gender and racial identity, even still. A good conservative Hispanic candidate, Marco Rubio, is being dismissed in favor of the uber-liberal Charlie Crist in Florida.
And look at how bad the decision to choose identity over ideology turns out to be. DeDe Scozzafava has dropped out of the NY-23 race. Erick Erickson says of this turn of events:
Relationships between the Republican establishment in Washington and the conservative movement are in rubble. Thanks to Pete Sessions NOT Doug Hoffman, there is new inspiration for a third party movement to challenge the GOP — a movement that will only help the Democrats.
Good men in the GOP are now going to be challenged in primaries because of the ill-will the NRCC has generated in New York’s 23rd Congressional District.
At this writing, RNC Chairman Michael Steele and Newt Gingrich have endorsed Doug Hoffman in NY-23. This is a hopeful turn of events. Erick Erickson is correct. The Republican establishment grossly misunderstood and underestimated the mood of the conservative base. The American people do not need more symbolism. They do not need a woman at all costs. They need a politician who will vote against taxes, vote against bigger government programs, and vote against invasive regulation.
The last thing the Republican party needs to be doing is going hunting for candidates based on connections, color and gender. The Republican party needs to be looking for quality candidates who will vote to shrink, not expand, the government.
In the midterms, a lot of voters will pull the Republican switch because they’re disgusted with Democrats. We need to make sure the Republicans are quality men and women who represent Republican, not Democrat, values.
Podcast: NY 23 With Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser And Valour IT With Marine Steve Schippert
Thursday, October 29th, 2009An inside look at NY 23 and conservatives versus the Republican establishment. Also, we talk about identity politics and Republicanism.
Steve Schippert joins me to discuss what it means to servicemen and women to be connected during their times of rehabilitation. Remember, you can donate at this site.
To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!
When Melissa isn’t on the radio, you can find her at melissaclouthier.com and on Twitter. Her username is MelissaTweets.
What Is Sarah Palin Up To?
Friday, October 23rd, 2009In my editorial at Pajamas Media today, I talk about Sarah Palin’s decision to endorse the conservative, rather than the Republican candidate and what it all means:
With her decision to endorse Doug Hoffman, the conservative (not Republican) candidate, Sarah
Palin sends the Republican Party a very clear message. She will be using her considerable fundraising ability to fund candidates who ideologically match what it used to mean to be a Republican. Since the Republican Party, from its toes to its nose, has difficulty identifying candidates with those credentials, she’ll help them do it.
The Republican Party has a choice. They can continue to antagonize those who vote them into office or they can start paying attention. They mistakenly buy the D.C. bubble philosophy that moderation is the way to find good candidates. What they’re seeing is a base willing to lose if the Republican Party doesn’t change its ways.
I also talk about identity politics and how it is blowing up for the Republican party. The love the party has for Sarah Palin has less to do with her beauty or gender than her beliefs and ideology. So the Republican party, while looking for women candidates needs to remember what’s most important: the beliefs. The base is sick of people who pay lip service to ideas like small government and fiscal responsibility and then turn around and govern like drunk liberals spending other peoples’ money.
Palin & Romney: Heart & Head? More Like, Heart & Soul…less
Thursday, October 22nd, 2009Matt Lewis wrote a thoughtful piece about the Republican party and what the two leaders mean for the future of the party:
The most often repeated template is for Republicans to select the person whose “turn” it is to run for president. That’s how the Grand Old Party opted for Richard Nixon, John McCain, Bob Dole — and even George H.W. Bush. The other, less frequently employed model, says: “If you’re going to send up a long shot candidate anyway –perhaps a ’sacrificial lamb’ — why not go with your heart?” That’s how the GOP chose conservative firebrand Barry Goldwater as its standard-bearer in 1964, a decision that guaranteed a landslide victory for Democrats.
Today, the perfunctory, “next in line” theory suggests that the most likely GOP nominee will be former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. While Romney dropped-out of the 2008 campaign earlier than Mike Huckabee, most conservatives concede that Romney finished in secondplace – and that is certainly the view held by the McCainiacs. So, by the logic that led to the nominations of McCain and Dole, it’s Romney’s turn. Even if rank-and-file conservatives find him less than perfect concede that he’s paid his dues.
But what about the other model? Who is this year’s Goldwater – and, just maybe, our Reagan? Who is the person movement conservatives really want? It sure ain’t Mike Huckabee. And it might be Sarah Palin.
Further, he says this [and yes, I'm heavily quoting, go read the whole thing]:
With three years to go, predictions are a risky business. Palin may not even run. And perhaps someone such as Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour will emerge as the conservatives’ darling. If recent elections are any guide, the Republicans’ heads will tell them to choose Mitt Romney. Their hearts whisper something else. Is “Sarah” the name of this siren song?
There is an implication in this analysis that nominating Romney would be a “smart” thing. I would suggest, that is false. Mitt Romney, it should be remembered, lost to John McCain. Anyone who lost to John McCain should be discounted, in my opinion. John McCain was a weak and flawed candidate and everyone knew it. The Republican primary voters felt that the other candidates were weaker and/or more flawed.
Voting for Mitt Romney in 2012 would not only be not using one’s head, it would be outright stupid. Sure, he’s got the economic turnaround thing going, but he has the look and feel of someone a person just can’t trust. He is, dare I say it, unelectable. And everyone, but the most devoted Romney-ites knows it.
As for Sarah Palin being the luring conservative temptress, bidding the GOP to crash into the shoals of death, pain and panic…now, that is wrong, too. While the verdict is still out on Sarah Palin, she could be a very good or a very bad choice. How can anyone know that yet?
Sarah Palin has to delineate herself from not only McCain’s policies, she has to define herself as a Republican. Or is she going really rogue and starting her own party? We’ll find out soon enough.
Right now, I don’t think Romney makes sense on any level. Really, I can’t think of one Republican candidate for president who would be a good choice. But it is early yet. Strange times can lead to stranger candidates. These are strange times.
Podcast: CA Governor Candidate Steve Poizner & Western CPAC Ralph Reed Speech
Thursday, October 22nd, 2009
To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!
When Melissa isn’t on the radio, you can find her at melissaclouthier.com and on Twitter. Her username is MelissaTweets.
Conservatives Causing Problems: Clashing With GOP Establishment
Friday, October 16th, 2009The Grand Old Party rests on a false premise: Conservative ideas won’t sell anywhere but in conservative places. This premise is wrong, as Pat Toomey is proving in Pennsylvania. The national Republicans spurned Pat Toomey in favor of Arlen Specter. Look what happened there. And now, wonder of wonders, Toomey would beat Specter head-to-head. What changed?
Nothing.
The Republican party simply does not have faith in certain core ideals anymore because they believe that the American people don’t believe them anymore. They are wrong. I’ll get to that in a minute.
First, the Wall Street Journal’s Naftali Bendavid has a provocative piece about how Tea Party activists are tangling with GOP leadership:
But these newly energized conservatives present GOP leaders with a potential problem: The party’s strategy for attracting moderate voters risks alienating activists who are demanding ideological purity, who may then gravitate to other candidates or stay at home. It’s a classic dilemma faced by parties in the minority — tension between those who want a return to the party’s ideological roots and those who want candidates most likely to win in their districts.
Here is another false premise: Activists are demanding ideological purity. No, they are demanding
that the Republican party stand for something, anything.
How can a socialist call oneself a Republican? And what good does a Republican socialist do once in office? If the ideas of a candidate would have him or her voting Democrat 90% of the time, what good is it to have him? The Democrats are demonstrating this problem right now. Blue Dogs don’t want the health care plan and rightly so. They will be trounced back home should they vote to expand the government. But therein lies the dilemma: Democrats are for expanding government. They believe, fundamentally, that the government is the solution. Why be a Democrat if you don’t believe that? Progressive Democrats are rightly furious. It has been their goal for ages to socialize medicine. Now, with huge majorities, they’re still being thwarted–by their own.
Winning at all costs usually means not winning at all. Arlen Specter is self-serving loathsome creature. He swung back and forth making decisions that suited him. He had no ideological center. He has no core beliefs. Well, he has one: What is good for me?
The Republican party needs to stand for something. Isn’t a small-government bent, the least people should expect from the party? It seems that the Republicans still don’t know why they were voted out of office. It was not because they were “too conservative”. That argument would apply had they attempted to stick to any conservative policy. No, they lost because they strayed from their core beliefs.
So, until the Republican party gets clear, the Tea Party folks will be pushing back. And if that means losing some local elections until the Republican party gets religion, so be it. The American people do not want some softer version of Democrats. Obama won because he sounded like Ronald Reagan–all personal responsibility and low taxes.
The Republican party is putting up candidates who believe in big government because they believe that’s what the people want. They are wrong. The American people want an alternative to the soft socialism coming from the Left. The American people want jobs–that comes from smaller, not bigger government. The American people want spending cuts–that comes from fiscal responsibility on the part of Congressional members. These are all (or used to be) Republican ideals.
In the midterm elections, Republicans are going to sweep. People are sick to death of the Democrats already. Republicans should be scouring the landscape for solid conservatives who will deliver responsible legislation once elected. Right now, they’re treating the electoral ills wrong because they’ve misdiagnosed the cause.
Tea Partiers have it right. The Republicans need to pay attention or risk staying a minority party for a very long time.
P.S. And to those folks believing that there is going to be some magical Third Party to save the day, I say that the cure is to remake the Republican party, not go outside it.
via Memeorandum
Helping Republicans Help Themselves
Monday, October 12th, 2009After Obama and the Democrats swept the Republicans out of office it became clear that Republican leaders got one message and everyone else got another message. The Tea Party movement was not borne of Democrat failure.
I will say that again: The Tea Party movement was not borne of Democrat failure.
The Tea Party movement was borne of Republican failure and consequently, the fear of Democrat success.
While the Republicans ruled (and they did rule as imperious potentates), they expanded the size and scope of the government. They used the taxpayer as their personal checkbook. They disrespected and ignored their constituents. They manipulated the President financial during a time of war. It was an unholy alliance.
As frustration built, the Tea Partiers saw the press give Barack Obama a free pass. Unquestioned and never challenged, he sailed through his pre-election campaigning. His associations with communists, anarchists, criminals, etc. were deemed irrelevant.
Many Americans bought President Obama’s speech. He talked of responsibility. He talked of restraint. He was reasonable.
Where do Americans now turn?
I’ve been saying for a while that the way back to the promised land is not through a third party. It’s not through hoping the Republicans will get it. It’s through taking back the Republican party.
Erick Erickson of Redstate says this:
Erick Erickson, founder and editor of the influential conservative blog RedState, has urged Tea Party activists to “put down the protest signs” and stage takeovers of local Republican parties.
“Grassroots activists need to start infiltrating the party,” said Erickson. “The only way to start getting [the establishment] back is to start pounding them with every fist we have.”
Activists need to help Republicans save themselves. The word Republican is nearly meaningless as it has no contrast with Democrats. When people get involved and transform the party from within, real change will happen.
