Posted on 11/03/2009 12:48:58 PM PST by BGHater
In what could be a nightmare scenario for Republican Party officials, conservative activists are gearing up to challenge leading GOP candidates in more than a dozen key House and Senate races in 2010.
Conservatives and tea party activists had already set their sights on some of the GOP’s top Senate recruits — a list that includes Gov. Charlie Crist in Florida, former Rep. Rob Simmons in Connecticut and Rep. Mark Kirk in Illinois, among others.
But their success in Tuesday’s upstate New York special election, where grass-roots efforts pushed GOP nominee Dede Scozzafava to drop out of the race and helped Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman surge into the lead on the eve of Election Day, has generated more money and enthusiasm than organizers ever imagined.
Activists predict a wave that could roll from California to Kentucky to New Hampshire and that could leave even some GOP incumbents — Utah Sen. Bob Bennett is one — facing unexpectedly fierce challenges from their right flank.
“I would say it’s the tip of the spear,” said Dick Armey, the former GOP House majority leader who now serves as chairman of FreedomWorks, an organization that has been closely aligned with the tea party movement. “We are the biggest source of energy in American politics today.”
“What you’re going to see,” said Armey, “is moderates and conservatives across the country in primaries.”
These high-stakes primaries, pitting the activist wing of the party against the establishment wing, stand to have a profound impact on the 2010 election landscape since they will create significant problems for moderate candidates recruited by the national party precisely because they appear well-suited to win in places that are not easily — or even plausibly — won by conservative candidates.
The tensions between the two visions threaten to limit the party’s gains in an election year that is shaping up in its favor.
Party strategists worry that well-funded, well-organized challenges from the right could force Republicans to exhaust precious resources on messy primary fights — or force moderate candidates to adopt more strident positions early on that could haunt them during the final months of the campaign.
“For me, what this says is, we need to take a deep breath and decide whether [moderates and conservatives] work together or not,” said Tom Davis, the former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. “And if we don’t, it can get very, very ugly.”
Activists contend that the only way back to majority status is to embrace the conservative principles that the party jettisoned during the past decades once it became too enamored of power. To them, the issue is less about ideological purity than about the compromises they see the party’s Washington establishment making and what they contend is a lack of support for conservative candidates who are deemed unelectable by GOP solons.
“New York 23, on some scale, is the first battle of a larger internal Republican debate over how to define the party,” said former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio, a conservative who is challenging Crist for the Senate nomination. “They want us to vote for their candidates, but they don’t want us to run for office.”
Rubio’s race is one that many on the right point to as the next New York 23, a contest where conservatives and tea party activists are in open revolt about Crist and the national party’s decision to endorse him despite his embrace — literally — of President Barack Obama and his stimulus package during a Florida visit in February.
Rubio has won nearly a dozen county GOP straw polls across the state and is rapidly becoming a darling of the tea party movement.
Everett Wilkinson, an organizer for the Florida Tea Party Patriots, said his group plans to take part in get-out-the-vote activities and other efforts to deny Crist the GOP nomination, despite the fact that Crist leads both Rubio and Rep. Kendrick Meek, the likely Democratic nominee, by a comfortable margin.
To Wilkinson, he’d rather burn the house down if it means saving it.
“We would lose if Charlie Crist got elected or if another person who doesn’t support our policies got elected,” he said. “Our members are actively going to get out there and create awareness of the governor’s actions.”
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a leading conservative who has endorsed Rubio, said he viewed the Florida Senate race as distinct from the New York special election. But he agreed with Rubio’s contention that the national party needed to broaden its outlook on candidates.
“I’m not saying our party made a mistake, because there’s a debate within the party over what we should be,” he said. “If we just start looking at who can win — sometimes we might miss a gem in the rough in effect. And I said from the beginning, that’s what I think Rubio is.”
Florida turns out to be one of many states where Senate candidates favored — in one way or another — by the National Republican Senatorial Committee are facing serious pushback from the grass roots.
In almost every situation, the lay of the land is the same. Whether it’s California, Illinois, Connecticut, New Hampshire or Kentucky, the NRSC has found a candidate who appears to be an exceptionally strong general election prospect — either well-known, well-financed or ideologically well-suited to the state’s politics — who is nevertheless meeting with tough resistance at the grass-roots level from activists who believe the conservative cause would be better served over the long term, even if it means the party nominee loses in the short term.
Even in Illinois, where polls shows Kirk would be highly competitive as a general election candidate in a state in which Republicans have been crushed in recent elections, the prospect of picking up the president’s former Senate seat isn’t enough to win over many activists.
“We’re going to work hard as hell to make sure Mark Kirk doesn’t win,” said Evert Evertsen, an Illinois tea party organizer. “Mark Kirk is about as liberal as Arlen Specter was.”
GOP House and Senate incumbents are fair game, too.
In Utah, where Bennett has won reelection by landslide margins since first winning the seat in 1992, disgruntled conservatives are looking to take him down in next year’s state party convention after his Wall Street bailout vote last fall and several other high-profile votes in which he broke with the right.
In the House, Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) is among a handful of GOP veterans facing primary challenges of varying competitiveness for their departures from conservative orthodoxy.
“It’s kind of like investors in a company saying they’re not going to tolerate it anymore. And that’s what we’re seeing here,” said Eric Odom, executive director of the American Liberty Alliance, a libertarian-oriented group. “We’re already gearing up. This is just the beginning.”
That was an excellent post and exactly what we need to do. Supporting a third party completely throws the baby out with the bath water. However, doing the same with the GOP gets us liberal candidates.
“We shall support the most conservative candidate who can win.”
bs
vote for the candidate that most closely fits your principles, then count the votes to determine the winner.
Any other approach let’s the liberal media determine who gets elected.
Damn straight! NO conservative in their right mind would EVER vote for Kirk. He’s a grade A liberal ass!
“Then, we’ll hold our noses, work like heck, and defeat the douche bag.”
Not happening. There will be no more nose holding going on in this conservative household. Nor will it be happening in any household of my conservative neighbors, friends or relatives. We’re fed up and will JUST SAY NO to ANY rinos. Period.
A divided party: Progressives threaten Democratic lawmakers
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
11/03/09 2:39 PM EST
MoveOn.org is sending out emails today seeking more contributions for its campaign to defeat any Democratic senator who does not fully support Obamacare. Yesterday the left-wing activist group asked members to contribute "to a primary challenge against any Democratic senator who helps Republicans block an up-or-down vote on health care reform." Today, MoveOn reports that it has received $2 million in pledges in less than 24 hours. "It's a clear sign of how angry progressives would be at any Democrat who helps filibuster reform," MoveOn executive director Justin Ruben writes in the new email.
"The larger the war chest we can offer a potential challenger, the stronger the signal we'll send to conservative Democrats," Ruben continues. "So we're setting a huge new goal: $3 million in total pledges by the end of the week. That's plenty to launch a serious primary challenge."
MoveOn is already planning radio ads targeting Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu and Arkansas Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln over the health care issue.
” vote for the candidate that most closely fits your principles, then count the votes to determine the winner. “
If we ever want to have leadership with integrity, we’ll have to become voters with integrity....
No more ‘nose holding’ here....
I was surprised that I didn’t see McCain’s name also. I know that J. D. Hayworth was considering a run against him.
btt
IF....a big IF....a true third party - and a conservative one at that - will ever hold major Federal offices (Congress, Senate, President), it will have to be recognized as such, and in national elections, beat both the dims and what's left of the rinos.
Other than that, you're just spittin' into the wind.
This statement places you in the camp of the independents (even if you are registered as a rino).
So...my question remains....if you vote on a "case by case" basis (may I assume conservatism holds most of your interest?), then what national candidates do you back? Given your assumedly conservative views, you and those standing with you (including myself if my assumptions are true) have precious few office holders for whom to vote.
And...unless we can elect a majority of conservative - and I mean real conservative - candidates, we will always be marginalized....and the nation will continue on the path upon which it has set it's feet.
Thanks for the kind comment.
Thanks for the kind comment.
McCain is an excellent example.
In the Primaries, no Conservative should support a McCain. There are plenty of more Conservative guys who at that point could win.
However, after the Primaries, you’re pretty much screwed with Comrade Juan McNuts. I voted for Sarah, and covered up his name so I didn’t puke. Voting for McNuts was necessary, if extremely unpleasant.
If Conservatism isn’t practical about the world, it is an ivory tower philosophy doomed to pyrrhic victories.
Enjoy that.
You and I are on the same team and probably have as much Conservatism in us as the other does. It is a question of “what are you going to do about that?”
I’ll keep working for as much Conservatism as I can actually get.
Wouldn’t it be great if a new Conservative Party could replace the Republican Party and kick it to the curb? I can dream.
Again, I did not support the idea of a full-fledged third party (at least not from the outset) but a race-by-race support for a true conservative in the primary to take on the party from within. If a third party candidate is more in line with traditional conservative positions, whether they be a straight-up independent or an actual third party member, then money should flow their way.
This is exactly what happened with Hoffman and rightfully so. A Hoffman win reflects the flawed belief that only an untra-RINO could win there. Many good-hearted Pubbie voters will simply support the nominee (or anointed one like Crist) unless they are informed otherwise. It took someone like Palin to shine the attention both negatively on "DeDe" and positively on Hoffman.
Again independent/third party candidates can caucus with the GOP when they are in the right and refuse to when they are in the wrong.
Good call Fieldmarshal!
Maybe it should. I would not mind seeing some good primary challengers for our more prominent Senate RINOs.
The Electoral College structure in our election systems cause a two party system: More Liberal and More Conservative.
Most other votes are destined to be a waste of time.
I believe the founders intended that (though I can’t quote Federalist Papers on the spot). The electoral structures force parties to vie over the mushy middle, and for the extremes of Conservatism and Liberalism to join up with their major party, or suffer philosophical defeat every time.
For political purists, among whom I count myself, that sucks. I’d rather get pure conservatives every time. But given the structures in place, we’re a two party system.
Why is it that “Constitution Parties” of various flavor flower and die every 4-8 years? Because each is ultimately a spoiler, ineffective, or a waste of a vote.
We need to drag the Republican Party (the nominally more conservative of the two) in a more conservative direction at every turn. Scuzzy was an excellent example to them. More examples, please!
Most Republicans want the party to be more conservative. So join up, and pressure the leadership to quit doing stupid stuff like nominating liberals like Scuzzy.
We need to make the Republican Party dependent on Conservatism. We rule, they follow.
What are Tea Parties? Emanations of the Republican Party? Heck no! We own them, and the Republicans line up behind us: Conservative Grass Roots.
Let’s show ‘em who’s boss!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.