Skip to comments.Frustrated by recent losses, Senate Republicans plan bigger role in primaries
Posted on 11/18/2012 5:13:08 AM PST by vmivol00
Senate Republican leaders, frustrated by losing winnable seats, are preparing to play a more assertive role in primary races, in consultation with the Tea Party and other conservative activists. The strategy reflects a change from the 2012 election in which they took a relatively hands-off approach to party primaries, according to The Wall Street Journal.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
If it wasn't already dead to most conservatives, this should finish the GOP off.
In the article I found this statement: “...Strategists cite five such races in the past two election...”
STRATEGISTS? Any time you hear that word in politics it means “PROPAGANDISTS.”
Keystone cops. Oops, should have done that before the election.
Since you guys didn’t listen to me for the last six months or longer, perhaps now you will. Santorum/Bachmann. Oh sure you all think that is too radical but I see you guys are really picking winners. We need to do a huge change and having two 100 percent conservatives on the ticket is as big a change as I have ever seen. Don’t listen to me or say they are too conservative, then you can just watch another one of your losers, lose the election. Get off you butts and start to pay attention to my posts and take action!!! Because you guys follow the GOPe, my tagline will probably end up happening.
I believe that the “winnable” seats were stolen by the Democrats and unless they can neutralize the vote fraud, the next [mid term]will cost them more seats.
This otta be good given the congress is so good at shrinking the government and balancing the budget. I am assuming this is a joke.....
In the last two elections the “party strategists”
1) worked against tea party candidates in the primaries
2) if the tea party candidate won the primary, the party strategists worked against the tea party candidate in the general election (by either giving zero support, or in some cases denouncing the tea party candidate who won the primary)
Now they want to work with the tea party? Which probably means they want to co-opt the tea party.
Same thing I said about Romney.
They need to lose the yes men (strategists) and start listening to the conservatives who don’t like them much.
Time to change registration!
A-men, naps. A-men. With you 100 percent of the way!
How about a core sense of moral values based on scripture?
It never ceases to amaze me that people will not attend church, nor listen to good, Godly preaching, but will be amazed that the world collapses around them and they think they can correct "wrongs" or "evils"
All politicians need to do is get saved, be converted and govern/legislate with the mind of scriptural morality and righteousness.
Really ... bible wisdom is not at least equal to world;y 'knowledge' ?
Bible wisdom is superior to worldly 'knowledge' !!
If the GOP starts planning and strategerizing, I can only expect abject failure for its efforts.
If Senators think their activities and presence is going to be some sort of asset to a future candidate, I expect the same failure .. their voice and presence a kiss of political death.
If nothing else, I see the president we have a judgement of God on America because we allowed our nation to mave away from God and payed lip service to returning and revival.
Yeah, right. After all their sneering and backstabbing, they now come with hat in hand wanting to consult with the "Tea Party" and Conservative "activists"?
Take a hike McConnell.
Time for them to start learning the difference, and to remember that the Tea Party got its start and its greatest momentum as a coalition of Republicans, independents, and Reagan Democrats who are concerned about spending and debt.
We gave away two layup seats to Akin and Murdock. There seems to be some strange hang-ups with some so cons and woman’s sexuality. Until some of these guys spend spend some time in a rape clinic or something they are going to drag down the whole party.
Well I think they lost because Republicans would not get behind these two patriots. What they said was 100 percent accurate and should be been said to the American people. Instead the GOPe and faux conservatives said they need to lose. Stupid!!!!! If I was the RNC Chairman, I would have put both of them at the front and say “this is the GOP”. Why not have someone completely 180 from the democrats. That is why Romney lost because he was the same as Obama. Why change when you aren’t changing anything?
“Senate Republican leaders” = Oxymoron(s).
May they all choke and die on a Pelosi sandwhich.
After the Kerry 2004 loss, the RATs sounded just like the GOP today.
What had been previously a minority POV -”Go hard Left and the mushy middle will follow” won the day, and look at what’s happened.
There are more rightists than Leftists in the country. F*** the “center”. Slap ‘em hard and they’ll wise up. They are the people who follow the strong horse.
There’s only one way forward (one peaceful way anyway), and that’s to go hard, hard right.
Santorum is not a hard man. And he’s a multi-loser. There are no second acts in politics.
The only “Senate Republican leader” I know of is Jim DeMint (R-SC). Shame he won’t run again and apparently has no desire for a different office.
So now that you helped cockblock the teaparty candidates and conervatives by your very own party of loosers you now see a way out........................cry me a river. You are going to see a major unheaval I suspect from very angry voters who were taken to the shed for a 2nd time. Just look at the election map of red and blue and we lost. How? Voter fraud that no one is talking about. 4 states not hard to do yet we hear crickets coming from your side. Later for that later for you.
No More RINOs
When does the GOP understand?
I predicted trouble for Romney in Michigan when he could only scrape out a tie against Santorum here. He had appeal with conservatives across the board and was actually a choice among conservative union members I know. He talked about street level job creation through the elimination of taxes at the manufacturing level combined with something like 17% cuts for the top. Romney talked about cutting taxes at the top which is fine but that money would wisely be invested elsewhere because it continues to cost too much to manufacture here.
Santorum ran a conservative geared campaign while Romney ran an urban moderate campaign that skipped the people he needed most while campaigning to people who weren’t going to vote for him in the general.
As far as Michele Bachmann is concerned, she is one seriously tough and brilliant woman who didn’t deserve some of the treatment she got from FReepers. Some of the crap we saw spouted about her here at FR would have made the most rabid leftist Palin hater proud. They attacked her for “stupid” comments on foreign policy yet they studiously avoided mentioning the fact that she’s a member of the permanent select committee on intelligence and actually knows what she’s talking about. FReepers happily attacked her for her “stupid” comments about drilling in the everglades yet none of them had the stones to acknowledge the fact that there are already oil and gas wells in the everglades.
She’s become quite the iron lady. Elected in 06 and stripped of funds by the NRCC in 08 yet still won. She fought the full might of the democrats on her own in 2010 and won. In 2012 she ran a pretty respectable upstart presidential campaign and again defeated the democrats in the house race with virtually no help from the party.
First, am I the only one who remembers that Akin wasn’t the Tea Party candidate in the primary?
Second, not every Tea Party candidate is going to win. Still, for every Tea Party loser there are many more establishment losers. I’ll see your Murdock and Angle and raise you a McMahon, Thompson, Brown, Fiorina, Mack, etc.
We would also have senator Jane Norton from CO and Senator Mike Castle from DE. We would not have Rand Paul but some other republican and yes, probably Charlie Crist instead of Rubio.
At a minimum, the NRSC needs to remove primary challengers in any state won by the opposition president or Blue states in the previous cycle. It is hard enough to win in a blue state but even harder if there is a primary challenge.
If this rule had been applied, we would have had Fiorina run stronger in CA, Sue Loudon run stronger against Reid in NV, the witch from DE would be replaced by Castle, Lugar replace Mourdock, Thompson in WI would have been stronger, we likely beat McCaskill, Norton would likely win in CO, Nelson would have a stronger challenger in FL, Cruz would still win in TX (deep red, and rule would not apply), Rand Paul would still win KY (same reason), Deb Fisher would still win red state NB, and unfortunately, Crist would replace Rubio.
All in all, the rule would have improved the senate results.
Republicans are only a pretend opposition, they are part of the same party the Democrats are. There is only 1 party of Ivy League Lawyers & Incumbents and the only way to change this is to vote every incumbent out in primaries no matter what party they are in. Or form a 2nd (TEA?) party to oppose them.
The incumbent will never lose in the general election, because both parties have gerrymandered their districts.
Paaalease, the gang that couldn't shoot straight is now looking to us for answers? LOL! I don't trust them.
They Divorced us a long time ago, it is time for us to move out.
New party please, we need to run Conservatives as Conservative Independents, the E-GOP unless we get $H!+ lucky or force it down their throats, they don't want a Ted Cruz etc.
I will be so happy when we can finally put the GOP to rest here on FR and we have another home, I am so done with them...
This is going to make me unpopular with some people here, but, strategically speaking, conservatives need to focus on reducing government and enabling Right to Work on a national basis.
Take a lesson from Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Since making dues-paying and union membership voluntary, public employee union membership has plummeted, along with the money they have available to fund dem candidates. This is going to have long-term impact on elections in WI.
We need to stay focused on things which promote the finances and power of the Left: unions (especially public employee unions), number of government employees (which tend to overwhelmingly vote Dem), government spending, Welfare.
And here's the part that's going to make me unpopular with many: for now, we need stay away from things which piss off and energize the Dem base to oppose us, and which does not lessen their power: abortion and gay marriage. For the Dems, abortion has the base-energizing effect that gun-control does for the Right. It's better for politicians to ignore it, and let the grass-roots handle it at the grass-roots level, by making abortion providers so unpopular and harassed that they decide it's not worth the hassle.
The strength of the Tea Party is precisely that there is no figurehead. So who is going to consult with the Reince and the NRCC/NRSC, and who is going to be compelled to listen to anything they have to say?
They didn't chase Rand out. He whupped Mitch's boy Grayson. Mourdock and Akin were bad candidates -- not bad people, mind you -- but bad campaigners. Particularly Mourdock's reserved nature twisted by the media into something passo-aggro; and having seen Akin's example of what the MSM can do to a single comment, and finding doing the same thing irresistable just two months later.
If they can somehow find a way to ensure that Tea Party candidates have some idea of exactly how to play the MSM, a little vetting is not a bad thing. Screening would go too far, and in those instances where that is attempted, the Tea Party hopeful can register as a candidate anyway.
It is hard to call Akin a ‘tea party’ candidate, since the largest tea party groups had backed other candidates in the primary. Sure, Michele Bachmann and Steve King backed him, but they really are social conservatives, with Bachmann having opportunistically claimed a tea party title of sorts for herself in the House.
Meanwhile, virtually all of the rising stars in the party—from Rubio to Cruz, Haley and Martinez, owe their victories to the tea partiers who backed them against weak establishment players.
Finally, how many mega-funded RINOs lost in the last two cycles?
Are you sure they’re not all SOPs? (Stupid Old Partiers)
That is a fair criticism.
"As far as Michele Bachmann is concerned, she is one seriously tough and brilliant woman who didnt deserve some of the treatment she got from FReepers. Some of the crap we saw spouted about her here at FR would have made the most rabid leftist Palin hater proud."
And that is not fair criticism. She did it to herself. Period. Paragraph.
I will trust no candidate that hires a poison pen angry-little-man like Ed Rollins. She got pimped by the worst consultant in the business. Who turned on her after she dumped him (far too late): Rollins: Bachmann stayed clear of attacking Romney in hopes of VP slot
And she overplayed Gardacil. You and I were both on those pre-election threads when it was a singular Texas issue, and we both criticized Perry for what he did. She was fine to bring it up in the debate, but after tried to shape this one issue on the stump as Perry's 'war on women' and it came off poorly -- mawkish and outright stupid.
Rove I understand was handling the Charter PAC senate campaign played games. His material never warned voters that IF OBAMA GETS RE-ELECTED AND SENATE CONTROL REMAINED . .. OBAMACARE AND ALL THE TAX INCREASES THAT GO WITH IT WILL NEVER GET REPEALED Let alone tie into or cover the formentioned grape shot which would have perhaps changed that body. I don’t recall any of that material directed toward that fact.
Finally they didnt believe the polls which turned out were dead on. Even going as far as setting up focus groups which could have looked into whats going on . Even to the point of going out to local eateries and bars and eavesdrop into conversations and pick up on topics being discussed.(chat rooms twitter too contrived)
Nuts...This loss is inexcuseable, while I truly don’t believe Mitt Romney would ever continence losing, I’m begining to wonder if many GOPE’s including the group that Rove headed didn’t want to see the AHCA known as O’care stay in place ..
I really don’t care what you easily manipulated morons think.
Im begining to wonder if many GOPEs including the group that Rove headed didnt want to see the AHCA known as Ocare stay in place ....That's the dirty little secret of the Republican Establishment - they WANT Obamacare to stay in place.
The only "change" they care about is the majority in the Senate. Then they can have all that power and the ensuing wealth that comes with it..
John C Breckenridge: Confederate Civil War General
odd choice of screen name in light of your bio
Akin and Mourdock lost because they’re both jackhole idiots who let their big mouths prove it to everyone else.
The Republicans need to go with true Conservatives or die.
Even an amateur like myself knew in JANUARY that journ0list Stephanopolus signalled that the “war on women” was the campaign theme for Dems.
I can’t believe Mourdock wasn’t prepped for that.
All you have to say is “so you’re in favor of keeping convicted murderers alive and killing innocent pre-born children?”
We traded an 80% Republican for a 97% Baraqqi for 6 years.
I would like to see her become governor.
Let me get this straight. Akin and Murdock were ahead ...on the five yard line. ....all they had to do was run out the clock. Then they make misogynistic...Boneheaded...Factually untrue statements..make incacuable damage to the pro life movement....scare and dismay woman..LOSE the seats... and your solution is to Put them front and center?
“There are more rightists than Leftists in the country.”
Jim, this is where you go off the track.
The “empirical evidence” (in this case, votes) ought to illustrate that that is no longer the case.
There’s gettin’ to be more folks IN the wagon than pullin’ it!
It's fine if the candidate is pro-life and not in favor of gay marriage. But if he makes his campaign revolve around abortion, to the exclusion of the economy, he will lose.
Romney lost, to a large extent, because he was a squishy moderate who the so-cons were unwilling to support.
Akin lost because he was perceived as somebody who was predominantly interested in the abortion issue.
“Even an amateur like myself knew in JANUARY that journ0list Stephanopolus signalled that the war on women was the campaign theme for Dems.”
It was “the economy, stupid!”
Or didn’t you realize that?
PS: Not sure of what the -new- theme should be, but it ain’t gonna be just the economy no mo’. Not if we wish to win, anyway...
The problem is that if a candidate makes a statement in opposition to abortion, then that is ALL the public will hear about that candidate, 24/7. That one remark will be the only subject of conversation in the MSM for the entire campaign.
Repub candidates need to be VERY careful in answering questions about abortion. They need to have a standard response that cannot be turned into an adverse sound bite, and stay with it.