Posted on 03/18/2014 4:18:58 PM PDT by cotton1706
*Promoted from the diaries – Aaron*
The national narrative today suggests that the chances of the Republican Party taking over the Senate in November are increasing as the map of competitive races expands.
One of the states that the pundits are increasingly talking about is Oregon. If you are listening to the Beltway establishment, including Rove, you would think that there is only one Republican candidate running in Oregon — Dr. Monica Wehby.
The problem with this is two-fold:
1) Monica Wehby is not the only candidate running for the Republican nomination
2) Monica Wehby is a liberal Republican and proudly pro-abortion.
Luckily, Oregonians have an alternative. His name is Jason Conger, and my organization, Oregon Right to Life, has proudly endorsed him.
Despite being abandoned by his mother as a child and suffering periods of homelessness, he nevertheless worked his way through community college and graduated from Harvard Law School.
Conger has been endorsed by nearly every Republican state legislator in Oregon and 97 percent of Jason Conger’s itemized contributions have come from Oregon.
Meanwhile, 40 percent of Monica Wehby’s itemized contributions have come from out-of-state, thanks to the DC GOP establishment’s support of her candidacy – including contributions from Senators Susan Collins, Saxby Chambliss, and Richard Burr.
The Beltway GOP establishment – likely orchestrated through the NRSC – thinks they know Oregon better than those of us fighting here in the trenches.
It is simple: the Beltway GOP establishment does not believe that a conservative can win in Oregon. So they are trying to hoist a liberal Republican on Oregon conservatives.
I have a simple request: Stay out of our state, and let us choose the best person to represent our values to be on the ballot this November.
Gayle Atteberry, Oregon Right to Life
“...Troubling is her claim she’d “revamp” Obamacare rather than repeal it....”
I expect we’ll hear a LOT of that from the squish wing of the GOP.
I have questions relevant to this primary. When was the last time Oregon voted Republican for President? Also, when was the last time Oregon elected a conservative U.S. Senator?
Oregon hasn’t voted GOP for President since 1984. As for the last “Conservative” Senator, given that Gordon Smith was to the right of both Bob Packwood and Mark Hatfield, he might be counted. Other than him, you’d likely have to go back to Guy Cordon (1944-55). He narrowly lost to left-wing Democrat Richard Neuberger in 1954 (Hatfield would take the seat back from his widow a dozen years later).
That needs to be taken into consideration before deciding to oppose a potentially appealing Republican running in a liberal constituency. I've backed Tea Party challengers in the past, but I say we should try to cut our losses in this case.
I’d still likely endorse Conger here. Wehby would probably be another Susan Collins. The money issue is a biggie here, too, as I wrote at the start of the thread.
“When was the last time Oregon voted Republican for President?”
RR in 1984.
“Also, when was the last time Oregon elected a conservative U.S. Senator?”
No idea.
Pointing out that OR hasn’t voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1984 is misleading, since George W. Bush came within less than 1% of carrying the state in 2000 and got a respectable 47% in 2004. Oregon isn’t Rhode Island.
And as for electing a conservative Senator, it depends what you mean. Gordon Smith was moderate-to-conservative, and he served until 2009 (he narrowly lost reelection in the terrible political environment of 2008). Specifically on the issue of abortion (the subject of this thread—check out its title), Smith was pro-life, as was his predecessor Mark Hatfield (who was generally liberal on some economic and foreign-policy issues, I wouldn’t call Hatfield a RINO).
So I wouldn’t point to history to rule out electing a pro-life U.S. senator from OR. Now, that does not mean that we should ignore the fact that pro-life conservatives start off at a disadvantage in OR; but I would posit that a pro-abortion extremist would not be able to obtain the required turnout from conservatives to win the state.
Our best chance at beating Merkley would have been with Congressman Greg Walden, who is well known in the Portland media market (he’s from the county just east of Multnomah), has ample experience on federal issues, has a relatively conservative voting record without being “extremist” by Oregon standards, and is pro-choice on abortion without being unacceptable to conservatives (he does support bans on late-term abortion and oppose taxpayer funding of abortion). (I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that if Walden were pro-life he’d still be our best candidate for the U.S. Senate in OR.) Alas, Walden wants to stay in the House, and in his safely Republican House seat. No other first-tier candidate has stepped up, so, unfortunately,we are deciding between candidates who would be pretty heavy underdogs against Merkley. The pro-abortion NRSC-backed candidate has no better a chance of winning than her more conservative primary opponent. So if we’re going to back a candidate due to political realities, llooking at all of the political realities leads me to conclude that it is pointless to back a pro-abortion candidate who doesn’t have much of a chance of winning.
This is where we get it wrong.
The idea is not to pick up 100 Senate seats, all filled with conservatives. Nor is it to get 60 conservative
Republicans. That would be great, but it’s not happening.
All that’s necessary, is to get a majority of 60+ seats, so 35+ conservatives from red states, and 25+ whatever we can get from where ever we can get it.
I’ll take a Susan Collins from Maine, or a Mike Castle from Delaware (ooops, never mind).
What totally screws us up are the guys like Graham, McCain, and both guys from Mississippi - Wicker and Cochran. And others.
Look at Heritage’s rankings and check the liberal Senators from RED states:
http://www.heritageactionscorecard.com/members
These are the guys we need to go after.
Perfectly Acceptable: Kirk at 44% from Illinois - I’ll take what I can get from Illinois.
Totally dreadful: Alexander 48% from Tennessee - I expect much better from Tennessee!!!
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.