Republican Primary Voters Seem Determined to Nominate Candidates Who can Win

Townhall.com ^ | May 9, 2014 | Michael Barone

[Kaslin]

Results of Tuesday's primaries, particularly the victory of state House Speaker Thom Tillis in North Carolina's Republican Senate primary, are being hailed -- or decried -- as a victory for the Republican establishment over the Tea Party movement.

There's something to that. Tillis benefited from support from Karl Rove's American Crossroads and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and endorsements by Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush.

In contrast, Sen. Rand Paul flew in on the day before the election to campaign for second-place finisher and fellow physician Greg Bannon, who was also endorsed by Tea Party Patriots and FreedomWorks. Mike Huckabee campaigned for the third-place candidate, minister Mark Harris.

Some conservative bloggers are making much of the fact that Tillis received less than a majority of the vote. But his 46 percent topped the 40 percent threshold to avoid a runoff in July. And his margin over Bannon, who won 27 percent of the vote, would be counted a solid victory in a state without runoffs.

Political reporters have described this race and other Republican primary contests as battles between national political players. But I think the more important thing is what the result tells us about the state of mind of Republican primary voters.

This year Republican voters seem more inclined than in 2010 and 2012 to vote for those who appear likely to be strong general election candidates and less inclined to vote for candidates who stand up on chairs and yell, "Hell no!"

Brannon made statements comparing food stamps to slavery and founded an organization with conspiracy theories on its website. Plenty of fodder for Democratic ads if he had won the nomination.

That doesn't mean that Republican voters have given up on conservatism and are content to vote for RINOs (Republicans in Name Only). Tillis could point to a solid conservative voting record in the legislature.

As Speaker of the North Carolina House, he led successful efforts to cut taxes and authorize charter schools.

The legislature controversially cut extended unemployment benefits -- a measure followed by the steepest decline in unemployment in any state.

Tillis concentrated his fire on incumbent Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan and her deciding vote for Obamacare. He argued that the barrage of anti-Tillis ads and mailings by Hagan's campaign and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid showed that Democrats regarded him as the Republican most likely to win in November.

This is not to say that Republican voters are entirely pleased with incumbents. Two North Carolina incumbents beat challengers by relatively narrow margins.

In the second congressional district, Renee Elmers, attacked for supporting immigration measures, including legalization, won, 59 to 41 percent.

In the third congressional district, Walter Jones, attacked for dovish views on foreign policy, won, 51 to 45 percent.

And in Ohio's 14th congressional district, freshman David Joyce won, 55 to 45 percent. But House Speaker John Boehner got a solid 69 percent against multiple opponents in the Ohio eighth.

Republican primary voters seem to have passed through and out of a cycle that is apparent in both parties' core constituencies: In the last years of the second term of a party's president, the party's wingers grow restive.

They are disappointed that their side's president has not accomplished all they hoped and has compromised on what they believe are core principles.

Thus, after eight years of George W. Bush's presidency, Republican primary voters were pleased to reject likely general election winners in favor of seemingly more principled (and provocative) opponents.

This attitude may have cost Republicans Senate seats -- certainly in Delaware in 2010, arguably in Nevada and Colorado that year, and Indiana and Missouri in 2012.

Tea Party admirers point out, accurately, candidates who started off as insurgents -- Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz -- won solid victories and have injected needed new ideas and energy into the party.

Overall, Republican officeholders have internalized and acted on the Tea Party agenda. That's why the primary challenge to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell seems likely to fail later this month.

Something similar is happening to Democrats in President Obama's sixth year in office: The left-wingers are getting restive.

Evidence includes the election of New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, the talk of an Elizabeth Warren presidential candidacy, billionaire Tom Steyer's $100 million crusade against the Keystone XL pipeline.

But left-wing Democrats aren't challenging many incumbents and establishment favorites -- yet. That could come if and when currently energized Republicans win the presidency.

[central_va]

Far too many of the Tea Party insurgent candidates have been people who quite simply lack the resume or the gravitas to be taken seriously as candidates.

Wow with that elitist attitude you might be able to reinstate the monarchy in the USA.

Boy the anti "normal" people venom is really out today. Howerver, I am not surprised the GOPe bootlickers

[tanknetter]

Yes, because relegating the GOP to minority party status, preventing guys like Ted Cruz from ever having any tangible power (chairing a committee or subcommittee with subponae power) because you hate GOPe/RINOs more than you hate Liberals/Democrats makes so much logical sense...

[cripplecreek]

This behavior goes right back to the beginnings of the tea party. A comment I made in a thread about the forced unionization scam in Michigan. Moderate republicans were the primary driving force behind it and then the number 1 guy ran for the 1st district seat and the moderates wanted Dan Benishek to get out of the way for the guy who can win.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3153942/posts?page=8#8

Just check keyword “Benishek” and you’ll find those threads with those moderate pimps and me.

[tanknetter]

Um, there already is pretty much a monarchy (ok, more like oligarchy) in the US. Barack Obama is the current King.

Foot shooting candidates like Akin, Mourdock, etc may help assuage your anger/contempt/frustration/feelings of inadequacy, but they hurt, not help, the cause of getting rid of it.

But then again, you really don’t want to get rid of the Liberal oligarchy, do you? It would rob you of the ability to sit around wallowing in your anger/contempt/frustration/feelings of inadequacy, wouldn’t it?

[grania]

The way I look at it is the "tea party" gave constitutional conservatives plenty of financing to be elevated to being serious contenders for nominations. At that point, it was up to them to inspire voters with their vision and passion, just as Cruz, Paul, Lee and some others have done. We've been stung so many times with frauds such as Jeff Flake and Kelli Ayotte that people are going to be much more cautious about these new-wave conservatives.

The issues we care about affect all US citizens. We might be better off articulating them across the political spectrum rather than be backstabbed by someone we supported. A lot of these conservatives who lost don't have a voting record on the issues.

[tanknetter]

I agree completely.

But there also needs to be an acknowlegement that Conservatives have been stung by the incompetence of candidates like Akin an Mourdock too.

Launching in on anyone who raises that point, or that GOPe candidates running in Blue states/districts where Tea Party candidates can’t win are worse than Dem\Liberal candidates isn’t ... helpful. I consider myself to be a Reagan Conservative first, Republican second. I believe that my long term posting history here supports tgst. As do, I think, a lot of other Freepers who raise the same issues as me. Insulting us by ramping up the personal attacks and insults for our somewhat more pragmatic view when it comes to electoral politics serves no real purpose other than to perpetuate unnecessary divisiveness.

[tanknetter]

Better, not worse, in second para above.

[grania]

Where I probably disagree with you is that I wouldn’t vote for those who have a voting history of backstabbing constitutional conservatives. My exception would be someone like Rubio, who pretty much got played by Schummer and McCain, but has stayed true to conservative principles...if only he can get education about the invasion of the US.

[Awgie]

Putting more RINO’s in office is not a win.

Actually reversing the Fascist/Commie trends of America would be.

[tanknetter]

I understand.

I’d still vote for a backstabber over a Dem, just to get the numbers of seats held up and ensure a majority. Not for the sake of the backstabber, but because a rising tide raises all boats (Reagan liked that quote, btw) and would elevate good guys like Cruz into positions of tangible power.

[central_va]

Does it ever occur to you bimbo GOPe whores that for every TP candidate you dane incompetent there are 50 maybe 100 progressive RINO’s on your side?

[staytrue]

“Like I said, a republican is challenging for the Dingell seat without party backing.”

You are either woefully uninformed or an F’ing liar.

I personally went to a fundraiser for Oberweis. Rino Senator Mark Kirk, Hank Paulsen, Jim Riske, and Rob Portman were there too.

Oberweis did say he is putting a lot of his own money into it. I think his family owns a bunch of Ice Cream shops.

It is not one of the 14 hotly contested seats and Oberweis is expected to lose, but he is giving it his all and the NRSC IS GIVING NOMINAL SUPPORT BUT SUPPORT NONETHELESS.

I still fail to understand why you people like to spout off lies like the one you just posted.

The event was on Thursday, April 24, 2014.

[staytrue]

“Ted Cruz. Mike Lee. It can be done when we choose serious candidates. Far too many of the Tea Party insurgent candidates have been people who quite simply lack the resume or the gravitas to be taken seriously as candidates”

THANK YOU FOR POSTING.

[cripplecreek]

You pathetic lying piece of garbage.

The Dingell seat is in Michigan and has nothing to so with the names you mentioned.

Now go wipe that Rove off your chin.

[staytrue]

Yeah, you are right. I was thinking Durbin instead of Dingell.

[only1percent]

I love normal people. I don’t hire them for senior jobs on my team, and my team doesn’t have the fate of the free world in its hands. Candidates for Congress should be people of clear intelligence and significant accomplishment.

[central_va]

Candidates for Congress should be people of clear intelligence and significant accomplishment.

The nation, as founded, was supposed to have citizen legislature. Your vision of an elitist utopia has been realized.

[octex]

... Maybe you believe supporting legal immigration is the same as supporting amnesty....
*************************************
That’s nothing but spin. Of course I support LEGAL immigration, but that has nothing to do with being a US citizen.

I also support the Constitution and it specifies that (to paraphrase) a POTUS has to born of a parent subject to the jurisdiction of the US; that is, not parents of foreign citizenry. Rubio’s parents were both Cuban citizens when he was born. ...Likewise, Jindal’s parents were both Indian citizens when he was born, so he’s not eligible for POTUS, either.

Being a legal immigrant doesn’t make that person a US citizen.