Posted on 09/08/2010 10:58:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
The announcement by former congressman Tom Tancredo that he'll run for governor of Colorado as a fringe party candidate follows a familiar pattern: established politicians turn to protest campaigns only after they've been disgraced, defeated and rejected by the mainstream. Their minor party dalliances represent a desperate, pathetic bid to keep the media spotlight, more than they reflect any practical agenda or commitment to ideological purity.
In Tancredo's case, he remains tainted by his embarrassing 2008 presidential race. A full three years before the Iowa caucuses, he became one of the first Republicans to announce his intention to run, and managed to waste $1.5 million on his campaign, never reaching double digits in national polls and formally withdrawing just days before Iowa voted. (He ended up with 5 caucus votes— not 5,000, but 5 — out of 119,000.)
Similarly, Alan Keyes joined a minor party (the Constitution Party, the same angry outfit that has now drawn Tancredo) only after his third failed GOP presidential campaign, plus three landslide defeats as a Republican Senate candidate. Adding insult to injury, he even lost the meaningless Constitution Party nomination in 2008 to a little-known preacher, then left that fringe operation to launch his own fringe party.
In similar spirit, former Republican Bob Barr suffered a crushing 2-to-1 defeat in his 2002 congressional re-election bid, then left the GOP to become the Libertarian Party presidential nominee in 2008. Pat Buchanan, another formerly influential figure, abandoned the Republicans in 2000 in the midst of his third failed presidential campaign, enlisting in the Reform Party (created by former vanity candidate Ross Perot) for a catastrophic campaign that drew barely one-sixth the votes of fellow fringie Ralph Nader.
In the 19th century, two rejected presidents established this sad pattern of crushed, embarrassed public figures seeking redemption, revenge or just continued attention. Martin Van Buren lost the White House in a landslide in 1840, failed to win renomination by the Democratic Party he had helped to build, then ran in 1848 as a "Free Soil" spoiler candidate. President Millard Fillmore also lost the nomination of his own party (the Whigs), and four years later campaigned as the "Know Nothing" standard bearer of 1856, promoting a radical anti-immigrant platform that would embarrass even Tancredo.
Only once in U.S. history did a politician abandon his major party base while still popular and successful: former president Teddy Roosevelt re-entered politics in 1912, narrowly lost the GOP nomination to incumbent President Taft, and then, openly angry at this perceived betrayal, ran under the banner of the Progressive ("Bull Moose") Party. After his strenuous campaign fell disastrously short (Democrat Woodrow Wilson won the electoral vote by 5 to 1) Roosevelt quickly returned to the Republican fold, strongly supporting its 1916 nominee and considering the GOP nomination for 1920 before his sudden death at age 60.
Misinformed zealots may insist that Abraham Lincoln offers another example of a successful politico taking chances on a third party, but by the time that Honest Abe reluctantly abandoned his long-standing Whig affiliation, that party had collapsed and Republicans had already taken its place. The new GOP dominated congressional elections of 1854 (electing a new speaker of the House) and 1858, while finishing second in a close 1856 presidential race — all before Lincoln won election as the first Republican president in 1860.
Politicians with the winning touch almost always shun fringe parties because chances of success are so small. The most admired American leaders take their place in an honorable pragmatic tradition, counting practical results as more important than showy gestures. The sad truth, so dramatically illustrated by Tancredo's egotistical campaign, is that third-party candidacies seldom demonstrate courage or commitment but almost always amount to illogical, revenge-fueled reactions to disgrace and failure — reactions that naturally ensure continued disgrace and failure for the deluded narcissists who pursue their self-indulgent efforts.
That’s funny. He was great as my congressman. I have met him and he is real people. But maybe I should take your word for it.
Or not...
Yeah people who met Al Capone thought he was real people too. Same with Mussolini. Heck I remember reading some nimrod talking about having “shook hands and looking into the eyes of Bill Clinton” and knowing he would make a great president. Just because you’re an easy mark doesn’t mean everybody is.
Easy mark? LOL! Yep, that’s me.
Whatever, I am leaning Tom. So are most leading conservatives here, including Mike Rosen, another easy mark I suppose.
http://www.850koa.com/pages/mikerosen.html
Not THE Mike Rosen??
The same Mike Rosen I’ve never heard of? WOW!
Seriously though you must know that Tancredo can’t win and will only serve as a spoiler increasing the odds that the Democrat will win the seat? Perhaps you don’t care. I know Tancredo knows this and doesn’t care.
Yup. When was the last time Medved called a Dem politician crazy?
I will be voting for Tom. I was really disappointed in both republican candidates. And the more we learn about Maes, the worse the news get. And the news today that Tancredo is raising more money than Maes...
But, I am afraid we will see Hickenlooper as governor.
Seriously, if you aren’t in Denver/CO, don’t knock what you don’t know. 850koa, the biggest radio station in this region of the country, plays Rosen during the normal time that Rush plays across the country, delaying Rush’s start time until noon, locally. He has a very large audience, voting audience, in Colorado politics.
I hope the Tanc can win it. The other choices appear to be poor and poorer.
Maes cannot win. Everyday there is new information coming out about Maes that will make Hickenlooper a shoe in. The man appears to be a con artist, and really will do damage to the Republican party in this state.
There are some things you don’t screw up. For instance, if an elderly woman claims that she gave you a LARGE cash donation, and her donation did not show up on your list of donations, don’t screw up giving the money back to her. Don’t give her the wrong amount, don’t not sign the check.
Don’t lie about things like being an undercover cop in another state.
The list goes on.
I wasn’t aware of what you told me. Thanks for the information. Still it looks bad no matter how you slice it according to realclearpolitics.com:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/governor/2010_colorado_governor_race.html
Being somewhat local, and being in CO long enough to have watched Hickenlooper, I am somewhat sick to my stomach about the possibility. In such a critical year, a critical time in CO’s future, I cannot understand how the Republicans didn’t do a better job of vetting and picking candidates. We really screwed up.
Hickenlooper is a very likeable man, very congenial. He is about as radical as they come, it appears, but the media is going to protect him on that. And voters are going to like him.
Look at the polling dates. They are all before Maes crashed and burned. Hickenloper is still below 50%. This indicates he may have a strong advantage but it is far from a done deal.
A vote against Maes is more than just a vote against the candidate. It's also a vote against his supporters—a faction that, in my opinion, is turning the Colorado Republican Party to crap. Having Maes as Governor would energize them and put them in the driver's seat.
This also includes some <airquotes>Tea Parties and 9/12 Groups</airquotes> who started off as protests against statism, but then ran off the rails when they degenerated into herds of sheeple who vote for random, unvetted underdogs that their leaders tell them to vote for.
Colorado is definitely a poster child for sheeple. They voted for Obama like mad, thinking it would be “better.” I have so many peers regretting that decision now. My only real response is “Really, you didn’t know better, didn’t bother to research, didn’t bother to think?”
Although it has been quite exciting to see people wake up to the problems with our federal government, we all need to be aware that these are the same people who voted for Obama in droves before.
And I have never been convinced of this “Tea Party” movement that so suddenly grew up after Obama was elected, upset with his policies, within months? I am sorry, but where were you two months before he was elected? What changed in the two months after he he took office to make you so greatly change your mind about him?
That is the smart bet as of today.
Yes, the Mike Rosen that has filled in for Rush Limbaugh.
Yes, the Mike Rosen that worked at the Pentagon as an economist after leaving the armed services.
Yes, the Mike Rosen that makes the libs here in Colorado run for cover - and has for decades.
It seems that all the Freepers on this thread that are from Colorado and are close to Colorado politics realize why Maes is now considered the 3rd tier or ‘minor’ candidate.
Those outside the state seem to be the ones unaware of what Tancredo brings to the table (or what Maes takes off the table).
All the influential conservatives in the state have pulled their endorsements.
Believe me, it is not a mistake for Tancredo to be in this race.
To this date, there has not been one identifiable conservative value that Maes has ever acted on or that can be attributed to him.
Get real. Hickenlooper is going to be re-elected because of the split vote on the right. Hickenlooper was in a fight for his life before Tank threw his hat into the ring.
19 percent? I remember it being 21 percent
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.