Posted on 05/15/2006 6:22:08 AM PDT by isaiah55version11_0
I doubted the strategic wisdom of conservatives sitting out this election to “teach Republicans a lesson”; several bloggers have responded.
There are still doubters and skeptics, though. What’s really stunning is this absolute certainty of angry conservatives that A) Republicans will learn the right lessons from the defeat, and not, say, respond in a panic by embracing their inner RINO and flailing around for MSM approval and B) that the Republicans can easily win back Congress in 2008, just by stiffening their spines and pledging to return to their conservative roots.
I have my doubts on both counts. For starters, why would Republicans get the message that “we need to be more conservative” in a year that conservatives were knocked out?
Who are the Republican lawmakers most angering the conservative base? Well, let’s say Sens. Trent “I’m tired of hearing about Porkbusters” Lott, Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, John McCain for cosponsoring Kennedy’s immigration bill and campaign finance reform, Arlen Specter for being a pain in the tushie over judges, Chuck Hagel for being the New York Times’ favorite Republican senator to criticize Bush, and other minimally-conservative Republicans like Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. Well, they’re not going to lose in 2006. Most of ‘em aren’t even up for reelection this year.
Look at the Republicans most in jeopardy in 2006. (I’m using National Journal’s most recent rankings.)
In the Senate, a bad year for the Republicans would mean the loss of Rick Santorum (who has lifetime American Conservative Union rating of 88 out of a possible 100, and a 92 in 2005) in Pennsylvania, Jim Talent (93 rating lifetime, and a 96 in 2005) in Missouri, Conrad Burns (91, and a perfect 100 in 2005) in Montana and Mike DeWine (80 lifetime, only 56 in 2005) in Ohio. Of course, Ohio voters who sit this one out will replace DeWine with Sherrod Brown, who has a lifetime rating of 8 and 4 for 2005. And they won’t get to revisit that decision until 2012.
If the GOP base doesn’t show up in Minnesota, you get Amy Klobuchar instead of Mark Kennedy (90 rating lifetime, 84 in 2005).
If the GOP base doesn’t show in Maryland, you get Ben Cardin (lifetime rating of 6, 2005 rating of 0!) or Kweise Mfume (lifetime ACU rating of 4) instead of Michael Steele.
If the GOP base doesn’t show in Tennessee, you get Harold Ford (19 lifetime, 21 in 2005) instead of Ed Bryant (lifetime ACU score of 98!) Van Hilleary (lifetime score of 97!). Another GOP candidate is Bob Corker, Chattanooga mayor.
If the GOP base doesn't show in West Virginia, you get Robert Byrd (lifetime rating of 30, 20 in 2005) as Appropriations Committee Chairman, instead of businessman John Raese.
If the GOP base doesn't show in Washington, you keep Maria Cantwell (11 lifetime, 8 in 2005) instead of businessman Mike McGavick.
Okay, maybe Chafee goes down. But you've lost how many solid conservatives to remove this one guy?
In the House, I'm looking at the vulnerable incumbent Republicans, according to the Hotline.
There’s Bob Ney, who has a lifetime ACU rating of 86, and 88 in 2005. I realize he has ethics issues; the voters in his district will have to decide whether the allegations are serious enough to disqualify him from office. (Presuming a prosecutor doesn't say something first.)
There’s Jim Gerlach of Pennsylvania, with a 67 lifetime and 56 in 2005. Let’s observe that Kerry carried Gerlach’s district, and Al Gore did as well four years earlier; each of the last two cycles Gerlach has carried 51 percent of the vote. So Gerlach may be as conservative a lawmaker as you can elect in this district.
Down the line of the National Journal list, you see fairly conservative to very conservative GOP lawmakers at risk this year: Shaw of Florida, 82 lifetime, 71 last year. Heather Wilson of New Mexico 82 lifetime, 75 last year. Mike Sodrel of Indiana, 92, only served one year so far. Davis, Kentucky 88, another first-year guy. Hostettler of Indiana, 90 lifetime, 100 in 2005. Pryce of Ohio, 79 lifetime, 83 in 2005. Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, (Mr. Able Danger!) 70 lifetime, 65 in 2005. Charles Taylor of North Carolina, 92 both lifetime and 2005.
Yeah, maybe if conservatives stay home, they’ll knock out liberal Republican Chris Shays of Connecticut. Whoop-de-doo. Who’s going to be left standing?
Trent “I’m tired of hearing about Porkbusters” Lott, Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, John McCain, Arlen Specter, Chuck Hagel, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.
Nice job, guys. Your effort to re-conservativize the Republican Party in Washington by staying home this year will have the effect of massacring the actual conservatives and empowering the moderates who you disdain. Perhaps we can call this counterproductive maneuver “RINO-plasty.”
But that’s okay, the staying-at-home-conservatives insist. The GOP will win back the House and Senate in 2008, establishing a true conservative majority.
Maybe. But as I mentioned, what kind of lengths do you think the Democrats will go to in order to keep power once they’ve got it? Does the “Fairness Doctrine” ring a bell? You think Pelosi and Reid wouldn’t try that tactic to hinder conservative talk radio? How about McCain-Feingold 2.0, with a particular focus on controlling “unregulated speech” on the Internet and blogs?
Think the MSM was cheerleading for Democrats in 2004? How much more fair and balanced do you think they’ll be when their task is to defend Democratic House and Senate majorities AND elect President Hillary Rodham Clinton? My guess is, they’ll make the CBS memo story look accurate and evenhanded by comparison.
Think the GOP can prevail in close races once they’re out of power? Ask the members of the military who had their ballots in Florida blocked. Ask Doug Forrester how well his anti-Torricelli campaign worked when he suddenly faced Frank Lautenberg at the last minute. Ask Dino Rossi. Ask Democrat Tim Johnson if he’s glad the last county in South Dakota to report its results just happened to have enough of a Democratic margin to put him over the top in 2002.
Once the Democrats regain control of Congress, a GOP takeover is going to be exponentially harder than it was in 1994. You’re never going to catch the Democrats as flatfooted again.
Why are so many conservatives hell-bent on cutting off their nose to spite their face? Are they really willing to throw away a decade’s worth of work and go back to square one?
We usually like looking at the Daily Kos crowd insisting for an immediate pullout of the troops or impeachment hearings right this second and we laugh at them for their ludicrously unrealistic expectations.
But apparently the Kos are not the only ones with an all-or-nothing mentality. Sometimes in life you have to use the West Coast offense, nickel and diming your way down the field instead of going for the long bomb. If I want a more conservative government, I get it by electing the more conservative of the two choices, even if he isn’t as conservative as I would like. I do not get it by sitting on the sidelines and pouting, and letting the less conservative guy take the reigns of power.
For this I get labeled a “bamboobzled [sic] boob” by the likes of Bill Quick. Yeah, I’m the unreasonable one.
So what's the point? I get it, you don't like compromise. Sorry, that's the way things get done in a Republic. If you don't like that you are more than welcome to join the hate America crowd and head off to Canada or wherever the disgruntled go when they lose elections and refuse to compromise.
The party obedient aren't paying any attention to reality. Even with full conservative support the GOP won't be able to overcome the millions of new democrats flowing across the borders.
I, for one, never sit out an elections. The fear of having dems in governance is just to scary.
"Right on! It's such a shame that too many 'conservatives' would rather be 'right' than effective in politics."
If being "effective in politics" means becoming a liberal (RINO or Neocon), I guess I'll choose to be ineffective.
Great so you want us to continue supporting those who get elected by conservatives then refuse to support conservatives.
And if JOhn Conyers is in charge of a latrine the world will see for real how pathetic he and his coharts are.
Support the likes of McCain and Spector and have them continue to screw the base?
Mr. Bush and the republicans have had the whole enchelada what with control of the house senate and white house and still they refuse to push the conservative agenda.
Refuse to control our borders, refuse to kick out illegals refuse to give the states the right to regulate abortion. Refuse to reign in spending and yet they demand our loyalty and votes?
Get real.
The writer is 100% right.
I'm not angry at the Republicans... disappointed, yes. I no longer consider myself associated with any party. I'm voting for solidly pro individual RKBA and solidly pro life.
If the candidates don't meet my requirements, then they don't get my vote.
I've stopped asking candidates if they support the 2nd Amendment because "of course" is the answer they all give, including Feinstein.
I now ask this... "What have you done to support my individual right to keep and bear arms and to repeal anti-gun legislation?"
Mike
So complaining about Miers was absurd?
The GOP abandoned conservatives long before conservatives began to abandon the GOP.
We elected them to be tough against the liberals and do their jobs, with few exceptions they have failed.
If there are losses in November it's on the shoulders of those in power not the voters who are tired of being lied to, deceived and put at risk.
You stay home... you give up.
All true.....readitandweep.....
Here's what he said in January 2004:
Excerpts from "President Bush Proposes New Temporary Worker Program":
Third, we should not give unfair rewards to illegal immigrants in the citizenship process or disadvantage those who came here lawfully, or hope to do so.
Fourth, new laws should provide incentives for temporary, foreign workers to return permanently to their home countries after their period of work in the United States has expired.
The legal status granted by this program will last three years and will be renewable -- but it will have an end.
This program expects temporary workers to return permanently to their home countries after their period of work in the United States has expired.
Some temporary workers will make the decision to pursue American citizenship. Those who make this choice will be allowed to apply in the normal way. They will not be given unfair advantage over people who have followed legal procedures from the start. I oppose amnesty, placing undocumented workers on the automatic path to citizenship. Granting amnesty encourages the violation of our laws, and perpetuates illegal immigration. America is a welcoming country, but citizenship must not be the automatic reward for violating the laws of America.
"...all-or-nothing mentality."
Don't see it that way..
I'm frozen as far as voting. I can't vote for one or the other.
It needs to get worse before it gets better.
Something to be learned from the 'rats, whose left hillary!-Teddy-et-al, have driven aside/out their right Lieberman-ZMiller. Analogous to what is happening to the 'pubs.
BS! You people come and go like the wind, leaving for now defunct and soon to be resurrected third parties, or just stayin home like in 1996.
Whatever............................
Would ya forgive the House 'Pubbies, since they DID vote for a strong anti-illegal immigration bill?
Dunno bout my Senators but Nathan Deal will have my support this year. Need to check up on Chambiss and Issakson.
"Fourth, new laws should provide incentives for temporary, foreign workers to return permanently to their home countries after their period of work in the United States has expired.
The legal status granted by this program will last three years and will be renewable -- but it will have an end."
Why does Europe come to mind? Or Germany with the Turks?
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.