HOW TO ELECT A CONSERVATIVE SENATE

RodFromGa | May 28, 2006 | RobFromGa

[MainFrame65]

Lamar Alexander is no better than Bill Frist. He did vote no on the final senate bill, but the following quote from his E-newsletter tells you his real position on the illegal alien issue.

"-- On Thursday, I voted against the Immigration Reform bill. The Senate bill has been greatly improved, but did not do enough to secure our borders to allow me to vote yes. I was disappointed to vote “no” because Congress should not end the year without taking strong steps to secure our borders, to define the legal status of foreign students and workers, and to help prospective citizens learn English and U.S. history so they can become Americans. After we negotiate with the House of Representatives, I hope there will be comprehensive immigration legislation that I can support. --"

[maxter]

I am sure you forgot your sarcasm tag, right?

[FreeReign]

Great post.

[dalight]

Frist is retiring. Waste of breath beating that horse.

[AuH2ORepublican]

I object to your characterization of certain Republican Senators as RINOs. Norm Coleman of MN comes readily to mind. He has voted conservative pretty much across the board, with only a couple of exceptions. I am ecstatic that we have a pro-life, pro-gun, pro-tax cuts, pro-military, pro-WOT Republican Senator representing a state that has not voted for the Republican presidential nominee since 1972 and which held President Bush to 45.5% in 2000 and 47.6% in 2004. As Senator Gregg has been a solid conservative as well; we are very fortunate to have two good conservative Senators from a "purple" state such as NH when the state's two U.S. Representatives are RINOs. And as bad as DeWine has been on a few issues, he is not a RINO, and certainly far less deserving of the label than the contemptible Arlen Specter. Same goes for McCain, Graham and Hagel; they have been huge disappointments on a couple of issues, but for the most part are solid conservatives. The RINOs in the Senate, from the most liberal to the least, are Lincoln Chafee, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Arlen Specter. The ultraliberal Chafee we can get rid of in this year's primaries, and as I have written before we'd be better off without Chafee even if an admitted Democrat were elected to replace him (although I think that Steve Laffey has a real chance of winning in November). Snowe and Collins aren't quite as reprehensible as Chafee and come from states that keep getting more and more Democrat and where it would be better difficult to find someone to beat them in the primary and then win the general election; until a conservative or at least moderate-to-conservative comes along with proven ability of winning in Maine, we may be stuck with the RINO sisters. As for Specter, we blew our chance of getting rid of him in 2004, and we're stuck with him until 2010 (assuming he lives that long). I hope that Governor Swann endorses Pat Toomey in 2010 and that we finally replace Specter with a real conservative. Among the Senators with disappointing records that fall short of RINO territory, I think the only ones worth going after are Graham and Hagel, who represent two of the most conservative states in the Union. We really can't expect to do much better than Gordon Smith in Democrat-leaning OR, and we'd need heavyweights such as Kasich or Blackwell to take down DeWine and Voinovich in GOP-leaning OH. As for McCain, I'm hoping he'll retire soon, since he'd be very tough to beat in a primary and if we do defeat him it might throw the seat to the Democrats. To have conservative control of the Senate, we need to elect Republicans from states that vote heavily GOP in presidential elections, such as ND, SD, MT, AR, NE, LA and WV. That can be accomplished by (i) nominating socially conservative, economically moderate-to-conservative candidates, (ii) convincing proven vote-getters to run against seemingly entrenched incumbents, and (iii) spending money on those races. John Thune's victory over Tom Daschle is the model to follow. We need SD Governor Rounds to take out Tim Johnson in 2008 and for both ex-Governor Schaefer (sp?) and Governor Hoeven to take out the liberal twins of ND. We need Governor Huckabee to take out Pryor in 2008 or (if he insists on running for President) Lincoln in 2010. And we need similar top-tier candidates to run in the other conservative states that keep electing liberal Democrats. Other than conservative Democrat Ben Nelson of NE, the other Democrat Senators from these states can easily be characterized as liberal by revealing to the ignorant public exactly what they voted for and against. In 2002, Saxby Chambliss used very effective 10- or 15-second ads about particular liberal votes by Max Cleland, ending with "Now why would he do that?" that convinced Georgians to throw out their conservative-talking, liberal-voting Senator. A similar strategy should work in the states I mentioned above. I think we can have a Senate with 60 Republicans, including 55+ solid conservatives, by 2010. But we need to make this a goal and stop wasting money on unnecessary or counter-productive battles. I, for one, return every donation request from the NRSC (which spends money attacking conservative challengers to RINOs such as Specter and Chafee) with a note letting them know that I'm sending my donations directly to conservative Republican Senate candidates such as Rick Santorum, Michael Steele, Stephen Laffey and Keith Butler, just as I sent donations directly to John Thune, Herman Cain and Pat Toomey last year. Conservatives need information of which battles are worth fighting and which candidates are worth backing. FR does a good job pointing out which candidates to support in certain races, but we need more. We need a 527 group such as Club for Growth, but one that will emphasize social issues such as abortion, guns and marriage in states in which this will help the GOP win (such as the states I mentioned above)---maybe call it the Club for Life---so that a single conservative candidate may emerge as the frontrunner in the GOP primary and not allow a RINO to sneak through with 30% of the vote because the conservative vote was split among 4 candidates. But most of all we need to take advantage of any little slip-up by Senate Democrats to gain these seats one by one.

[dufekin]

We don't declare politicians "RINOs" based upon a single issue, even an issue as important as immigration reform. I would elect gladly a Senator who disagrees with me on immigration but fervently advances the remainder of the conservative agenda: lower taxes, spending, entitlements, and regulations; defeating the terrorists and supporting our troops; opening domestic energy sources; clearing the Social Security pyramid scheme, etcetera.

Most "conservative" Senators identified in this article range from just slightly conservative to only moderately so; very few true conservatives inhabit the Senate.

[hedgetrimmer]

My advice?

Become a poll watcher and make sure the elections in your district are fair. Fight vote fraud, counting fraud and eligibility fraud. Get rid of voting machines. Make sure the counting machines are calibrated correctly and recheck them for accuracy after the count. Then see how big a difference it makes.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Let me try again: I object to your characterization of certain Republican Senators as RINOs. Norm Coleman of MN comes readily to mind. He has voted conservative pretty much across the board, with only a couple of exceptions. I am ecstatic that we have a pro-life, pro-gun, pro-tax cuts, pro-military, pro-WOT Republican Senator representing a state that has not voted for the Republican presidential nominee since 1972 and which held President Bush to 45.5% in 2000 and 47.6% in 2004. As Senator Gregg has been a solid conservative as well; we are very fortunate to have two good conservative Senators from a "purple" state such as NH when the state's two U.S. Representatives are RINOs.

And as bad as DeWine has been on a few issues, he is not a RINO, and certainly far less deserving of the label than the contemptible Arlen Specter. Same goes for McCain, Graham and Hagel; they have been huge disappointments on a couple of issues, but for the most part are solid conservatives.

The RINOs in the Senate, from the most liberal to the least, are Lincoln Chafee, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Arlen Specter. The ultraliberal Chafee we can get rid of in this year's primaries, and as I have written before we'd be better off without Chafee even if an admitted Democrat were elected to replace him (although I think that Steve Laffey has a real chance of winning in November). Snowe and Collins aren't quite as reprehensible as Chafee and come from states that keep getting more and more Democrat and where it would be better difficult to find someone to beat them in the primary and then win the general election; until a conservative or at least moderate-to-conservative comes along with proven ability of winning in Maine, we may be stuck with the RINO sisters. As for Specter, we blew our chance of getting rid of him in 2004, and we're stuck with him until 2010 (assuming he lives that long). I hope that Governor Swann endorses Pat Toomey in 2010 and that we finally replace Specter with a real conservative.

Among the Senators with disappointing records that fall short of RINO territory, I think the only ones worth going after are Graham and Hagel, who represent two of the most conservative states in the Union. We really can't expect to do much better than Gordon Smith in Democrat-leaning OR, and we'd need heavyweights such as Kasich or Blackwell to take down DeWine and Voinovich in GOP-leaning OH. As for McCain, I'm hoping he'll retire soon, since he'd be very tough to beat in a primary and if we do defeat him it might throw the seat to the Democrats.

To have conservative control of the Senate, we need to elect Republicans from states that vote heavily GOP in presidential elections, such as ND, SD, MT, AR, NE, LA and WV. That can be accomplished by (i) nominating socially conservative, economically moderate-to-conservative candidates, (ii) convincing proven vote-getters to run against seemingly entrenched incumbents, and (iii) spending money on those races. John Thune's victory over Tom Daschle is the model to follow. We need SD Governor Rounds to take out Tim Johnson in 2008 and for both ex-Governor Schaefer (sp?) and Governor Hoeven to take out the liberal twins of ND. We need Governor Huckabee to take out Pryor in 2008 or (if he insists on running for President) Lincoln in 2010. And we need similar top-tier candidates to run in the other conservative states that keep electing liberal Democrats.

Other than conservative Democrat Ben Nelson of NE, the other Democrat Senators from these states can easily be characterized as liberal by revealing to the ignorant public exactly what they voted for and against. In 2002, Saxby Chambliss used very effective 10- or 15-second ads about particular liberal votes by Max Cleland, ending with "Now why would he do that?" that convinced Georgians to throw out their conservative-talking, liberal-voting Senator. A similar strategy should work in the states I mentioned above.

I think we can have a Senate with 60 Republicans, including 55+ solid conservatives, by 2010. But we need to make this a goal and stop wasting money on unnecessary or counter-productive battles. I, for one, return every donation request from the NRSC (which spends money attacking conservative challengers to RINOs such as Specter and Chafee) with a note letting them know that I'm sending my donations directly to conservative Republican Senate candidates such as Rick Santorum, Michael Steele, Stephen Laffey and Keith Butler, just as I sent donations directly to John Thune, Herman Cain and Pat Toomey last year.

Conservatives need information of which battles are worth fighting and which candidates are worth backing. FR does a good job pointing out which candidates to support in certain races, but we need more. We need a 527 group such as Club for Growth, but one that will emphasize social issues such as abortion, guns and marriage in states in which this will help the GOP win (such as the states I mentioned above)---maybe call it the Club for Life---so that a single conservative candidate may emerge as the frontrunner in the GOP primary and not allow a RINO to sneak through with 30% of the vote because the conservative vote was split among 4 candidates. But most of all we need to take advantage of any little slip-up by Senate Democrats to gain these seats one by one.

[demkicker]

Excellent post, thanks!

[demkicker]

Your post gave me a headache. Remember the FR motto: Paragraphs are your friends.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"Your post gave me a headache. Remember the FR motto: Paragraphs are your friends."

---

Sorry about that. I corrected the problem as quickly as I noticed it---see my response to the headache-inducing post.

[babygene]

"We don't declare politicians "RINOs" based upon a single issue"

What's this "We" thing? Got a mouse in your pocket?

[demkicker]

Thanks! ;-)

[MHGinTN]

Corker or Bryant will replace court jester this year in Tennessee.

[RobFromGa]

Here are the 2005 ACU Ratings for the various RINOs:

SNOWE 32
COLLINS 32
Landrieu 44
DeWINE 56
SMITH 58
Nelson 60
SPECTER 63
COLEMAN 64
VOINOVICH 68
GREGG 72
STEVENS 80
McCAIN 80
HAGEL 96
GRAHAM 96
MARTINEZ 100

Coleman (who I happen to think is not a bad Senator for Minnesota at present) and Specter are basically even and both come from Purple states. Specter is just more visible. DeWine ACU rating for 2005 is lower than Specter so I don't see how you can call Specter a RINO and not DeWine.

I am in agreement with most of what you have posted, with a few exceptions: I think Laffey has very little chance in RI if he beats Chafee.

[RobFromGa]

While the Democrat Senators from the Blue and purple states may be popular, very few of them are "conservative". Only Nelson from NE and Landrieu from LA could be classified as "moderates" in my viewpoint, the rest vote like liberals. Here is the data:

Democrats from Blue or Purple states--
ACU ratings 2005

Nebraska, Nelson, 60
Louisiana, Landrieu, 44
Colorado, Salazar, 32
Arkansas, Pryor, 24
Montana, Baucus, 24
North Dakota, Conrad, 21
Florida, Nelson, 20
Indiana, Bayh, 20
West Virginia, Byrd, 20
Michigan, Levin, 17
North Dakota, Dorgan, 17
Arkansas, Lincoln, 16
Minnesota, Dayton, 16
New Mexico, Bingaman, 13
South Dakota, Tim Johnson, 13
Wisconsin, Kohl,13
Wisconsin, Feingold, 13
Michigan, Stabenow, 12
West Virginia, Rockefeller, 4
Iowa, Harkin, 4
Nevada, Reid, 4
Oregon, Wyden, 4

[RobFromGa]

Thanks for taking the time to read my analysis. I just want people to understand the task that we face as well as the timetable. Getting conservative control is not going to happen in the midterms and we could damage our prospects long-term if we don't start early in the 08 and 2010 election cycles.

Good luck with the Taylor situation.

[EverOnward]

Bookmarked for a great reference. Thank you!

[RobFromGa]

Bill Frist is NOT a conservative

[RobFromGa]

In my book, he votes to serve his own interests and is a RINO.

Craig is a staunch conservative and you disagree with him on an issue. He has a 94 ACU rating over a 25 year record. And he is 96 in both 2004 and 2005.

We just need the House to hold fast in the Joint Cmte. and the illegal vote in the Senate will not become law. The Senators knew it had to go through the Cmte.