Band of centrists forming for Senate GOP in 2010

The Hill ^ | 05/06/09 | Aaron Blake and Reid Wilson

[calcowgirl]

For those writing Republican centrism’s obituary after Arlen Specter’s party switch, holster your quills.

In fact, if the next few weeks go well for the GOP, it might pave the way for a whole new chapter in the left flank of the right-leaning party.

The month of May will be huge, recruiting-wise, for Senate Republicans, with decisions expected from several big-name candidates, including Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, Rep. Mark Kirk (Ill.) and possibly Rep. Mike Castle (Del.).

All would instantly be formidable — with Crist and Castle favored at the outset — and all are noted centrists. They would not only give Republicans a chance to win again, but give Republican centrists a chance to be a force again.

Kirk and Castle routinely rank among the top handful of GOP centrists in the House, and Crist and Ridge are already drawing heat from some conservatives for their decidedly middle-of-the-road records as governors.

But those aren’t the only potential GOP candidates with centrist credentials. Two possibilities in New York — former Gov. George Pataki and Rep. Pete King — are also strong examples, as would be former Sen. John Sununu in New Hampshire if he runs. Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina is strongly indicating that she’ll run in California, and Rep. Jim Gerlach is considering running in Pennsylvania.

Indeed, it seems almost every Republican recruit who will have any chance of winning this cycle will be a centrist.

[pgyanke]

By the way, (speaking of Kool-aid) the point of elections is not just to win. The point of elections is to allow people to choose their elected representatives. If the people abandon their principles before there is even a primary, they will never be heard.

[calcowgirl]

I'm not sure why you think my citing the most liberal bastions in the country as examples of liberalism is silly.

Then let me try one more time.

JLA said: His ideals [Reagan's] are still as much 'in vogue' today as they were in the 80s and even before that.

To which you responded: Really? Even in San Francisco and NYC?

I simply pointed out that the CITIES of NY and SF are not the sole indicator of the STATE and how it might vote, as evidenced by Reagan's sweeping success in California despite having lost the liberal bastion of San Francisco.

Understand now?

[misterrob]

Reading “The Forgotten Man” now and it talks in detail about how FDR’s supporters were so heavily influenced by Stalin’s USSR.

Then again, Hoover was pretty leftist as well.

[CharlesWayneCT]

It’s worse. If someone ran today with Reagan’s record in California and saying what Reagan said, and promising to do what Reagan actually did as President, the conservatives would run him out of town as too moderate.

[misterrob]

Huh?

[misterrob]

Please tell me who the RNC should put up who can win then.

[calcowgirl]

Here in VA the Repub challenger for Gov is being crucified in ads for not supporting the stimulus bill even though it was the right thing to do. The citizens don’t care about all of the details.

"Right thing to do?"

You're kidding, right?

You don't think those million folks that showed up for tea parties cared about all of those details?

Man.... oh, man.

[CowboyJay]

"Again I will ask"

A: Ideologically pure.

That's how the dems did it, and why they actually have leverage to get things done now that they're back in power. The pendulum will always swing back and forth between Dem and Repub. Making sure the pivot-point moves right instead of left is what will decide the long-term fate of the country.

[misterrob]

The Repubs have no message. They can’t say anything about the economy, corruption or oversight. Instead they can whine about gays which will appeal to a subset of the population but in the end its not a winning strategy.

[Mr Rogers]

Maybe if a conservative ran WITHOUT being stabbed in the back by his own party, he could win?

It would be nice to at least try it somewhere...

[what's up]

I simply pointed out that the CITIES of NY and SF are not the sole indicator of the STATE and how it might vote

Duh. I was giving these 2 liberal bastions as examples of trends in their states at the moment.

The trend in both NY and CA is Schumer and Boxer. Jindal won't win.

Do YOU understand now?

[Big_Monkey]

"I simply pointed out that the CITIES of NY and SF are not the sole indicator of the STATE and how it might vote, as evidenced by Reagan's sweeping success in California despite having lost the liberal bastion of San Francisco.

Obama carried California by over 3 million votes, in an election that saw just over 13.5 million votes cast. Are you taking the position that these "Reagan voters" from 30 years ago just sat home this election? And, they must have sat home the last 6 elections as California also has two of the most liberal Senators in the country and an ever-shrinking GOP caucus as well.

And, when cities are as densely populated as SF and especially NY, they may not be the sole indicators, but they certainly are significant indicators of how a state may vote.

[calcowgirl]

Look sweetie. I won't call you a moron if you don't call me a liar. If you're not bright enough to understand the point I made, take it out on someone who cares.

If you post lies, I'll call you on it. Nothing moronic about that.

As for the limited government, again, do a little homework. There's been plenty of polling data released the last three weeks that says CLEARLY, most Americans aren't that worried about the size of the growing government. Start with some Google - it might set you free.

Great. CBS polls should now dictate the GOP platform? They used to have a name for people that followed polls and propaganda: Useful idiots.

[misterrob]

The thread is about the Senate GOP and how they are looking to win an election cycle. Please explain how you would win seats in areas where they voting base is not a conservative demographic. You work for the GOP.

enlighten us.....

tick, tock clock is running

[calcowgirl]

If someone ran today with Reagan’s record in California and saying what Reagan said, and promising to do what Reagan actually did as President, the conservatives would run him out of town as too moderate.

Hogwash.

[Tublecane]

At some point, in the distant future, Republicans will realize that the MSM and experts in punditry NEVER suggest Democrats as a whole have to be less liberal. They may suggest it for particular candidates, especially presidential candidates. But not for the party.

At some point, Republicans will realize that the periodic calls for them to be less partisan/extreme is just a ploy to make them lose more power. Often, it’s a ploy that sucks in conservatives as well as RINOs. Because conservatives, for whatever reason, lack the liberals’ killer instincts.

[misterrob]

If you are a political party then its the ONLY thing and that is what the topic is about.

You want to discuss the value of conservatism then happy to agree with you but on another thread

[Tublecane]

“powell still thinks he’s a republican too...”

I don’t know how that’s possible, since he voted for the opposition party. Why would Republicans listen to a man who threw his support behind the enemy? All he’s gonna tell them is to be more like the enemy. And if that’s the case, why bother being a seperate party? Why not go Democrat á la Spectre.

[pgyanke]

I would say that a high number of Reagan voters did stay home last election. They had no one to vote FOR. And that, ladies and gentlemen, brings us full-circle in this conversation.

[CharlesWayneCT]

So, you think a candidate who said he would grant amnesty to illegals would get the support of people here at FR?