Posted on 05/09/2014 5:19:53 AM PDT by 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.
You wanna check Karl Rove for polyps while you’re up there?
Barrone is pretty good and I agree with him more than not.
His implication that Rand Paul is a TEA Party favorite is incorrect. Rand shot himself in the foot with his stance on amnesty and views that reflect his dad’s (Ron). Likewise, Rubio did the same regarding amnesty (and is ineligible to be Prez; having been born to parents of foreign citizenship).
Exactly, it doesn’t matter which party the big government leftist is running for .
“If they want to run RINOs they should run them in those democrat district where they might do some actual good.”
What is the matter, Teaparty candidates and/or Conservative candidates too chicken to run against a democrat incumbent ?
To which someone always asks “You really don’t see any difference between democrats and republicans?”
To which I say, no they are each bad in their own unique ways.
Like I said, a republican is challenging for the Dingell seat without party backing.
Low do you need a flashlight zotbait?
GOPe WANTS their second-tier power all to themselves.
They aren’t equipped to use principles, morals or conservatism to win anything but their own perverted little constituencies that seem content to be lied to twice a year about their representatives show votes and treachery.
They don’t want to be in charge; they don’t want to rock the boat and upset their comfy, dissembling, appeasing traitorous lives. They’ll fight tooth and nail for it, to the bitter end, but it won’t be against Democrats, it’s the conservatives (Tea Party, for want of a better name) who is their enemy.
Dumping money in a race so that they can control that person if elected is why they are doing this crap. Rove and his ilk are nothing but losers.
Like Delaware in 2010, right?
GOP voters got their ideologically sound nominee. Unfortunately, in their rush to nominate a true Conservative and destroy a RINO they neglected to properly vet their choice. Who turned out to be both susceptable to personal attacks (charges of involvement in witchcraft) and and too inexperienced to counter those personal attacks effectively, that prevented any sort of discussion or debate on actual issues.
If pointing that simple political reality out makes me a “boot licker” so be it. Guys like central_va (some of whom I suspect are really just Soros-paid trolls who come out here to stir up dissention) can sit around griping at the unfairness and immorality/unconstitutionalty of the latest Liberal policy implementation while the country burns down around them. All the while accusing anyone who does differentlt of being a RINO/GOPe bootlicker.I prefer to be out at least trying to fight the fire.
People who can win? Like Dole, McCain and Romney?
Lol
Or Virginia where an actual conservative wins the nomination and gets the back of the hand from the GOPe establishment which results in the Democrats winning a race that the Republicans could have won if they had put as much into it as last time around.
Very true.
VA was winnable by Cuccinelli. I’m not arguing for GOPe candidates, I’m arguing for some pragmatism in understanding that a GOPe candidate who can win in a Blue state/district is still better than a Dem candidate who WILL win if the only Tea Party criteria is ideological purity.
I don’t know anything about Delaware or who runs there but I can tell you that Terri Land is running in Michigan without tea party opposition because she’s acceptable to both tea party and establishment.
GOPe candidates “who can win” shouldn’t get any conservative votes at all
If it makes you feel better to ride a RINO over the progressive cliff so be it.
About Senator Paul, show me he voted for amnesty for the illegals. You can't because he didn't. Maybe you believe supporting legal immigration is the same as supporting amnesty. It is not. I am a naturalized citizen (1977) who came here legally in 1966 and believe that anyone who wants to come here should do so legally and not sneak in.
The way the GOPe left Cuccinelli hanging out to dry was a travesty. All of you GOPe bootlickers can delude yourself, but yo are being used - yet again. Where else you gonna go right?
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.
We got a winnah! Post of the day.
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.