Posted on 09/04/2001 8:01:56 AM PDT by Hugh Akston
One area of agreement for nearly all conservatives, however, is disdain for the positions that dominate the modern Democrat party. The Democrats have come to represent a cadre of liberal causes and special interests, the erosion of the precepts of the United States constitution, socialism and wealth redistribution, forfeiture of national sovereignty, institutionalized racism and preferences, an ever expanding regulation state, confiscatory taxation, pork barrel spending, gun confiscation, and PC limitations on speech.
Even the most divergent of conservative factions agree more with each other than they do with the liberal Democrats.
A cat fight that has long raged in conservatism is between those who believe the best strategy is to work within the Republican Party, even if this means compromising on certain positions, and those that feel the Republican Party has adopted too many similar positions to the Democrats as to warrant their support. Typically, those cats in the latter segment have gone their own directions instead of in one direction, spreading their support between the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, and the Reform Party. Even those who agree on a tactic can disagree on how to implement that tactic.
Given all of this, conservatives would be wise to not squander opportunities to find agreement and work together. The deepest divisions and bitterness can be healed, somewhat, by working together to a common goal. Sadly, one such opportunity may be slipping away right now.
Bret Schundler, a conservative Mayor of Jersey City, is running for Governor of New Jersey. Schundler defeated long time GOP establishment man Bob Franks for the nomination in what was acknowledged to be a surprising result.
For conservatives who think that the "powers that be" within the Republican Party do not merit support, a Schundler victory in November would provide a validation of their belief that a conservative can win anywhere, without having to abdicate principles. The excuse for running candidates such as Jim Jeffords or Lincoln Chafee that only certain (liberal) types of candidates can win in certain areas would be shown to be a lie.
For those who believe that conservatism can best be advanced within the Republican Party, Schundler would be the poster child for how it can be achieved. Schundler ran for a lower office, demonstrated his ability to win elections, gathered experience, and then worked within the system to topple the establishment. As Ronald Reagan did, he retained the defeated party men, so as not to alienate their supporters, as well as to hopefully show them a thing or two. (Reagan had approached Gerald Ford to be his running mate despite their ideological differences. When that proved untenable, he turned to his primary opponent, George H. W. Bush. Bret Schundler kept Bob Franks on as a senior advisor, and also brought in another moderate establishment man, former Governor Tom Kean.)
Yet, as with Reagan, his positions and principles remained unchanged.
Just as he provides a way for those warring conservative (and Republican) factions to come together, he provides a common ground where those on opposite sides of the current fracture in the pro-life movement can work together and mend fences. Schundler is pro-life without qualification, helping reinforce the notion that the Republican Party is home to those who value life, even at the earliest of stages. Even as 'Keyesters' and 'Bushies' argue back and forth over which side is helping or hurting the pro-life movement, there should be no disagreement that for pro-life advocates: a Bret Schundler victory in November would be a Godsend.
Should Schundler win, abortion politics nationwide would be transformed nearly overnight. Right now, there are Republicans in both the House and Senate who lack the confidence in the public support for the right position to actually act according to principle; like it or not, politicians will be politicians. If an unabashed pro-life candidate can win in arguably the most pro-abortion state in the union, think of the impact it will have on the wavering Republican politicians. Would the splinter group "Republicans For Choice", which features non-Republican James Jeffords on their front page, be able to lead off their "about" page with the assertion that "ABORTION IS A LOSING ISSUE FOR THE GOP"? (As a sidebar, I will concede that the answer to that rhetorical is probably yes, since they have no qualms with being disingenuous, as the linked "about" page gives testimony. On it, they claim that 71% of Republicans nationwide are pro-choice, which is obvious nonsense given that a recent Gallup poll shows that just as many Americans consider themselves pro-life as there are that considers themselves pro-choice. That said, if they do continue to claim this, it will just further undermine their own credibility.)
Think about the blow to the confidence of the demagogues of the left if they know that demonizing a pro-life candidate as being an extremist fell on deaf ears in New Jersey, of all places. "My feeling on this is that there are hot-button issues like abortion and gun control," said Debra Wachspress, president of the Million Mom March New Jersey State Council. "Those issues really tend to excite people a lot." Would Ms. Wachspress be trumpeting that opinion after a Schundler victory?
For all conservatives and Republicans, Schundler represents the only credible way at this juncture to defeat yet another doctrinaire tax-and-spend liberal Democrat, Jim McGreevey. At this juncture, the Schundler candidacy is having some difficulty. The three prongs of his difficulty are polls, cash, and buzz. All are correctable, especially should concerned conservatives put aside their differences and personal agendas to rally behind him.
An August 26th Star-Ledger/Eagleton-Rutgers Poll showed Schundler lagging McGreevey by 19 points, while a similar Quinnipiac poll put the margin at 20 points. Given these discouraging numbers, why should anyone believe that Schundler could overtake his rival?
First, Schundler has shown a propensity for overcoming significant deficits in a hurry. A mere eight weeks before the Republican primary, Schundler had trailed Bob Franks by 26 points. Franks had spent months hammering Schundler as an extremist, much as McGreevey has been doing since the primary. This tactic exploded on Franks when they debated, since what the voters saw was a calm, reasonable, personable man of conviction and not the ranting extremist they had been told to expect. The final margin for Schundler in the primary was 14 points.
Second, the recent history of New Jersey gubernatorial elections shows a pattern of volatility. In September of 1997, Governor Christie Todd Whitman appeared to be cruising to a comfortable victory over the same Jim McGreevey, as a Quinnipiac poll put the gap between the candidates at 15 points. Whitman did hold on to win, but only by 22,000 votes. Four years earlier, mid-summer polls showed the then little-known Whitman to be over 20 points behind incumbent Governor Jim Florio, a Democrat of the same tax-and-spend variety as McGreevey. Two polls, taken near the eve of the election, showed that Florio would easily win re-election, with Whitman behind by 9 points in one and 11 points in another. And 12 years prior to that, Tom Kean overcame a summertime 17 point deficit to win election to his first term. New Jersey voters are notorious for deciding late in the game where their votes will go.
Third, the polls that show Schundler badly trailing McGreevey also demonstrate that the New Jersey voters simply are not familiar with these candidates. Despite being a candidate for Governor only 4 years ago, 28% of the respondents to the Rutgers poll were undecided when asked if they had a favorable or unfavorable view of McGreevey. Schundler is even more of an unknown in the minds of voters, with 41% having no opinion. The gap in the candidates' unfavorable ratings, which more times than not gives a more accurate picture of a given race, shows Schundler trailing by a mere 7 points. This is well within the margin of error (remember, the margin of error on a poll is per-candidate, so that when looking at the gaps between candidates one must double the margin of error).
During the Republican convention, George W. Bush was enjoying a lead of around 15 points according to most polls. At this time, advisor Karl Rove was telling party insiders that those numbers should be ignored, because Gore's numbers were artificially low. He stated that Democrat voters, who the polls showed were ambivalent towards their candidate, would "come home" by Election Day. The Rutgers poll shows that Schundler is pulling in only 70% of Republicans at this juncture. As Republicans "come home", which they invariably will as the debates and heavy rotation of campaign ads occur, the margin between the two will close considerably. Throw in the fact that 32% off all independents consider themselves completely undecided right now, and one can see that this is still a very winnable election for Schundler.
While there is nothing that conservative activists nationwide can do to directly move poll numbers, money is a completely different matter. Schundler lags there as well. On August 13th the McGreevey camp reported having raised approximately $3 million, while as of August 30th Schundler had yet to crack the $2 million barrier. This is more problematic than the deficit in the polling numbers, due to the high cost of advertising in New Jersey. There may be no market more expensive to buy advertising in than the metropolitan New York area, which along with also-expensive Philadelphia form the primary media market for New Jersey candidates. A sluggish economy makes raising money more difficult, particularly for Republican candidates. Despite the media-fed common perception that the Republican Party is the party of the wealthy, donations to Republicans nationwide generally come not from the wealthy, but from middle class voters. Per-capita donations to the Bush and Gore campaigns, for example, showed that the Democrat got more per-donor, despite the overwhelming advantage Bush had in overall campaign donations. Schundler needs donations, and he needs them from all quarters.
This is one area in which different sparring factions within conservatism could come together and work towards a common goal. President Bush showed himself to be a formidable fundraiser during the campaign, and his abilities in this regard would be well put to use for Schundler. The administration has begun to do their part, with Vice-President Cheney appearing at a July 30th fundraiser. Supporters of President Bush would do well to encourage even more action in this regard. Similarly, Dr. Alan Keyes has been active recently, holding a fundraiser in Texas and appearing in various venues to advance his conservative causes. His eloquence and fiery oration would be invaluable in helping to encourage donations to the Schundler campaign, should he choose to do so. Friends and supporters of the efforts of Dr. Keyes regarding the pro-life movement would do well to encourage him to put his talents to use in raising funds and generating excitement for a man who holds the same pro-life positions, without qualifications.
The final area of concern is regarding nationwide buzz. Despite the fact that this election will be, perhaps, the highest profile battle on election day 2001, and despite the ramifications a Schundler victory would have on the entire dynamics of the 2002 elections, grass-roots conservatives have done surprisingly little to create an atmosphere of excitement for the Schundler campaign. Instead, they have been getting distracted on issues that will still be there after November's Election Day has passed. For example, on conservative forum Free Republic, there have been only 20 threads regarding Bret Schundler and his campaign since the start of August, with none generating 100 replies. In comparison, there have been over 30 such threads centered on Dr. Keyes, with many of them generating several hundreds of replies, despite the fact that he is not running for anything this November. There have been over 100 threads debating embryonic stem cell research in this time, showing the passion that pro-lifers bring to the subject, yet the unabashedly pro-life Schundler is being drowned out. It would seem that priorities are out of kilter, with conservatives looking to find ways of arguing and cutting each other down, than finding common causes to advance.
Lucianne.com shows a similar dearth of conversation regarding the Schundler campaign. It is not just that it is more "fun" to debate than it is to agree, either. Discussion on forums such as these regarding Gary Condit, where there is near unanimous condemnation of the man, flows incessantly. This misplacement of priorities has to cause much joy for Jim McGreevey, the DNC, and crew.
As with the campaign contribution issue, grass roots conservatives can make a difference here as well. They can seek out information regarding the campaign and make it available for discussion. They can spend less time arguing divisively, and more time writing letters to the editor, calling in to C-SPAN, encouraging their local Republicans to assist in fundraising, and any other ways they can think about generate buzz. They can follow the suggestions offered by the Schundler campaign itself. While this is a New Jersey election, it is the closest thing to a national referendum this fall, and should be treated as such, lest an important opportunity be squandered: the opportunity to till conservative common ground in the Garden State.
That's Exit148! Sorry, Exit148, I don't mean to speak for you. However, since you're "in with the in crowd", you came to mind. Are Pete Kessler and RepubMommy still volunteering for Schundler?
I flagged StarFan because she is the leader of the Tri-State FR chapter and can contact FReepers in CT, NJ, & NY who may be willing to help out.
Go Bret Go!
(Gulp) If out-of-state FReepers who want to help out let me know what type of help they want to provide, then I will forward the info to you and you can forward it to the appropriate parties. OK?
FReepers interested in Bret's campaign: See Post #23 (above) for evilC's link to other Bret FR threads.
I'm really trying not to be a one-issue voter here, but it's a little disappointing that Mr. Schundler hasn't been more publicly supportive of rolling back some of these draconian gun laws we have here. I guess taking on one hot button at a time is enough to handle, and I really do have to admire him for sticking his neck out on the abortion issue in a moderately-to-extremely liberal media bastion, knowing full well what the consequences will be in editorial columns everywhere.
Thanks for the flag!
Sounds like a ringing endorsement to me. Jim McGreevey- He Can't Be All Bad! (Can He?)
I'm interested in helping out in whatever way I can, but I'd obviously prefer contacting voters in some way. But I really think for this to work one of the NJ FReepers needs to be a POC. Last year n.y.muggs set up a time and place and provided the materials, and we all arrived. If everyone just does their own thing, I really don't think we're using the power of FR to our advantage. Just my two cents.
I freemailed Exit148 only yesterday asking what we could do to help. Thus far we seem to have four Tri-State Freepers VERY interested in helping and I'm sure we can get more, with some advance notice. Please ping me once a weekend is selected. I'd be thrilled to hand out flyers, stuff envelopes, make calls or whatever! In the meantime, a donation will be sent ASAP.
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.