canlı bahis Albet poker oyna Milanobet Rulet fick geschichten instagram begeni kasma sexo relatos

A Famous Victory?

November 2nd, 2009 at 1:43 pm David Frum | 46 Comments |

| Print

Conservatives on radio and the web are preparing to hail a Doug Hoffman victory in NY-23, if it occurs, as a mighty victory for the fire-breathing style. Jonah Goldberg summed up the prevailing mood at NRO yesterday:

The story is not that the GOP is self-destructing, it is that the conventional wisdom is being shown to be ludicrous. For some time now Frank Rich, Sam Tanenhaus and countless others (including David Frum) have been arguing that the GOP is a rump party and the only way for it to survive is for it to embrace me-too Republicanism of one flavor or another. The story of all three major races (VA, NJ, and NY-23) is that this conventional wisdom was incandescently wrong and ill-advised. Hoffman and McDonnell owe their success to the support of independents (the independents all of these people said wanted moderate, Democrat-lite policies) and to Republicans determined to stay true to conservative principles. Not only was the conventional wisdom wrong, the idea that there’s a “civil war” within the GOP revolving around this argument is nonsense. The GOP is an unapologetically conservative party, providing a choice not an echo, and — horror of horrors — it’s working.

This is a deeply unrealistic assessment. In two of the three most watched races in the country, the candidate of the president’s party is running neck and neck against his main challenger – in the midst of the worst recession since World War II.

This is what you call a conservative politics that is “working”? What would it look like if conservative politics were failing?

It’s instructive to compare the elections one year into the Obama administration with the elections of 1993, one year into the Clinton administration. In 1993, Republicans narrowly defeated an incumbent governor in New Jersey and an incumbent mayor in New York City. For good measure, Republicans also won the mayoralty of Los Angeles 54-46 and won the governorship of Virginia 58-41.

On Tuesday, by contrast, we will likely see squeakers in New Jersey and the special election in New York’s 23d congressional district.

Why so much more successful 16 years ago than today?

Two reasons: programs and candidates.

In 1993, the big problems of the voting cities and states – crime, disorder and excessive local taxation – could convincingly be laid at the doors of out-of-touch Democratic administrations. Republicans offered credible alternatives: welfare reform, broken windows policing, and reform of government spending.

Today’s big problem is the economy of course. Republicans and conservatives would like to blame the recession on the president. In time perhaps that accusation will gain greater credibility. For now, though, it’s still George Bush’s recession and we remain George Bush’s party.

The second difference between 1993 and 2009 are the candidates. Back then, Republicans nominated the pro-choice Christie Todd Whitman to run in New Jersey, the former Bobby Kennedy supporter Rudy Giuliani in New York, and the pro-public transit Richard Riordan in Los Angeles – at the same time as they backed George Allen in Virginia. That’s what national governing coalitions do.

But where are the Richard Riordans of today? John Cornyn is working hard to recruit them for next year’s Senate races. But if the message of 2009 is that the Carly Fiorinas and the Charlie Crists are unwelcome in the GOP – his job is about to get a lot harder. And David Axelrod’s is about to get a lot easier.

Recent Posts by David Frum



46 Comments so far ↓

  • handworn

    Why is it that political science usually seems to amount to claiming rock-solid conclusions based on a result– usually 51%-49%, or something like that– comically within the margin of error, and based on a statistical sample of two choices?

    Today’s political scientists seem amazingly like the old joke that ends with the Polish scientist concluding, “When all four limbs are amputated, it is observed that the frog goes deaf.”

    I vote for moderates; there is not much I value less than technical party affiliation. If I were living in Hoffman’s district, words could not express my rage at the conservative extremists who took away the obvious choice by driving Scozzafava out of the race. Loud and clear this states that like winos who want your pocket change and the sight of your back, the extremists in charge of the right-wing public message want my vote and the sight of my head in the sand afterwards. Tell them this from me, David– Vladimir Putin will become a vegan flower child in Berkeley before I’ll vote for them.

  • Churl

    Frum asks, ‘This is what you call a conservative politics that is “working”? What would it look like if conservative politics were failing?’

    I’d say that conservative politics would be failing if conservatives let a Jeffords / Specter in-training go to Washington without protest.

  • ottovbvs

    ……Jonah Goldberg specializes in deeply unrealistic assessments…..in fact it’s been his meal ticket for years……..this is a solid conservative seat notwithstanding Obama won the district…….the notion that a Democrat house candidate was even in contention here would have been laughed at a year ago when the Republican took the seat with 65% of the vote. Personally I expect Hoffmann to win the seat, always have, but it’s going to leave an awful lot of blood on the carpet. Legislatively it won’t make a dimes worth of difference but is certainly going to reinforce a right wing perception that this is the way to go in future, primary any moderate Republicans and in Jonah’s words produce an unapologetically conservative party without a RINO to be seen…..I’m all for it.

  • ottovbvs

    Churl // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    “I’d say that conservative politics would be failing if conservatives let a Jeffords / Specter in-training go to Washington without protest.”

    …….Go knock yourself out Churl

  • ProfNickD

    Eh, who cares about big cities, or northeastern states for that matter. The real strength/growth in the country is in the South — after the 2010 census, FL will overtake NY as the 3rd largest state. TX already is the 2nd largest state. Electorally, AZ will be larger than MA, GA will be larger than NJ, and NC will be larger than CT, RI, and VT combined.

    I don’t get this fawning over “failed states,” so-to-speak, as in those bluest of the blue states. By definition, it’s a losing strategy to go after states in decline.

  • ProfNickD

    David said,
    “But if the message of 2009 is that the Carly Fiorinas and the Charlie Crists are unwelcome in the GOP – his job is about to get a lot harder.”

    Fiorina is probably the best that can be hoped for in CA — but there is no justification whatsoever in supporting Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio. Rubio is running ahead of Crist against Meeks.

    (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/florida/election_2010_florida_senate

    So, the “conservatism that can win again” would mean supporting Rubio, not Crist.

    Or is it the goal to not elect conservatives, even when they run better than moderates?

  • ottovbvs

    5 ProfNickD // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:24 pm

    “Eh, who cares about big cities, or northeastern states for that matter.”

    ………Er….. the Northeastern, mid Atlantic and Western seaboard states are just the financial, political and cultural center of the country…….all the Southern states with the exception of Texas and possibly Florida are all pensioners of the “failed” blue states……Florida btw with it’s growing hispanic population and the fading of Cuba as an issue is going to become a solid blue state a sort of east coast CA with which is shares many characteristics.

  • ottovbvs

    ProfNickD // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:32 pm

    ……Where would you guys be without Rasmussen…..everyone knows they’re rigged……legally rigged but rigged nevertheless……why do you think he’s not willing to publish his crosstabs …….personally I’ll be delighted if Rubio knocks off Crist……… the more absolutist and ideological the GOP becomes the better

  • sinz54

    ottovbs: the notion that a Democrat house candidate was even in contention here would have been laughed at a year ago when the Republican took the seat with 65% of the vote
    If the GOP had chosen a center-right candidate instead of Scozzafava, there would have been no conservative revolt; and the Democrat would not be in contention.

    The ONLY reason the Dem is in contention is because the GOP stupidly chose a candidate who was definitely to the left of that candidate who won with 65% of the vote in 2008. In fact, in some respects, the GOP candidate was to the left of the Dem candidate!

  • sinz54

    ProfNickD: The real strength/growth in the country is in the South — after the 2010 census, FL will overtake NY as the 3rd largest state.
    Look at the Electoral College map of 2008, weighted by electoral vote count:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cartogram-2008_Electoral_Vote.png

    As you can see, the Rust Belt + Northeast still have the bulk of the electoral votes in the United States. And those areas went strongly for Obama.

    The West Coast has 73 electoral votes, more than twice as many as TX; and they voted for Obama too.

    Just a cursory inspection of this map shows how boxed-in the GOP has become.

    The 2010 census will alter this map by a few electoral votes, but not qualitatively.

    So you tell me: How can the GOP expand its electoral vote count from 173 (which McCain won) to 270? Where does it find the other 97 electoral votes?

  • mthen

    What is the purpose of this site? Youve all but endorsed Dagget in NJ who is running only to help Corzine and now youre clearly rooting against Hoffman.

  • ottovbvs

    sinz54 // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    ……….A monkey on a stick with Republican after its name would have won in NY 23 as I pointed out, these doctrinal differences only really matter to far right zealots like you…..and the Democrat is no longer in contention now there is only one Republican.

    ……..However what the events of the past few weeks have done is put on notice every moderate Republican (no matter how loyal and of how long a service) that you had better toe the line, not upset you, Churl, Michelle Malkin or any of the wingnuts, or otherwise highly visible genuine dingbats like Palin, Toomey and Armey are going to parachute in doctrinally pure candidates to knock you off…….this penny seems to have dropped even with the masterminds at the WSJ oped page who after promoting Hoffman’s candidacy and trashing Scozza were busy talking about big tents this morning…….The search for ideological purity doesn’t concern me one bit…..have at it…..knock off Crist next….that would be a really big scalp worth having!!

  • ProfNickD

    ottobvs,

    You are only repeating the nonsense on Nate Silver’s 538 and are evidently are not aware that Rasmussen was the most accurate pollster in 2008 for the final election results.

    http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/poll%20accuracy%20in%20the%202008%20presidential%20election.pdf

    Crosstabs can be viewed as proprietary — Zogby doesn’t publish theirs either.

  • ottovbvs

    11 mthen // Nov 2, 2009 at 5:53 pm

    “What is the purpose of this site?”

    …….To address electoral reality not tell you what you want to hear……well it does some of that too.

  • ottovbvs

    ProfNickD // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    ” You are only repeating the nonsense on Nate Silver’s 538 and are evidently are not aware that Rasmussen was the most accurate pollster in 2008 for the final election results.”

    ……..Yeah yeah Nate Silver’s a doofus…….Rasmussen consistently understated Obama positions for months and then in the last 7-10 days brought his polls into line with every one elses….get real every pollster claimed he was “the most accurate”…….Zogby……now there’s another reputable pollster……these guys don’t publish for a very good reason….it would expose them to scrutiny

  • mthen

    Actually that was sort of a rhetorical question as it has become clear that the purpose of this site is to be a forum to excoriate moderates whenever they fail to criticize conservatives. What I want to from Republican a site is that they dont root against Republicans be they liberal, centrist, or conservative. As someone who has happily voted several times for Lincoln Chafee I feel I have the street cred to ask such a thing. I do congratulate you for not declaring right away that Im a Beck-loving-extremist-rightwing-nutjob although I can tell you kinda wanted to. I think you might be growing as a person.

  • sinz54

    ottovbs: far right zealots like you
    So now I’m a “far right zealot”? After all the right-wingers here have told me I’m a liberal who belongs in the Dem party?

    By definition, anyone who dares to oppose Obama’s agenda from his right (where most of the nation is, btw) is a “far right zealot” to you Dems. Just like anyone who opposes Sarah Palin is a “socialist” as far as her supporters are concerned.

    So that makes me a “far right socialist.” :-)

  • ottovbvs

    mthen // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:22 pm

    ” I do congratulate you for not declaring right away that Im a Beck-loving-extremist-rightwing-nutjob although I can tell you kinda wanted to.’

    ……..Are you a mind reader then?……You need to be able to differentiate between a rhetorical and personal comment

  • sinz54

    ottovbs: However what the events of the past few weeks have done is put on notice every moderate Republican (no matter how loyal and of how long a service) that you had better toe the line, not upset you, Churl, Michelle Malkin or any of the wingnuts
    Only this morning, you and “balconesfault” nodded sagely that all these three elections are turning on local issues and they don’t have any national significance.

    BTW, I wasn’t a backer of Hoffman. I had no preference between Hoffman and Scozzafava. I would have been perfectly content to see Scozzafava win the seat. I would be content to see Hoffman win the seat. I don’t care as long as Pelosi doesn’t get to control the seat.

    Let me repeat: If the GOP can pick up 25-30 seats in the House, I don’t care if they’re moderates or conservatives. I don’t care if their Northerners or Southerners. I don’t care if they come from urban districts or rural districts. Just as long as they remember not to vote for any of Pelosi’s bills. That will stop Pelosi cold. Beyond that, they can do whatever they want.

  • ottovbvs

    sinz54 // Nov 2, 2009 at 7:10 pm

    “Only this morning, you and “balconesfault” nodded sagely that all these three elections are turning on local issues and they don’t have any national significance.”

    …….Au contraire….I sagely and correctly said VA and NJ are turning on local issues (I think balcone’sfault said the same but he’ll have to confirm)……god knows what issues NY 23 is turning on other than it’s traditional allegiance to Republicans at the house level which have now been clarified by Scozza dropping out……..I said whoever won NY 23 it had no legislative importance which is rather different…….obviously it’s going have considerable impact internally in the GOP…….can’t you tell the difference or don’t you read/remember things correctly?

    …….dream on for 2010……there’s zero sign of a Republican wave building…..they are totally mistrusted….there isn’t the remotest chance of them taking the house back as things now stand although they might pick up a handful of seats say 5 or 6…….in the senate if the economy is in full recovery mode which I expect it to be (I know you hope otherwise) there’s a real chance the Democrats could win 3-4 more senate seats……there are nine Republican retirements and I don’t really see any Democrats at that much risk even Dodd and Reid will make it back……so by all means takes Crist’s scalp

  • balconesfault

    Only this morning, you and “balconesfault” nodded sagely that all these three elections are turning on local issues and they don’t have any national significance.

    There is a big difference between opining on whether the outcome of these elections will say anything significant with respect to the mood of the electorate going into 2010 … and whether the conduct of the campaigns will say anything significant with respect to the intra-party political fights going into 2010.

    After all, the latter contention is the basic point of why challenge candidates were offered in NJ and NY23 – to drive the GOP nominations and finances next year to the right.

  • ProfNickD

    Sinz54,

    I was referring to after the 2010 Census — “red” states will likely pick-up 13-14 electoral votes from “blue” states — a roughly 27 electoral vote swing based on population growth alone. (Incidentally, TX will likely pick-up 4 Congressional districts.)

    http://www.polidata.org/census/st007nca.pdf

    And, the trend is accelerating. Northeastern states lost only 12 seats in the 1990 and 2000 Census’ combined. In 2010 alone they will lose more than that.

    The key is to win back the complete south (FL, NC andVA) — that alone will win back 55 electoral votes, aside from these states’ increases after 2010. Losing IN(wtf?), OH, NV and CO will not likely happen again if the the next GOP presidential nominee is a Reagan conservative (reduced spending, lower taxes, less regulation, traditional values[pro-gun/death penalty/traditional marriage, etc.], strong defense).

    And that’s 270+.

    Once the GOP buys into increased spending, not cutting taxes, more regs on business, anthropogenic global warming, same-sex marriage, gun control, and all the other liberal issues they can forget those states in the Midwest and West… and it won’t make them any more competitive in the northeast as McCain, who is a believer in global warming, learned.

    The northeast can be ignored by the GOP, now and forevermore, if population growth trends remain and if they stick to the “normal” Reagan conservatism.

  • KL7212

    >The key is to win back the complete south (FL, NC andVA) — that alone will win back 55 electoral votes, aside from these states’ increases after 2010. Losing IN(wtf?), OH, NV and CO will not likely happen again if the the next GOP presidential nominee is a Reagan conservative (reduced spending, lower taxes, less regulation, traditional values[pro-gun/death penalty/traditional marriage, etc.], strong defense).

    This assessment, to put it bluntly, is assinine.

    The fact that the population is “shifting” towards “Red” states in the South is more than balanced out by the fact that the Republican base is increasingly reliant on rural areas, which are in decline, and is losing support in many “high growth” states like Colorado, California, Nevada and New Mexico because of demographic shifts due in part to Hispanic immigration and the arrival of “snowbirds” from the frost belt. Florida, once solidly Republican is now a toss-up state in Presidential elections. Ohio is losing, not gaining, population while gaining seats in the Deep South does nothing to offset Republican problems in the rest of the country. Even after 2010, Democrats will still have won 5 of the 7 largest states in five straight Presidential election cycles. Illinois, California, Pennsylvania, Michigan and New York will still be solidly “Blue” and still count for huge percentage of Electoral Votes in 2012.

    The drift of suburban voters to the Democrats in the Northeast and the populous mid-West has now started to show itself outside of the Rust Belt. If “current trends continue” how long will be before states like Georgia and Texas become competitive again for Democrats?

    Building a national coalition that is sensitive to regional and cultural differences is critical to the success of both parties. The Democrats seem to get this, why don’t we?

    Oh, and Ronald Reagan is dead and has been for some time. 1984 is as meaningful as 1884 at this point. This pathetic cult of personality would be laughable if it weren’t so sad. Besides, Reagan’s best pupils have been Democrats. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are his best these last 20 years.

  • Oldskool

    Regardless of the inside baseball, it’s great fun to watch. Similar to Dems in the 1980′s… and 1990′s come to think of it. And like those Dems, I’m hoping for more overreach from the Right. It almost seems to be required before a party is able to notice they’re no longer inside the airplane and the ground is approaching fast.

  • balconesfault

    It almost seems to be required before a party is able to notice they’re no longer inside the airplane and the ground is approaching fast.

    Or perhaps more apt – last night I was out for dinner with a friend who is a recreational pilot (he also used to be a California Republican, but that’s another story). We were discussing the need for having faith in flying by instruments (he’s also a diving instructor and we started by talking about the need to teach “basics” like how to read a compass and map before relying on GPS).

    Anyway, long story short, he talked about how a pilot can be literally flipped upside down in inclement weather, and descending quickly, and be convinced that he’s actually rightside up because the g-forces from the descent simulate gravity so well.

    A self-deception that usually continues right up to the moment that ground/water is sighted … at which point it’s a little late to do much besides make proper final exclamations.

    (sadly, this is likely what happened with JFK Jr. – much less morose when used as an analogy than as a real occurrance)

  • divinitas

    It’s amazing what strong emotions this race brings to republicans and conservatives. It’s like watching a fight between between blue dog democrats and progressives. I’ve read this site for a few months now and didn’t feel compelled to write til now.

    There are way TOO many outsiders poking their nose into this race. The time and money spent on NY-23 should of been spent convincing Americans of an alternative healthcare plan that will provide them with some security or on how to get their jobs back – what a stupid distraction!

    However, many of the earlier statements regarding the demographics of the country are true. Urban areas are becoming more dense and with that a tendency to be more democratic, diverse and socially liberal. I don’t think this should be ignored.

  • Socrates

    In an off year, these races mean as much as or as little as the pundits and the spinmeisters make them out to be. They give people something to pontificate. By this time next year, who knows what will happen. A year in politics is a long time. Just go back to November 2007 and re-read the old newspaper. The pundits were certainly singing a different song then what happened in November 2008.

    This also goes for the GOP infighting in NY23. It too will pass. Next year, when hundred of races are on, who knows what will happen.

    Meanwhile, people go on with their life! Yet, for the life of me, I don’t know why we care so much about future predictions, knowing that guesses of the experts are just about as good as ours.

  • cicerorising

    I am really confused David- so maybe you can explain something to me.

    You write that the GOP did so much better in 1993 because it:

    1) Barely won the NJ Gub race with a pro-choice moderate C. Whitman over a Dem incumb.

    2) Won a huge victory in the Virginia Gub race

    3) Won the NYC Mayoral election.

    and

    4) Won the LA Mayoral election.

    Now it looks as if tomm. the GOP/conservative movement, will:

    1) Narrowly defeat a Dem incumb. in the NJ Gub. election, but this time with a pro-life Republican.

    2) Massively win the Virginia Gub election

    3) Win the NYC Mayoral election

    4) Win a special election in a Republican district that was recently carried by Obama, despite the fact that the candidate (Hoffman) was not an official party candidate.

    and finally

    5) Come much closer to victory in an overwhelmingly democrat district in California.

    But because Tony Villers had no real opposition (hardly surprising considering he is the first modern Hispanic mayor of Los Angeles) in his re-elect campaign (despite it being a non-partisan election) this somehow means that the GOP is doomed.

    ???

    Come on.

  • NY-23 « Benighted Comment

    [...] PDRTJS_settings_322334_post_1250 = { "id" : "322334", "unique_id" : "wp-post-1250", "title" : "NY-23", "item_id" : "_post_1250", "permalink" : "http%3A%2F%2Fbenightedcomment.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F11%2F03%2Fny-23%2F" } From Mark Steyn: Incidentally, it’s not just the Associated Press that’s pre-emptively dismissing any Republican victories on the morrow as a mere dead-cat bounce on the plummet into the abyss. So is the proprietor of the former New Majority. [...]

  • Churl

    ottovbs, you sound somewhat bitter right now. Wait for a while before you get too upset. Shortage of military absentee ballots in VA may help your candidate for governor, SEIU and some ghostly partner of ACORN are fiddling votes in NY-23, and the NJ electoral technicians are doubtless working their wonders. Your guys may win yet.

    Keep the faith!

  • ProfNickD

    Ken Longo,
    Illinois, California, Pennsylvania, Michigan and New York will still be solidly “Blue” and still count for huge percentage of Electoral Votes in 2012.

    You evidently didn’t read what I posted, likely because you are one of those who have faith in the magical importance of the northeast.

    These places are dying.

    TX, FL, GA, VA is where the growth is — and they never were “reliably Republican.” They’ve been Democratic through their entire history until the conservative/Reagan Revolution.

  • ottovbvs

    Churl // Nov 3, 2009 at 9:01 am

    “ottovbs, you sound somewhat bitter right now.”

    ……Your powers of invention remain in full vigor I see.

  • ottovbvs

    32 franco 2 // Nov 3, 2009 at 9:06 am

    ” I see little has changed here except that otto still feels the need to spew his leftist bile and apparently has no life .”

    ……In your absense you missed I was MIA for a month having no life in Italy and the UK……..certainly nothing has changed with you……you’ve still got your complex about David…..but then nothing is going to change because this site essentially performs the function of the argument room in that Monty Python skit……do you want a $5 argument or a $20 one?…….now I have to leave you to waste more of my life getting my boat out of the water.

  • sinz54

    divinitas: Urban areas are becoming more dense and with that a tendency to be more democratic, diverse and socially liberal.
    Urban areas are not becoming more dense. Large swaths of Detroit have become virtual ghost towns.

    Suburban areas have grown enormously (horrifying those liberal thinkers who detest “suburban sprawl”; they should think about where their votes come from). And suburbia, once a Republican stronghold, has become a Democratic stronghold. Why? Because suburbanites tend to be fairly libertarian in their outlook; they moved there from the cities to have a home with some privacy and land they could call their own. The Religious Right, with its advocacy of “Christian values” supported by law and Constitutional Amendments, is antithetical to this suburban libertarianism. The GOP could win those areas back, if it sounded more libertarian and less traditionalist. But the GOP doesn’t have many such candidates.

  • sinz54

    ProfnickD: TX, FL, GA, VA is where the growth is — and they never were “reliably Republican.”
    TX, GA, and VA were all Republican strongholds until Bush’s failures chased away many voters in VA. FL, while not quite a Republican stronghold, certainly leaned Republican because of the Cuban-Americans there.

    But picking up some 12 electoral votes in 2012 won’t help us much. In 2012, if Obama holds on to all the states he won in 2008, he will still win by 140 electoral votes.

    At that rate, it could take 30 years before the electoral votes of the Northeast become so depleted that the GOP could win mostly by the votes of the South.

    Besides, you’ve also ignored the huge influx of Hispanic voters into the Southwest and West, who mostly vote Dem and are threatening to pull those states into the Dem camp. Bush tried to appeal to Hispanic voters with immigration reform. The right wing of his own party, much of which opposes even LEGAL immigration of Hispanics because they know those Hispanics will vote against them, shot down Bush’s immigration reform.

  • sinz54

    balconesfault: whether the conduct of the campaigns will say anything significant with respect to the intra-party political fights going into 2010.
    Even if the GOP had been a little smarter, and picked a center-right candidate instead of Scozzafava, challenges to other GOP “RINOs” were coming. I read RedState.com and I can see what they’re planning, regardless of what happens in NY-23.

    Long before NY-23 became a big fight, the RedStaters were planning to back Marco Rubio to challenge Charlie Crist in FL. They’re also targeting Mark Kirk in IL. And those will be bigger problems for the GOP than NY-23.

    If Crist beats Rubio fair and square in the primary, will the RedStaters close ranks behind Crist and work to defeat the Dem in November 2010? From what they’ve written, I expect that most (though not all) of them will. The FL TeaPartiers, on the other hand, have already said that they will not. They have said that they would prefer that any moderate Republicans lose, even if it means that the Dems win more seats and governorships.

  • sinz54

    ottovbs: I was MIA for a month having no life in Italy and the UK
    Shame on you for going AWOL!

    A true political junkie would have taken his laptop with him, found an ISP in UK and Italy, and connected to New Majority from there.

  • Reason60

    Richard Riordan, our former mayor of LA, exemplifies why the Tea Party will be a trainwreck on the GOP; mayors by job description have to be pragmatic managers- you can huff and puff all day about John Adams and Ayn Rand, but at the end of the day, the trash needs to be picked up, and potholes filled.
    This requires a working coalition of diverse and parochial interests, mutual backscratching, and the messy muddy workings of politics.

    The Tea Party purity drive just doesn’t work in a managerial situation- even if magically half the nation’s mayors and governors became Tea Party conservatives tomorrow, they would still have to contend with this same equation; and either they would compromise and become centrists, or get taken out with the trash at the next election cycle.

  • franco 2

    “deeply unrealistic”…. projection David, projection. You are desperate to spin this by selectively characterizing Republicans of yore…I.E Giuliani a former Bobby Kennedy supporter! It is not just grasping at straws – it is grasping at the memory of straws long past… I too was a Kennedy supporter at one time… I also at one time could not add subtract and divide. If Bobby Kennedy were alive today statists like Frum would decry them as too conservative and out of the mainstream claiming that his zealous overreach got his own brother killed by the mafia or some such thing.

    Incidentally I just voted for a statist Republican (and a fat guy to boot) so don’t y’all say I’m not a “team player”. Chris Christie is definitely an improvement over Corzine and in this case I’m not going to throw away my vote on a third party.

    Why is Frum mum on the endorsement by the Republican star/nominee of the 23rd endorsing the Democrat? No POSSIBLE way to spin that even for a Yale poli-sci grad with a propensity to fudge and distort. It has to be embarrassing to him and other statist Republicans who have to witness with us the ideological depravity that infects the R party . More Colin Powell Republicanism….endorse Democrats and then lecture the rest of us…

  • franco 2

    Mark Steyn in The Corner writes:

    This is where David Frum & Co miss the point: I’m all for growing the base, expanding the coalition, etc. But the Scozzafava candidacy was a characteristic example of the tin-eared faux-sophistry that does nothing but blow your own foot off. It’s a shame over 900 grand’s worth of good people’s donations at a time of recession should have to be tossed out of a moving vehicle on the Adirondack Northway to demonstrate the obvious point that nobody needs Scozzafava Republicanism.

  • balconesfault

    If Bobby Kennedy were alive today statists like Frum would decry them as too conservative and out of the mainstream claiming that his zealous overreach got his own brother killed by the mafia or some such thing.

    thanks for sharing your … ummm … opinion

  • Churl

    reason60 says, “…but at the end of the day, the trash needs to be picked up, and potholes filled.
    This requires a working coalition of diverse and parochial interests, mutual backscratching, and the messy muddy workings of politics.”

    Well, perhaps in Chicago or LA you need to deal with diverse and parochial interests and scratch backs to get the trash picked up or potholes filled. This not everywhere the case.

  • franco 2

    You’re welcome balcone anytime…What’s yours? Oh, everyone who is the least bit to the right of you is a raving maniac, I forgot…

  • balconesfault

    Oh, everyone who is the least bit to the right of you is a raving maniac, I forgot…

    Nice strawman. But no, there are many who are to the right of me who I consider intelligent actors, valuable in any policy discussion.

    Unfortunately, these days those same people are largely being expelled from the Republican Party as RINOs. Often, it’s simply one position they may hold … be it being pro-choice … or favoring government action to slow the emissions of CO2 … or being in favor of raising taxes in some forms as part of a strategy to reduce the deficit … and suddenly they are now on the wrong side of a line.

    There are no doubt some who disagree with me on pretty much everything who aren’t maniacs, for the simple reason that they start with a different set of presuppositions – but they are internally consistent within a framework, and modify their beliefs to fit evidence presented to them, and don’t go on the attack when contradictory evidence is presented, but rather weigh it to consider whether they believe it, and how it may affect their original beliefs.

    That’s acting rationally. Doesn’t mean that I’ll agree with them at the end of the day, but I can at least see that they got somewhere out of logic, and not simply reactionary thinking.

  • sinz54

    franco 2: Incidentally I just voted for a statist Republican (and a fat guy to boot) so don’t y’all say I’m not a “team player”. Chris Christie is definitely an improvement over Corzine and in this case I’m not going to throw away my vote on a third party.
    I assume folks like you favor Rubio over Crist, right?

    OK, let’s suppose Crist manages to beat Rubio and win the primary fair and square. Will you close ranks behind Crist and work to get him elected in November 2010? Or will you stalk off in a huff and refuse to support him because he wasn’t your guy?

  • sinz54

    franco 2:

    The reason I asked you that question, is because the FL Tea Partiers already said that if Crist wins the primary, they won’t support him. In fact, they actually said that if Crist wins the primary, they hope he loses to the Dem in November 2010.