|
2006-05-17 Home Front: Politix
|
|
A practical guide for frustrated conservatives
|
by Jim Geraghty, National Review's "TKS" Blog.
Mr. Geraghty has written a series of very intelligent posts responding to the "I'm frustrated about immigration/pork/_____(insert issue here) and so I'm gonna sit out the '06 election and teach those bums a lesson" meme that's been popping up among conservatives in the blogosphere, including many Rantburgers. Sorry for the long post, but this is good and important stuff and can't really be edited down any more without losing its impact.
From the first post in the series
. . . put me down as one of those guys who cannot comprehend the argument that conservatives ought to sit out this election to punish the GOP so that theyll learn a lesson and get better/more conservative in the future.
To advocates of this position, I must respectfully ask
are you out of your flippin mind? By what logic does a constituency become more influential and powerful by becoming less active, and demonstrating less capability to turn out the vote and influence elections?
Lets say Congressman Tom Tancredo represents your views on illegal immigration. Youre angry at the GOP leadership for not espousing his positions; youve concluded that they dont listen to him. Do you really think the ball will get moved in your direction by throwing the party that has Tancredo out, and replacing it with the party that doesnt have a Tancredo figure in it at all?
Do you really think a Democratic Congress will get tough on illegal immigration? . . .
Or lets say youre unhappy about high federal spending. Your solution is to give Congress to Democrats, who have a long and well-established reputation for flinty tightfistedness on public spending and an ironclad commitment to spending taxpayers dollars wisely
oh, thats right, they dont! . . .
What kind of foreign policy statements do you expect from Democratic Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi, or Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Biden, and majority committee members John Kerry, Russ Feingold, and Barbara Boxer? How about President Ahmedinjiad, we can work this out? Mr. Zarqawi, you can have Iraq, because were outta there? Kofi Annan, you're doing a heck of a job! . . .
In the second post, he gets more specific on the matter of consequences:
Who are the Republican lawmakers most angering the conservative base? Well, lets say Sens. Trent Im tired of hearing about Porkbusters Lott, Ted Bridge to Nowhere Stevens, John McCain for cosponsoring Kennedys immigration bill and campaign finance reform, Arlen Specter for being a pain in the tushie over judges, Chuck Hagel for being the New York Times favorite Republican senator to criticize Bush, and other minimally-conservative Republicans like Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. Well, theyre not going to lose in 2006. Most of em arent even up for reelection this year.
Look at the Republicans most in jeopardy in 2006. (Im using National Journals most recent rankings.) In the Senate, a bad year for the Republicans would mean the loss of Rick Santorum (who has lifetime American Conservative Union rating of 88 out of a possible 100, and a 92 in 2005) in Pennsylvania, Jim Talent (93 rating lifetime, and a 96 in 2005) in Missouri, Conrad Burns (91, and a perfect 100 in 2005) in Montana and Mike DeWine (80 lifetime, only 56 in 2005) in Ohio. Of course, Ohio voters who sit this one out will replace DeWine with Sherrod Brown, who has a lifetime rating of 8 and 4 for 2005. And they wont get to revisit that decision until 2012. . . .
Yeah, maybe if conservatives stay home, theyll knock out liberal Republican Chris Shays of Connecticut. Whoop-de-doo. Whos going to be left standing? Trent Im tired of hearing about Porkbusters Lott, Ted Bridge to Nowhere Stevens, John McCain, Arlen Specter, Chuck Hagel, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.
Nice job, guys. Your effort to re-conservativize the Republican Party in Washington by staying home this year will have the effect of massacring the actual conservatives and empowering the moderates who you disdain. Perhaps we can call this counterproductive maneuver RINO-plasty.
But thats okay, the staying-at-home-conservatives insist. The GOP will win back the House and Senate in 2008, establishing a true conservative majority.
Maybe. But as I mentioned, what kind of lengths do you think the Democrats will go to in order to keep power once theyve got it? Does the Fairness Doctrine ring a bell? You think Pelosi and Reid wouldnt try that tactic to hinder conservative talk radio? How about McCain-Feingold 2.0, with a particular focus on controlling unregulated speech on the Internet and blogs?
Think the MSM was cheerleading for Democrats in 2004? How much more fair and balanced do you think theyll be when their task is to defend Democratic House and Senate majorities AND elect President Hillary Rodham Clinton? My guess is, theyll make the CBS memo story look accurate and evenhanded by comparison.
Think the GOP can prevail in close races once theyre out of power? Ask the members of the military who had their ballots in Florida blocked. Ask Doug Forrester how well his anti-Torricelli campaign worked when he suddenly faced Frank Lautenberg at the last minute. Ask Dino Rossi. Ask Democrat Tim Johnson if hes glad the last county in South Dakota to report its results just happened to have enough of a Democratic margin to put him over the top in 2002.
Once the Democrats regain control of Congress, a GOP takeover is going to be exponentially harder than it was in 1994. Youre never going to catch the Democrats as flatfooted again. . . .
We usually like looking at the Daily Kos crowd insisting for an immediate pullout of the troops or impeachment hearings right this second and we laugh at them for their ludicrously unrealistic expectations. But apparently the Kos are not the only ones with an all-or-nothing mentality. Sometimes in life you have to use the West Coast offense, nickel and diming your way down the field instead of going for the long bomb.
It's how the Left got as far as it did in the 1960s and 1970s.
If I want a more conservative government, I get it by electing the more conservative of the two choices, even if he isnt as conservative as I would like. I do not get it by sitting on the sidelines and pouting, and letting the less conservative guy take the reins of power. . . .
So, if you're a frustrated conservative, what should you do?
Im spectacularly pleased that yesterdays post generated so much discussion around the web. . . . Some e-mailers agreed, some e-mailers disagreed, SOME WERE VERY ANGRY AND HAD FORGOTTEN WHERE THE CAPS LOCK KEY IS, but the most important and common question from e-mailers was, Okay, if sitting out the 2006 election doesnt get us where we want to go, what will? Its a great question; heres my best shot at answering it.
One: Frustrated with the GOP as a whole? Then support the guys you do like. I roll my eyes when somebody says, Ah, theyre all a bunch of crooks. That just says that the complainer hasnt bothered looking for a member of Congress that represents their views. If youre mad as heck about immigration, theres Rep Tom Tancredo and the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus or Sens. Jon Kyl, or Jon Cornyn. If youre mad about pork, theres Sen. Tom Coburn.
If you dont want to send money to the RNC, NRSC, or RNCC because they support too many Republicans-in-name-only, then fine; send money to the lawmakers who you see standing up for the conservative policies you want to see enacted. The rest of the GOP will notice if candidates like Tancredo and Coburn suddenly get a deluge of small donations for their stands. . . .
More than a few e-mail writers seemed supremely discouraged about this course of action after Pat Toomey fell about two percent short in his primary challenge to Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania in 2004. The reason the RNC, the NRSC, and RNCC always support incumbents against primary challengers is because it is, I am told, a part of their candidate recruitment strategy. Republican candidate recruiters often find themselves trying to convince happy, successful individuals in the private sector to give all that up and voluntarily sign on for at least a years worth of stress, expense, privacy invasions and aggravation of a campaign. One of the ways they can attract candidates is to say, once youre in, well always have your back. We wont abandon you two years from now, or four years now, or any time in the future. The leadership of the Republican Party will always stick by you in a tough campaign. . . .
Two: Vote for lesser of two evils? Maybe. If Chafee wins his primary, and you face a choice between a Democrat and a liberal Republican, maybe its worth leaving that slot blank. (You still ought to show up and vote, even if its just for other races.) But my hair goes grayer when I hear a conservative say, Im so mad at Bush that Im not even going to vote this year. My friends, Bush isnt on the ballot!
Show up at the ballot box, look for your congressmen, and if theyre running this year, your senator and your governor and your mayor and whatever other races, and judge them based on the job that they as individuals have done. Dont vote against your congressman because youre mad at Ted Stevens (unless, of course, your congressman IS Ted Stevens). Dont blame your local guy for Trent Lott. Maybe you decide that your local congressman has let you down and isnt worth supporting. Thats fair enough.
(By the way, once in a while a really angry e-mailer will exclaim, "how dare you tell me who I have to vote for!" Hey, it's your decision. Vote for whoever you like. But be aware of the consequences. Don't vote for the other guys because you're convinced it will set in motion some triple-bank-shot scenario that will help your guys in the long term. There's a lot of "things need to get worse before they get better" mentality out there, which strikes me as creepily similar to Marx's "immiseration" theory that the only way things get better is when they get much, much worse and reach the breaking point. I'd ask advocates of this mentality, do you see it a lot in your daily life? Do you often act against your best interest, because you want to hit bottom so that things will then get better later? How's that working out for ya? Cause I'm always trying to move the ball in my direction, even if it's three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust.)
Three: Realize some lawmakers will be a mixed bag. Theres a quote from former New York City mayor Ed Koch that begins Joe Kleins latest book: If you agree with me on nine out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist.
You will rarely encounter a lawmaker who agrees with you on all your issues; youve got to prioritize, and decide which ones are dealbreakers for you. . . .
Another thing we do have to recognize electoral realities. Conservatives shouldnt have much ire at Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins. Maine is a pretty liberal state; the two nice ladies are about as conservative as youre going to get out of that state. Youre not going to get a rock-ribbed social conservative, so you make do with someone who votes our way on taxes and defense issues. If I still lived in New Jersey, I would prefer a Bret Schundler type, but its been proven, cycle after cycle, that a really conservative guy just isnt going to win in the Garden State; we have to take our tax-cutting Christie Whitmans until the political attitudes in the state change.
Four: The real fight on so many of these issues is in the Republican Presidential Primary. Obviously, many, many conservatives are furious with President Bush for his policies on spending, the Medicare prescription drug bill, and most of all, immigration.
The 2008 race will really begin early next year. Look hard at the candidates, and volunteer early for the guy who stands where you want the party to stand.
This is good advice, for anyone . . . of any political persuasion . . . on any issue . . . at any time. 
|
Posted by Mike 2006-05-17 08:50||
||
Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07]
Top
|
|
Posted by Elmatch Elmolugum1622 2006-05-17 15:47||
2006-05-17 15:47||
Front Page
Top
|
|
Posted by DMFD 2006-05-17 20:49||
2006-05-17 20:49||
Front Page
Top
|
|
21:10 newc
20:17 SteveS
18:44 magpie
18:33 Frank G
18:33 badanov
18:26 Hellfish
18:23 Hellfish
17:40 swksvolFF
17:34 Ebbuger Whuque4103
17:30 Ebbuger Whuque4103
17:02 Melancholic
16:27 Gravilet Snanter4154
16:20 Chaise Speaking for Boskone7897
16:02 Skidmark
16:01 Skidmark
15:46 Skidmark
15:41 Skidmark
15:37 swksvolFF
15:36 Skidmark
15:34 Skidmark
15:27 Skidmark
14:48 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:16 NoMoreBS
|
