What NY-26 Means For The Tea Party… and the GOP
By Shaun Kenney | Wednesday, May 25th, 2011 | PoliticsThis didn’t take a genius to figure out what happened here: a random guy put a Tea Party sticker on his shirt sleeve, and a Republican district went Democratic. Ford O’Connell hammers it home:
What we see in tonight’s election result is the power of the Democrats’ attack politics. What we didn’t see was a concerted effort by the GOP leadership during the past couple of months to control the message and sell its vision of why we need to change our government’s fiscal habits now.
Let me add something else to this mix. The presupposed “Tea Party candidate” was anything but — no history, no credentials, just a sticker and a willingness to take advantage of an upset electorate. As a result, instead of seeing a GOP candidate embracing the Ryan budget, the NY-26 Tea Party forked over a largely Republican seat to an out and out socialist.
…and so today, we get to read op-eds from guys like the WaPo’s Dan Balz (real name… no joke) asking “Will Republicans Learn The Lesson Of The NY-26 Loss?” and so forth.
The greater question is whether conservatives will be able to stitch together a coalition in order to win elections.
To date, the Tea Party even in Virginia is mired in civil war, the libertarian wing attempting to toss out the social conservative wing, establishment money vs. grassroots activism, personalities are driving the principles, and the same divisions that splintered the Libertarian Party in the 1970s, the Constitution Party in the 1980s, and Reform Party in the 1990s are at play again.
It cannot be stated enough. Coalitions win elections. Sure enough, there are instances where it’s better to have a bad Democrat than a bad Republican, but the litmus test for a “bad Republican” has to exceed or meet the test for the “bad Democrat” — and I am in no way convinced that Jane Corwin was anywhere close to bad on conservative issues, and certainly not comparable to now Representative-Elect Kathy Hochul, a guaranteed pro-spending, pro-Pelosi, pro-abortion liberal.
In fact, Democrats are chalking up Corwin’s defeat based on her support for Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget. Not as good as the RSC budget proposal… but awful darned close.
NY-26 taught us two things: (1) Tea Party candidates are not winning elections on their own merits, and (2) the GOP cannot win without the Tea Party. The first group — Tea Party or establishment — that learns how to build winning coalitions first, wins the heart and soul of the Republican Party writ large.
Anyone want to wager who will win? Gentlemen, place your bets.
Because should either the Tea Party not become more politically astute, or the establishment old guard continue to do everything possible to antagonize the grassroots, the only winner will be the Democrats seeking to spend and borrow our way into $70 trillion of entitlements America cannot afford.
Perhaps voices such as Jay Cost are correct. A maturation process needs to occur on both sides, and quickly. The solution will not be easy, nor will we be able to escape the last two decades of reckless spending without paying for the consequences. Regardless, a voice for 2012 that can unite fiscal and social conservatives again without sacrificing our principles, that can speak to the common man without patronizing him, that can talk plain and rebuild the stability this nation was known for and enjoyed… perhaps these are the voices in the Republican Party that we need to embrace if our grandchildren are to enjoy the Pax Americana the Greatest Generation left to us?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Shaun Kenney is the Chairman of the Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors, former Communications Director for the Republican Party of Virginia, and an active blogger since 2002. Shaun lives in Thomas Jefferson's backyard with his wife, six children, and a modest attempt at a farm in Kents Store, Virginia.
Comments
28 Responses to "What NY-26 Means For The Tea Party… and the GOP"
Uh huh. It’s the Tea Party’s fault. Yep… Sure…
Why did the Dems lose the last election? Because they went freekin nuts in office. And you Republicans are headed the same way.
Darrell,
Tell us, did you feel the same way when Ralph Nader and the Green Party screwed Al Gore out of the Presidential election in 2000? And please, spare us the tired old diatribe about Florida.
It’s interesting that Repubs are now putting out the same talking points and whistling in the dark factoids that Dems treated us to for two years. It’s a messaging problem… it’s Dems lying about our wonderful plans… we have 15 months to tell the public the truth … it’s Dems tricks running 3rd party vote splitters..
I have some respect for Ryan even though his plan was deficient policy wise and politically stupid because of his political courage and sincerity. And I supported Scott Walker all through the Wisc fight even when things weren’t going well. So I am not saying things from malice or panic.
The Ryan plan is a typical inside the beltway plan that extends deficits as far as the eye can see but “manages” them in Dole like fashion. Unlike Bush with Social Security Ryan and Boehner followed in the footsteps of Pelosi and Hoyer (in a kinder gentler way) in rushing through the budget in the House without any chance of it passing without Repub control of both the WH and Senate. All kinds of people from Krauthammer to Trump to Morris to Caddell warned them they were committing political suicide. Cap and trade redux.
Ryan’s Medicare plan has a plausible kernel wrapped in a toxic shell. Elementary politics states that a popular program can only be jettisoned for something better not something worse. This is what shredded Obamacare. Ryan and the GOP proudly follow in its wake. Ryan could have reshaped it internally e.g Medicare Advantage style changes, gradual implementation of means testing and age requirements etc. To talk of disaster in the future runs into the global warming scare etc. The media and the Dems are constantly trumpeting imminent disaster unless their programs are passed yesterday which the Repubs rightly ridicule. Then they do the same. Even if they are right, no one will believe them until it happens. Therefore like it or not Medicare changes will have to be more modest than ideal. That means more effort has to be paid to deficit reduction and growing the economy. Ryan’s plan is weak there but reckless with Medicare.
As for NY 26 I suppose Repubs can patronizingly claim that Tea party types can’t tell the difference between a real Tea Party candidate and a fake one funded by Dems. Perhaps there is a simpler explanation. People voted for the 3rd party candidate knowingly either because they were Repubs mad at the GOP (for Medicare or the budget travesties) who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Dem or people who responded directly to his populist message.
If I thought the Ryan plan was sound I would say to stand firm. However, I don’t think it’s defensible. It’s being criticized on the right for unending deficit spending and on the left for Medicare.
I invite people to run tapes of Scott Walker talking in the midst of the Wisc chaos and Paul Ryan under fire. Walker talked calmly and clearly and projected unwavering confidence. He knew he had his voters on board. Ryan is whining about Dem lies (imagine) and a messaging problem. He knows Repubs are split.
I would advise Repubs to force Ryan to withdraw his plan and come up with a better one. Then have him vet the plan properly. If he doesn’t want to then give the job to someone else. It’s a mess but the worst thing is to pretend it’s salvageable. Just see what happened to Dems who did that. If they don’t, 2012 is not going to be pretty.
I usually don’t include links but these two are interesting.
http://blogs.forbes.com/louiswoodhill/2011/05/18/memo-to-paul-ryan-its-time-to-think-about-plan-b/
http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/stan-collender/2199/ryan-plan-could-be-bad-gop-health-care-reform-was-dems
“We won, you lost” is not a viable campaign slogan. Especially when the losers are the voters who elected you to office.
Republicans are on the wrong side of these issues, still siding with the crooks instead of the citizens. Right now the lightning rod is Medicare. Soon it will be bankster busts with their cronies in DC if the state AGs follow Utah’s lead. The GOP is on probation, but they don’t seem to realize it. People are watching when Boehner flips homeowners the bird while wiping Wall Street a$$ with wads of cash. Or when he turns loose the political dogs to take out consumer bank protections and Elizabeth Warren.
No, the real problems are those ignorant Tea Party rednecks that don’t toe the establishment line. The Dems are going to win because of them. Just ask Boehner.
Valentinus,
“I would advise Repubs to force Ryan to withdraw his plan and come up with a better one. Then have him vet the plan properly. If he doesn’t want to then give the job to someone else. It’s a mess but the worst thing is to pretend it’s salvageable.”
I agree! Rand Paul & Paul Ryan in a room together for a few days should do the trick. That’s a good place to role model a coalition, don’t you think so, Shaun?
Sara,
I would include in the room Walter Jones of North Carolina, David McKinley of West Virginia, and Denny Rehberg of Montana. (Ron Paul is a presidential candidate so I exclude him for that.) Those Repubs apparently have more common sense than the rest of the party combined. Maybe they are leadership material.
It was easy to see: You(Tea Party & GOP) propose and vote to cut “old” people’s healthcare, retirement and frighten them, so they vote for the other candidate. Seniors vote everytime.
It doesn’t get any easier…
Shaun,
A couple of problems with your analysis:
1) In this case, the “spolier” was a well-known ex-Dem who ran as the Dem nominee in 2004 and 2006. Give that he only won 9% (and did the worst in the Dem’s home county), I’m guessing his voters were more disaffected Democrats than upset Republicans/independents. In order for the spolier theory to work, over 83% of Davis voters would had to have Corwin as their second choice. I doubt it was that high.
2) For 40 years, this region of New York elected *pro-life* Republicans to Congress. Corwin was not pro-life. That had a lot to do with her weakness on E-day.
@D.J. –
(1) That was my point entirely… and he pulled Tea Party support regardless of his past record, all because he carried the Tea Party banner. I mean, ouch fellas…
(2) Perhaps so, but the issues driving the race were by and large fiscal. Pro-lifers are well-known to sit out in a race where all options are pro-abortion…
@Sara –
Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Tom Coburn, and Jim DeMint — that’s my idea of a good start for coalition building!!!
At some point, we need two things: (1) leaders willing to be honest about what its going to take to get America out of the fiscal train wreck we’ve put ourselves in, and (2) a Tea Party sophisticated enough to leverage its influence inside the GOP, rather than break away. Libertarians would have been far more effective had they stayed within the GOP… as would constitutionalists, pro-lifers, reformers, etc.
The Democratic and leftist grandstanding over the Ryan Plan is getting laughable.
I’d leave Rand out of the coalition mix. He’s beginning to show his more… alternative… viewpoints that are even outside the Tea Party mainstream.
I certainly agree that we need leaders that are willing to address our fiscal situation, but I would certainly not prejudice the process by calling it a train wreck. Remember, just one short decade ago our budget was in surplus and our debt was being reduced. Due to fighting two wars without paying for them, providing more benefits in Medicare without paying for them, and deregulation of the crooks on Wall Street, we created a mess that had to be dealt with. We know that a combination of revenue increases and expenditure decreases, with increased productivity over the next decade will put our fiscal house in order. We need moderates in both parties to do what is obvious, and the tea party can go take a hike.
Dan,
Aw, come on…tell me you didn’t buy into that stuff about Rand?
And that just proves Shaun’s point about kicking people out with (supposedly) alternative viewpoints having little to do with the true goal of the tea party movement in the first place.
I think the whole “civil war” thing is just a new version of the same old same old anyway….. King Solomon said it best in Ecclesiastes 1:9
“What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.”
Folks,
It’s amusing to think of a Repub kumbaya in Congress but McConnell would rather lose the Senate than have Rand Paul or Jim DeMint get credit for anything.
Shaun says
“That was my point entirely… and (Davis) pulled Tea Party support regardless of his past record, all because he carried the Tea Party banner. I mean, ouch fellas…”
Shaun,
I guess you can’t imagine that fiscal conservatives might be so ticked off at the Repubs deficit fecklessness that they would do a protest vote. Also I thought Davis was exploiting populist trade issues a la Trump.
Another problem with the (Dole)Ryan budget is that it diverts attention from fiscal matters today to healthcare decades from now. Regardless of the merits or demerits of Ryan’s proposal, does anyone seriously believe that Repubs are operating from a position of strength on this now? I want the political experts here to tell me what is going to happen to it even if Dems were astoundingly to negotiate. It’s obvious that the net result would be just as costly as the current system. Just look at what happened to Romneycare from its original plan to what ended up passing. Do you really think seniors are going to refrain from pushing Congress for ever higher reimbursements? Do you think seniors will care if taxes have to go up on business and workers to pay for more Medicare?
Also don’t think for a minute that Ryan’s ploy to exempt current seniors from the plan is going to work. Believe it or not people have common sense. They know the adage of the camel’s nose. Isn’t that what Repubs are arguing about with Obamacare??
So what is my point? Medicare Advantage and Part D got implemented because they made sense to seniors. They bought the concept so the scare tactics didn’t work. Since Advantage and Part D were designed a bit better and less BigGovernment, they operated better than expected.
I offer you a contest where I run on turning Medicare into Medicare Advantage and you run on Ryan’s voucher plan. Any takers??
Val,
I can’t stand the word “voucher”. Ick. So, I’m out. Sorry.
It seems to me that the Tea Party movement may be imploding. There is no question that there is a civil war between the libertarian leaning Tea Party Groups Freedomworks/Tea Party Patriots/Campaign for Liberty, and those that have remained small and local, that recognize the importance of social and national security issues, in addition to the fiscal issues. This country cannot stand firm on a foundation of nothing but dollar bills.
If you read the websites of the many many Tea Party Patriot sites, most if not all are affiliated with Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty. I did not find one that doesn’t claim to be non-partisan, and one claimed to be fiercely non-partisan.
Jack Davis, the Tea Party backed candidate in the New York race was endorsed by the Tea Party Coalition of WNY, who is affiliated with the Tea Party Patriots. Though he was named in most all news over the last few weeks as a “fake” Tea Party candidate, he actually wasn’t, by the Tea Party Patriot standards of being non-partisan. People were screaming because he was a Democrat, and what nerve of him to claim to be a Tea Party Candidate. In other words, most people see the Tea Parties as being populated by only Republicans, just ask the Democrats. At a time when the parties must, by necessity, have bold colors, not pale pastels (RR)to differentiate the policies and platforms that define each, the lines are getting diluted. Sorry, I will never support Socialism or Marxism. The one time Blue Dog Democrats are mostly gone, their own party dumped them, and they are not going to allow any more to cross their hallowed halls in Washington. All Democrats must take a bite out of the Pelosi or Reid studded black leather whip. So, what is the definition of a good Democrat?
If all that isn’t bad enough for the Tea Parties, in the 2010 elections there were real “fake” Tea Party candidates, drafted and funded by the Democrats, in CA, PA, FLA, MI, NV and NJ, and probably more states as well. Their only purpose was to take votes away from the Republicans in what were expected to be close races. They were truly fake Tea Party candidates.
As was implied in this article, many people hear Tea Party, and just assume that they are the right candidates to support. Unfortunately, they don’t do their own homework. That is what the Democrats are banking on, and I suspect this effort will be ramped up for the 2012 elections.
So, it seems that the label Tea Party will soon enough become something to run from, rather than to use as a positive for anyone’s campaigns. Further, when open borders, amnesty, social conservatives are destroying the GOP Dick Armey is organizing and setting the tone of the movement, it is doomed to failure. I’ve read that in order to be affiliated with the Armey leadership organization, the Tea Party Patriot groups are required to send him the info on any members that sign up with their group. They are being bombarded by spam emails trying to sell them things, such as Gold and Silver, as a result of sold lists. That’s too bad, before some saw a good thing and took advantage, it was the best thing to happen to fight the current crop of Socialists in Wash.
Sandy,
Spot on. Leaderless movements are a one shot event. After that they will get leaders self appointed or elected. Nothing to moan about. 2010 was beautiful. Now the principles of limited Constitutional government and fiscal discipline have to make their way by dissemination, advocacy and organization.
@Val –
No, I can’t imagine a conservative voting for a socialist. Just stay home like the pro-lifers did.
The simplest explanation being the most viable, 10% of NY-26 voters saw Tea Party and voted for it — simple as that.
As for the rest… you lost me there, buddy.
Shaun,
Please show me the data on why people voted for Davis that support your position. He was a well known figure in the District with high name recognition who had run as a Dem before. I agree it’s not good for people to be petulant in voting but it is what it is. The GOP needs to assess what it’s doing wrong before the die is cast. The GOP is the political party and organizational entity with the most to lose in a personal selfish sense. The Tea Party can evaporate as quickly as it formed as Sandy noted.
Also, it’s a copout to say I lost you on all the rest.
Did I really lose you on the offer to run on Ryan’s voucher plan vs a Medicare Advantage Plan? “Medicare vouchers! To the ramparts my friends!” Shaun did you dream growing up that you would get a voucher for anything?
Did I really lose you on Krauthammer et al warning that the Repubs were committing political suicide?
Explain how the Repubs are acting that different with the Ryan plan than the Dems did with their party line votes in 09-10. Did the Repubs sell the country on their plan before they voted? What if George Bush had rammed through his SS program on a party line vote rather than going around the country making his case? Would that have worked out? Establishment Repubs may be wedded to Ryan’s plan but there are obvious institutional reasons for that. (More deficit spending yay.) That doesn’t mean the plan is good or bad or politically salable.
Your response or lack thereof is making me very nervous about the elections because it seems very consistent with the Repub party in general. I hope things work out in spite of all this but …
Valentinus- We agree on some things, but not all. I take your “spot on” comment to be in agreement with my fear that the Tea Parties may be imploding. If you digest my entire post, I am not in favor of the libertarian wing of the Tea Parties, which mostly includes the Ron Paul supporting portion of those parties, that have nothing more than fiscal issues as their goals. Hence my comment that the country cannot stand firm on a foundation of dollars alone. I am very much in favor of supporting the other 2/3rds of what has been referred to as Reagan conservatism, namely social and national security conservatism as well. I believe very strongly that there really are radical islamists that want this country to disappear, as well as Israel. Have you read the messages coming out of the “Arab Spring” where they have been very much against the US?
I laugh when people say they want to call a “truce” on the social issues, because we are broke. Are entitlements considered social issues? Yes. Do you think the Democrats will ever give up on social issues? Never. Look around and see the moral degradation they have unleashed on the country, for as many years as I have been alive, mostly through “higher education” and now down to our pre-school children. I read an interesting article recently where the author asked those that are screaming that they want the government to stay out of their bedroom, but, they are the very same people who are screaming that the government needs to recognize their bedroom habits, and pass laws to protect those habits. That is typical hypocrisy of the libertarians. They have joined hands with the Liberals in destroying the traditions our country was founded on, all so they think they will be able to go to the seven eleven to get their next bag of weed, or with Ron Paul, their next dose of heroine.
After all my talk about the libertarian Tea Party groups, I clearly do see them as a vice against the current crop of Republicans in DC, particularly the newbies in the House, especially those that may have been backed by their local Tea Party groups.
It is my personal opinion that because we have only the majority in the House, it has been obvious that whatever the House passed, it had little chance of passing, or even making it out of committee, in Harry Reid’s Senate. McConnell is a useless waste of time for the Republicans in the Senate, yet even all the new Senators, including the newbies Paul and Lee voted for him as the minority leader. Why? The point is that whatever the House passed, it stops there. I was very much in favor of passing whatever we could with spending cuts that actually had any chance of making it to Obama’s desk, and not being vetoed. I would have been happy if we got $2 million in cuts that could have made it through.
Not only did the Tea Party people, especially the Paulbots, but others as well, screamed from the high heavens that what was eventually passed was pathetic. If you ever suffered through the Daily Paul, I promise you they made the Republicans look as though they were far worse than any Democrat has ever been. Literally, they claimed the Republicans are collectivist tyrants. I promise some of the Paulies have posted that they want to go back to the Articles of Confederation, and that the adoption of the Constitution was a pox on this country. No lie. These are the very same people threatening, the newbies in particular, that if they don’t meet their demands that they will be primaried.
So, we did very well in the 2010 elections, with many giving credit to the Tea Parties for those wins. Now we have some Tea Party people threatening many that they will be primaried, because they didn’t back what were obviously losing plans, because they didn’t go far enough in their demands, that would have never made it out of committee in the Senate. I ask, what is the purpose, just to make loud messages, and go for principle which would have gained us nothing?
I believe that Ryan’s plan is mistimed, but, an answer to what the libertarians are demanding, or the Republicans are gone. All entitlements are the third rail that most politicians avoid. Wouldn’t it be better to get control of at least two houses, and hopefully the Presidency, and then look to pass what is very necessary for the country. Is it worth losing much in 2012 just to appease the radical libertarian wing, that really with as loud as they are, are a very small part of the electorate? I think not.
I need to add an important part to my above comment. The Republicans need to stall any budget decisions until they retake Washington. Hey, the Democrats haven’t been excited for passing any budget any time soon. Not passing any budget at least keeps it from going up.
@Val –
I’m saying that “you lost me” in the space between a well-formed thought in your head and the transition to web comment, ’tis all.
Never came out in favor or in opposition to the Ryan plan at all. In fact, I don’t think that most folks know much about the details of the plan other than the bottom line… a scary condition.
Oy. He was NOT the tea party candidate. The Tea Party denounced him. The Republican was a pro-choice moderate . The lesson is for the GOP to quit running unprincipled moderates, and stop the closed-door nomination process. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/05/25/gop-blows-it-in-ny-26
You have to love it how the TEA party gets blamed for everything. Republicans ask why is it that TEA party members are so willing to sacrifice a Senate seat by taking votes away from a Republican ? Yeah, well, why is it that Republicans are so willing to screw TEA party members out of a Senate seat that could have been theirs if there weren’t any Republicans running. Maybe its time to stop asking TEA party people not to run and time to START asking Republicans not to run.
Additional note – my comment above was in general, not specific to NY-26.
SK saya In fact, I don’t think that most folks know much about the details of the plan other than the bottom line… a scary condition.
Maybe you do understand me after all. And the fault lies with the public??
The lesson is that the Ryan budget is a political loser. Cut Medicare…or even SEEM to be cutting Medicare or Social Security and lose the election.
That, Shaun, is why you and I both said on another thread that if there’s ever going to be real entitlement reform, it will be necessary for Dems and Republicans to do it together to give each other political cover on it, the way O’Neil and Reagan did.
People in America aren’t stupid. When they see the GOP resist any efforts to cut oil subsidies or tax breaks for the highest earners or penalize the Wall Street crooks who caused the economic meltdown, but then see them propose to balance the budget on the backs of working people who count on Medicare and Social Security or flood and hurricane victims, who didn’t have anything to do with the problem the country found itself in… they begin to think that the GOP may not be on their side.
I believe the statement that Democrats threw Blue Dogs under the bus (I think made by Sandy) is inaccurate. Here is my analysis of what happened.
Many Blue Dog candidates rode the wave of new voters motivated to go to the polls to vote for Obama. These types of voters were more apt to vote a straight Democrat ticket. These type candidates were competitive enough in closely contested districts for the Obama wave to sweep them into office. Two years later the wave had receded and they were left high and dry.
It also did not help that some moderate, independents, were upset that while they had voted for change, the changes they saw happening were not the changes they had envisioned. They were upset with what they viewed the radical left wing swing of the pendulum, but what they wanted was governance from the center, not a radical swing to the right.
I believe the polling data I saw supports my analysis. The election was not won or lost on the numbers of either conservatives or liberals (with their obvious votes) who showed up on election day, the difference was with who won the moderate, particularly independent, vote.
Now that these types of voters have had a chance to taste what Republicans have in mind for change, only time will tell how they swing next time. Also, if Obama has any coat tails left by then, that will factor in with the 2012 elections.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.