Despite Nancy Pelosi’s irrational protestations to the contrary, yesterday’s elections marked major victories not merely for the GOP but for conservative grassroots activists as well.
The gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia are being hailed as political canaries in the coalmine for Barack Obama. These governors’ mansions going red further reinforces the sentiment that the policies of Obama and congressional Democrats aren't resonating with the persuadable middle block of voters – in this case, those represented by the swing votes in the two states.
New York's 23rd congressional district became a different referendum entirely: one on the GOP party establishment. While the contest was actually lost by Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, the race stands as a victory for the tea party movement, a victory captured before a single vote was cast.
Seemingly less newsworthy than the two gubernatorial races, the contest sparked nation-wide interest due to its elucidation of the curious and frustrating tension that often arises between party leaders and grassroots constituents. In this case, the card-check backing, pro-choice, Daily Kos endorsed Dede Scozzafava, arguably to the left of her Democrat opponent Bill Owens, was backed by the party over tea party movement endorsed Conservative Party candidate Scott Hoffman.
Until this weekend, Scozzafava was supported by the full force of the GOP establishment. The New York GOP as well as Beltway heavyweights John Boehner to Newt Gingrich endorsed her. More importantly, Scozzafava received substantial funding from the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). The NRCC actually spent money on ads attacking Doug Hoffman. This past Saturday, under pressure from highly motivated constituents and tea party movement activists, Scozzafava bowed out of the race.
Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time Big Party politicking has eschewed principles at their practical peril. (Just this year, to the dismay of conservatives across the country, the GOP establishment backed squishy Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the Pennsylvania Senate race. Shortly thereafter, Specter switched parties.) Fortunately, the eleventh hour endorsement of Hoffman and his potential victory in the polls are steps in the right direction towards halting this trend.
There is a fine line between being too piously purist and principled, dismissing the best candidate over a single-issue litmus test, and being too cautiously practical. The frustrating thing about the New York race is that Hoffman was hardly a right-wing partisan running against all odds in a blue district. He was a viable candidate, a mainstream conservative that could have won had the GOP backed him in full force. He almost did. As the Watertown Daily Times reported:
Mr. Owens garnered 61,666 votes, or 49 percent, with 90 percent of the precincts reporting at 1 a.m. Conservative candidate Douglas L. Hoffman came in with 57,073 votes, or 45 percent. Republican candidate Dierdre K. Scozzafava, who dropped out Saturday, had 6,976 votes, or 6 percent.
Scozzafava’s votes ostensibly could have put Hoffman over the top. Furthermore, he was running in a district that had consistently voted Republican since 1871, until yesterday. Scozzafava’s nomination was hardly a vote for electability, but politics pure and simple. Instead of a traditional primary vote, the state party selected her via an 11-person committee process. As even Michael Steele said yesterday, the grassroots outcry obtained the result that should and likely would have been achieved though a traditional primary process.
Just as in Pennsylvania, the party establishment and figureheads sheepishly backed the conservative they previously burned. Boehner stated that he regretted his initial Scozzafava endorsement. The RNC, originally bound to back the admittedly undesirable committee decision, putt its weight behind Hoffman, as is did the NRCC. (Of note, as in Pennsylvania, the alleged Republican in New York that was originally backed has pulled a Benedict Arnold. Scozzafava is now endorsing Bill Owens, the Democrat in the race she was previously eager to defeat.)
A valid concern from the outset of the tea party movement was that it would be stuck in a rut of perpetual rallying. Of equal concern is that the tea party movement, genuinely frustrated with politics as usual and eager to prove itself unaffiliated with the GOP, would be forever "anti politician" or merely serve as a spoiler for mainstream GOP candidates. In the case of NY23, the real spoiler was the party establishment that backed a liberal over a mainstream, electable conservative.
As the race in New York shows, this powerful grassroots movement can be concentrated to effect real political change. Regardless of the unfortunate outcome of the race, a message has been sent loud and clear to the GOP establishment and would be liberal Republican candidates as we head into the 2010 election cycle. The conservative grassroots, alive and well as seen in the tea party movement, is a force to be reckoned with and a force ignored at party leaders’ peril.
O’Hara at The Daily Caller
Tea Party versus Big Party
Despite Nancy Pelosi’s irrational protestations to the contrary, yesterday’s elections marked major victories not merely for the GOP but for conservative grassroots activists as well.
The gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia are being hailed as political canaries in the coalmine for Barack Obama. These governors’ mansions going red further reinforces the sentiment that the policies of Obama and congressional Democrats aren't resonating with the persuadable middle block of voters – in this case, those represented by the swing votes in the two states.
New York's 23rd congressional district became a different referendum entirely: one on the GOP party establishment. While the contest was actually lost by Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, the race stands as a victory for the tea party movement, a victory captured before a single vote was cast.
Seemingly less newsworthy than the two gubernatorial races, the contest sparked nation-wide interest due to its elucidation of the curious and frustrating tension that often arises between party leaders and grassroots constituents. In this case, the card-check backing, pro-choice, Daily Kos endorsed Dede Scozzafava, arguably to the left of her Democrat opponent Bill Owens, was backed by the party over tea party movement endorsed Conservative Party candidate Scott Hoffman.
Until this weekend, Scozzafava was supported by the full force of the GOP establishment. The New York GOP as well as Beltway heavyweights John Boehner to Newt Gingrich endorsed her. More importantly, Scozzafava received substantial funding from the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). The NRCC actually spent money on ads attacking Doug Hoffman. This past Saturday, under pressure from highly motivated constituents and tea party movement activists, Scozzafava bowed out of the race.
Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time Big Party politicking has eschewed principles at their practical peril. (Just this year, to the dismay of conservatives across the country, the GOP establishment backed squishy Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the Pennsylvania Senate race. Shortly thereafter, Specter switched parties.) Fortunately, the eleventh hour endorsement of Hoffman and his potential victory in the polls are steps in the right direction towards halting this trend.
There is a fine line between being too piously purist and principled, dismissing the best candidate over a single-issue litmus test, and being too cautiously practical. The frustrating thing about the New York race is that Hoffman was hardly a right-wing partisan running against all odds in a blue district. He was a viable candidate, a mainstream conservative that could have won had the GOP backed him in full force. He almost did. As the Watertown Daily Times reported:
Mr. Owens garnered 61,666 votes, or 49 percent, with 90 percent of the precincts reporting at 1 a.m. Conservative candidate Douglas L. Hoffman came in with 57,073 votes, or 45 percent. Republican candidate Dierdre K. Scozzafava, who dropped out Saturday, had 6,976 votes, or 6 percent.
Scozzafava’s votes ostensibly could have put Hoffman over the top. Furthermore, he was running in a district that had consistently voted Republican since 1871, until yesterday. Scozzafava’s nomination was hardly a vote for electability, but politics pure and simple. Instead of a traditional primary vote, the state party selected her via an 11-person committee process. As even Michael Steele said yesterday, the grassroots outcry obtained the result that should and likely would have been achieved though a traditional primary process.
Just as in Pennsylvania, the party establishment and figureheads sheepishly backed the conservative they previously burned. Boehner stated that he regretted his initial Scozzafava endorsement. The RNC, originally bound to back the admittedly undesirable committee decision, putt its weight behind Hoffman, as is did the NRCC. (Of note, as in Pennsylvania, the alleged Republican in New York that was originally backed has pulled a Benedict Arnold. Scozzafava is now endorsing Bill Owens, the Democrat in the race she was previously eager to defeat.)
A valid concern from the outset of the tea party movement was that it would be stuck in a rut of perpetual rallying. Of equal concern is that the tea party movement, genuinely frustrated with politics as usual and eager to prove itself unaffiliated with the GOP, would be forever "anti politician" or merely serve as a spoiler for mainstream GOP candidates. In the case of NY23, the real spoiler was the party establishment that backed a liberal over a mainstream, electable conservative.
As the race in New York shows, this powerful grassroots movement can be concentrated to effect real political change. Regardless of the unfortunate outcome of the race, a message has been sent loud and clear to the GOP establishment and would be liberal Republican candidates as we head into the 2010 election cycle. The conservative grassroots, alive and well as seen in the tea party movement, is a force to be reckoned with and a force ignored at party leaders’ peril.