Republican Party

[SezMe]

Note the endorsement from the Daily Kos:

The link is to Malkin.

...is it really surprising that the County Chairmen selected her?

No. And it's not surprising that they didn't select Hoffman because he doesn't even live in the the 23rd.

 

[Brainster]

The link is to Malkin.

She quotes from Kos. Unfortunately as it's one of her columns, it doesn't have the link to the original Kos post, but I assume she's quoted him correctly.

No. And it's not surprising that they didn't select Hoffman because he doesn't even live in the the 23rd.

Discussed here by Stacy McCain:

OK, this is a non-issue, and has been explained several times. Doug Hoffman's hometown, Saranac Lake, is in the 23rd District. Hoffman's current residence is about a 15-minute drive away in Lake Placid, which was also in the 23rd District -- until the (then) GOP-controlled New York legislature gerrymandered the district!

And:

Hoffman has been up-front about this all along, and has promised to move into the re-drawn 23rd if he wins on Nov. 3.

 

[leftysergeant]

Wow. Hoffman will move back into the district AFTER the election? If I were the Democrat running against him, I would already have a full bandolier of ammo just handed to me.

 

[SezMe]

She quotes from Kos. Unfortunately as it's one of her columns, it doesn't have the link to the original Kos post, but I assume she's quoted him correctly.

Geeze, Brainster, you trust Malkin?

From Kos

I have no love for the Democrat, Owens, and I clearly have no love for Scozzafava in that post, so only an idiot would construe that as an "endorsement"

 

[gtc]

Wow. Hoffman will move back into the district AFTER the election? If I were the Democrat running against him, I would already have a full bandolier of ammo just handed to me.

Is this so unusual in the US?

I don't think either party would get much mileage from this in Australia. The only exception I can think of was the politician who appeared to live in a salubrious beach side suburb while representing a struggling working class district 45 minutes drive away.

 

[SezMe]

Discussed here by Stacy McCain:

BTW, Brainster, the comments in that link demonstrate exactly the divide I mentioned in the OP. The Litmus Wing wants to hew to a strict conservative line while the moderates want a big tent. I'm not sure how much the 23rd election is a bellwether but post-election commentary on both sides next week should be most interesting.

 

[Dr Adequate]

She quotes from Kos. Unfortunately as it's one of her columns, it doesn't have the link to the original Kos post ...

Yeah, that's life.

 

[Brainster]

Geeze, Brainster, you trust Malkin?

From Kos

Jeez, SezMe, you trust Kos? He's inventing his own definition of endorsement, there, saying that it's not an endorsement unless you love the candidate. But people give half-hearted, lesser of two weasels endorsements all the time. Note the reason he prefers Scozzafava:

If the Democrat loses the race, we lose nothing -- it was previously held by a Republican. If he wins the seat, we gain another obnoxious Blue Dog, undermining our caucus from within while adding just a single vote to our already dominant House majorities. Furthermore, the typical DC wankers will take this as "proof" that you need to run Lieberdems in such districts to win them, while ignoring the fragmented conservative opposition. Not much of an advantage at all. More than likely, a net disadvantage.

Sounds like Kos is the one not interested in a big tent party, and wants to kick out the moderates. Imagine that!

 

[Darth Rotor]

Because they are hard-core partisan morons . . .

Take off the morons, and you get irony.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

I don't understand this example at all. This shows, as much as anything else, that Democrats are very tolerant not only of variations within the party, but with former members of the party that stab them in the back.

Some of the top democrats are also a little too tolerant of dingbats in their own party. Pelosi railed against antagonizing the debate recently within the last couple of months, and she's apparently not stepping her foot down on politicians like Grayson. Obama apparently didn't care much for that one either... Nothing personal but based on examples like that I have to respectfully disagree with you.

As far as the republican party is concerned they still need to get their priorities straight. They have an opportunity to gain ground in the mid-term elections but my concern is they'll lose sight of important issues in the same way they did before the democrats retook the house a couple years back. They're apparently still splitting after losing even more ground last year wiith the presidential elections.

 

[Brainster]

Rick Moran has a good take on the whole NY-23 situation. Rick acknowledges the danger:

I have written extensively about the dangers of this populist wave, and how it could easily become, if not as radical as Rich believes in his overactive imagination, then certainly a detriment to conservatism and GOP hopes in 2010. But the race in NY23 shows that there’s nothing for it now, the base has been empowered and the wave is on the move. My fear is that all this enthusiasm and resentment, and fear will be channeled into unproductive avenues and result in a lost opportunity in 2010.

But notes that this is a special case:

But as I point out in my PJM piece, Andrew is wrong to conclude that this presages some kind of mass takeover by the far right. The circumstances in NY23 created a perfect storm for the base that is very unlikely to be repeated in other congressional districts. If the base puts up primary challengers to those they consider insufficiently pure, the normal equilibrium of politics will take over and incumbency, money, and name recognition will overwhelm just about any challenge to the supremacy of the party establishment. In other words, if the conservative base thinks that NY23 is some kind of harbinger for the future, they will be royally disappointed.

But that doesn’t mean I can’t cheer them on in NY23. An establishment that gets too comfortable is no good to anyone. And the message I like being sent from this race is that putting up good, reasonable conservatives like Hoffman for office is usually better than the alternative.

I agree. I don't want the Glenn Beck fruitloops taking over the party. But I don't want the GOP to become "Democrats-lite" either.

 

[SezMe]

Sounds like Kos is the one not interested in a big tent party, and wants to kick out the moderates. Imagine that!

Of course! He's pretty far left and wants to push his party in that direction. He's also advocated for running candidates in primaries against Blue Dogs. So he is, in fact, the Dem's equivalent of the Tea Party crowd.

But, again, that's no news bulletin.

ETA in response to your post just above. I don't think the threat that the Reps face is running Litmus Wing candidates in primaries. Rather, it is the possibility of pushing established candidates further to the right than they otherwise would go making them more vulnerable in November.

 

[Unabogie]

Of course! He's pretty far left and wants to push his party in that direction. He's also advocated for running candidates in primaries against Blue Dogs. So he is, in fact, the Dem's equivalent of the Tea Party crowd.

But, again, that's no news bulletin.

Actually, that's not entirely accurate. What Kos advocates is that in districts which are safely blue, that Blue Dogs should be challenged in primaries to create "more and better Democrats" (better being more liberal). I'm not sure Teabaggers are making the same distinction, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong. In this case, the district went 52-47 for Obama, so foisting a certified Teabagger into the mix doesn't follow Kos' model and is therefore not analogous.

 

[SezMe]

As Brainster pointed out, the 23rd has been red since Jesus was in swaddling clothes so the analogy might be extended there. Or not. I did not mean to draw a strict parallel between Kos and the Tea Baggers; politics is not (or, should not) be amenable to such simplistic analysis.

 

[MikeMangum]

Proving her critics right, Scozzafava endorses the Democrat.

 

[MattusMaximus]

This is a disturbing turn of events. While I don't usually subscribe to Newt's views, his analysis seems to be spot on.

Agreed. Say what you will about Newt Gingrich, he's always struck me as quite the pragmatist - which is something I respect in a politician, even if I wouldn't vote for him. For example, I think his point about the hypocrisy of the Tea Party types concerning their disdain for "local control of politics" when it doesn't suit their ideology is particularly worthy of note.

I, too, think Newt is spot on in his analysis, especially the part where he says this kind of thing can set a dangerous precedent in driving the GOP into more extreme & less defensible positions. Unfortunately, with this "success" the Tea Party crowd is only going to be more emboldened and they will dial up the crazy level in next spring's GOP primaries and beyond. I think we could very well see a lot of third-party candidates on the Tea Party ticket next year.

For example, here in Illinois, a moderate Republican Congressman, Mark Kirk, is going for the 2010 Senate seat. I know he tends to be a moderate (I live in his district), because he has always been pro-choice & pro-environmental in his policy positions. But now the hardcore conservative Tea Party bunch is trying to take him down in the primary (they even started to "Town Hall" his recent public meetings).

Before this NY fiasco, the hardcore Tea Party types here in Illinois were already slinging some nasty stuff at Kirk. Now I think it'll get even worse for him. I'm certain they'll now start to turn the dial all the way up to 11, which will be very revealing for the rest of us in Illinois. I almost feel bad for Kirk (don't plan on voting for him anyway), because I think that even if he wins in the GOP primary, he could very well be facing a Tea Party candidate in the general election, which would guarantee a Democratic win. Kind of a crappy way to finish your political career, I think.

Ah well, it should be entertaining to watch

 

[MattusMaximus]

Proving her critics right, Scozzafava endorses the Democrat.

That's simple. It's because he's the saner candidate, from what I've seen.

It'll be interesting to see whether or not her endorsement sinks the Tea Party guy.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Proving her critics right, Scozzafava endorses the Democrat.

Apparently her critics said that she wasn't insane. That may be the only thing they'll ever be right about, so they should treasure this moment.

 

[MikeMangum]

That's simple. It's because he's the saner candidate, from what I've seen.

Objectively saner, of course. That's why the conservative (term is synonamous with insane, apparently) currently has the polling lead.

In counterpoint to Newt, here is Jonah Goldberg:

I'm writing about this for my USA Today column, but the Frank Rich hissy fit is a perfect example of the real story of the election. 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.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Ooh, did Jonah Goldberg say that?

Really?

Let's quote it again.

I'm writing about this for my USA Today column, but the Frank Rich hissy fit is a perfect example of the real story of the election. 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.

Yeah, it's working so well that the Republican candidate just dropped out of the race.

If this is success, one wonders what failure must look like.