Archive for October 17, 2009

Q: How can you tell the Republican Establishment is backing the wrong candidate in NY-23?

Posted: October 17, 2009 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,

A: When it takes your the candidate that takes three tries to say this:

Update at 2:32 p.m.: Burns adds that Scozzafava would run in the Republican primary in 2010 if challenged. He declined to say whether or not Scozzafava was open to running as an independent if she lost the primary.

Can’t anybody play this game?

Bill Kristol has it exactly right:

Today, the Wall Street Journal has a story on the race with the headline Tea-Party Activists Complicate Republican Comeback Strategy. The truth is the opposite: The GOP establishment complicates the Republican and conservative comeback strategy.

The party is going to get exactly the result it deserves with this move and the biggest winner will be Obama.

Vote Hoffman!

One warning in the 2008 election I was 0 for everything! Even local elections and ballot questions. Lets hope the trend doesn’t continue.

Update: Via Michelle, Doug Hoffman addresses this directly:

On August 18 Scozzafava’s campaign called my signing of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge a “stunt”:

Matthew A. Burns, campaign spokesman for Republican candidate Dierdre K. Scozzafava, said Mr. Hoffman’s pledge was a “stunt,” and did not indicate if his candidate would sign.

On October 1 Scozzafava herself publicly promised not to sign the pledge:

Scozzafava said she won’t sign the pledge because the income tax is just one form of tax, and that more people could be impacted if, for example, you refuse to increase income taxes under any circumstances but raise other taxes or fees instead.

But after two weeks of conservatives and independents abandoning her in droves to support my campaign, she has had a foxhole conversion:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Dede Scozzafava, a Republican running in New York’s 23rd Congressional district, recently signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge sponsored by Americans for Tax Reform (ATR).

I wouldn’t want to interrupt this show of steely principled resolve, but isn’t it slightly problematic to break a promise in the act of making another promise? Is there any lesson here except that Dede Scozzafava will say or sign whatever she thinks is mostly likely to get her elected?

I think the people are a lot smarter than the NRCC gives them credit for. I hope I’m right.

It’s all about A status Quo…

Posted: October 17, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , , , , , , ,

…not THE status quo which is democratic control of congress but A status quo, making sure that waves are not made with particular interests.

The thing about power is it waxes and wanes, sooner or later the Republicans will again control the house and/or senate. Sooner or later they will be Chairmen of committees that have spending and taxing power and that means sooner or later interests will shower them with money and favors to retain their particular interests.

The problem is if you get candidates who actually take conservatism seriously then that type of business as usual becomes harder and said power brokers loose face with the money men who might God forbid withhold their largess or even worse support the other guys!

This is why NY23 is significant. There are likely internal reasons why Dede Scozzafava was selected but like Newt’s endorsement is short term thinking (unless his primary concern is the gravy train). If the party discourages conservatives they will see more of this.

The republican party is happy when it comes to the tea party movement generating negative ratings for the president and challenging him so they don’t have to do it. About actually electing conservatives that will challenge Republicans to actually live up to the fiscal responsibilities that they espouse? Not so much.

I should note that you get the same dynamic from the other side. The far left is strung along for money to preserve majorities by electing democrats in “purple” districts but those same candidates balk at the radical agenda and the people who put up the money rightly cry foul. The hypocrisy is the same but one significant difference exists.

The conservative principles of the tea party protesters:

Fiscal responsibility
Support of Military victory and the Troops
Judeo-Christian values
Lower Taxes

These appeal to the great mass of the American public and are often publicly declared even by progressives.

The liberal principles of progressives:

Government Socialism
American defeat abroad and support of repression
Secular humanism ridicule of Judo-Christian values
Higher Taxes

These can NOT be declared openly without electoral defeat except in the most radical areas such as San Francisco.

You will on occasion see “progressives” espouse some or all of the conservative values while running to get elected, you will never see a conservative espouse the 2nd.

Update: Professor Darren Hutchinson seems to notice our problem in reverse. It appears both of use are being used like Leonard Hofstadter for Leslie Winkle immediate satisfaction.

Newer Entries