How to Defeat a Field Without Engaging
Early Wednesday morning, it was confirmed that Rep. Todd Akin won the Republican senatorial primary, and will go forth to challenge sitting Senator Clare McCaskill. This was a three way race between Akin, currently a member of the House of Representatives and a Tea Party favorite, John Brunner former CEO of health and beauty care giant Vi-Jon and former state treasurer Sarah Steelman. Brunner had spent millions of his own money just to make it through the primary, and still came up short. Steelman had caught the eye and endorsement of Sarah Palin and came in third. Akin, seen by many as by far the most conservative candidate, which he pointed out many times. Interestingly, it was also pointed out by McCaskill and the Democratic party as means of both attacking him AND trying to get Republican base out to vote for him. He was the candidate the senator wanted to square off against since he was by far the furthest right of the candidates and she is hoping to paint him as so far outside the mainstream that she looks like the only logical choice. Brunner was her nightmare, both had tons of his own money and didn't look crazy as his opponents. Steelman considered herself the true Tea Party favorite since she was a) endorsed by Sarah Palin and b) had not been in the House for a few terms like Akin had. But McCaskill, in making a choice for Akin, has inadvertently shown the dilemma for modern Republican party.
Clare McCaskill won her Senate seat during the 2006 election, when just about every other seat went to the Democrats as well. This time around, she's facing a very uphill race considering that Missouri went to McCain in 2008 and will probably do so again this year. What was once a bellwether state has been slowly trending red in the past decade, while other states have been trending blue. It's been trending Tea Party since that movement started going, and it's been growing more Southern culturally when it was borderline Midwest at one point. However, it's not Arkansas in terms of trending red. So, McCaskill is hoping to set her record as moderate Democrat against that of a far right House member who sponsored a bill to change medicare laws to make sure they didn't pay for abortions, banning a reduction in weapons as required by the START treaty, against everything Obama wanted and generally in the 5th percentile of most right-voting congress members. Basically, if there was anything logical going that was against Obama, he was against it. If there was something crazy going on so long as it supported the Republicans, he was for it. He accused NBC of being hate filled liberals for "removing" words from the Pledge of Allegiance. He said liberals have no faith and hate God, which will likely come as a great shock to the many Christian Democrats living in Missouri. He is, in short, everything a lot of liberals hate about the modern Republican party. Which makes him the perfect opponent for a moderate liberal.
Akin was strongly supported by Mike Huckabee, while his opponent in the primary, Sarah Steelman, got the coveted endorsement of Sarah Palin. Of course, between the 2010 election and this one, this puts the win percentage for Palin endorsed candidates at "decent but not kingmaker" territory. However, with this win and the Senate primary race in Texas, this is proving to be a good year for the most Tea Party candidate. However, all THAT proves is what was already known as common wisdom: primaries skew to the extremes, especially Republicans. The only thing keeping some of these candidates viable is that these are often races that the DCCC has not been contesting seriously. However, in a big senate race, the entire state votes, not just one small section. While Akin might have been popular enough in his own district to keep going, he's gonna have to campaign in St. Louis and other Democratic strong holds about how intelligent design needs to be taught in schools along side evolution, but how he won't give money to actually help those schools. At some point, people do want things from their government, and the Tea Party is only in favor of giving the shaft.
This race, in some ways, was emblematic of the race for the future of the Republican party: pro-business (Brunner), religious far right (Akin) or anti-establishment far right (Steelman). It was in the national primaries as well: Romney (business), Cain (anti-establishment far right), Bachmann (religious right), Santorum (religious right) and Ron Paul (anti-establishment right). They have left behind a lot of kinds of Republicans, but there will be another rant on that later. These are the dominant forces right now in this election. Even the once vaunted security Republicans (like Giuliani or Powell) only had a last gasp this year with Huntsman (don't worry if you don't remember him, he didn't last long). The moderate right as seen in the days of Dole or others is now gone. There are still some wonks out there, like probable VP pick Paul Ryan, but volume is starting to out pace validity in terms of what people want. Seriously, is there any reason other than small bit of charisma that Sarah Palin is still a player enough in the party that the RNC chair wants her to speak at the national convention? She has long since quit her position as governor, and generally former governors of unimportant states are not invited to speak; then again, neither was she, which is what he was bitching about. So, the republican party, once being famous for being "trunk-to-tail" in terms of organization and unity has a lot to decide about its future.
Of course, so long as they are deciding, they will get people like McCaskill trying to muck up their water to make races easier to win. Earlier today, the DCCC announced more races in their Red-to-blue program designed to turn currently Republican held seats to the Democrats. That brings the current number up to 51, with a few others races being watched for potential as later additions. They know they aren't going to win most of those races, but those are all races where Tea Party candidates are running. They often have had a term in office or fought in vicious primaries, leaving them open to charges of being outside the standard political mindset. While the Tea Party famously has no set code, there do seem to be some things on which a lot of people who claim the title all share: cutting government spending (except for defense and medicare), anti-gay marriage, anti-Obama, strong Christian identification and protectionist policies. While many people might have a similar views on one or two of those issues, they often don't feel as strongly and won't go for the whole package. As an example, there are plenty of people who identify as christian, but not all will go for teaching intelligent design in classrooms or more stringent laws about immigration. For a long time, the Republicans had the big tent: it was easier to find a pro-choice Republican than a pro-life Democrat, as well as varied opinions on spending, government involvement in personal lives and all kinds of other issues. Now, as the Republican party has gone further to the right, many are left in the middle with no allegiance (including yours truly).
And until the Republicans remember the fight is about the middle, they will keep losing it.
So it is written, so do I see it.
Clare McCaskill won her Senate seat during the 2006 election, when just about every other seat went to the Democrats as well. This time around, she's facing a very uphill race considering that Missouri went to McCain in 2008 and will probably do so again this year. What was once a bellwether state has been slowly trending red in the past decade, while other states have been trending blue. It's been trending Tea Party since that movement started going, and it's been growing more Southern culturally when it was borderline Midwest at one point. However, it's not Arkansas in terms of trending red. So, McCaskill is hoping to set her record as moderate Democrat against that of a far right House member who sponsored a bill to change medicare laws to make sure they didn't pay for abortions, banning a reduction in weapons as required by the START treaty, against everything Obama wanted and generally in the 5th percentile of most right-voting congress members. Basically, if there was anything logical going that was against Obama, he was against it. If there was something crazy going on so long as it supported the Republicans, he was for it. He accused NBC of being hate filled liberals for "removing" words from the Pledge of Allegiance. He said liberals have no faith and hate God, which will likely come as a great shock to the many Christian Democrats living in Missouri. He is, in short, everything a lot of liberals hate about the modern Republican party. Which makes him the perfect opponent for a moderate liberal.
Akin was strongly supported by Mike Huckabee, while his opponent in the primary, Sarah Steelman, got the coveted endorsement of Sarah Palin. Of course, between the 2010 election and this one, this puts the win percentage for Palin endorsed candidates at "decent but not kingmaker" territory. However, with this win and the Senate primary race in Texas, this is proving to be a good year for the most Tea Party candidate. However, all THAT proves is what was already known as common wisdom: primaries skew to the extremes, especially Republicans. The only thing keeping some of these candidates viable is that these are often races that the DCCC has not been contesting seriously. However, in a big senate race, the entire state votes, not just one small section. While Akin might have been popular enough in his own district to keep going, he's gonna have to campaign in St. Louis and other Democratic strong holds about how intelligent design needs to be taught in schools along side evolution, but how he won't give money to actually help those schools. At some point, people do want things from their government, and the Tea Party is only in favor of giving the shaft.
This race, in some ways, was emblematic of the race for the future of the Republican party: pro-business (Brunner), religious far right (Akin) or anti-establishment far right (Steelman). It was in the national primaries as well: Romney (business), Cain (anti-establishment far right), Bachmann (religious right), Santorum (religious right) and Ron Paul (anti-establishment right). They have left behind a lot of kinds of Republicans, but there will be another rant on that later. These are the dominant forces right now in this election. Even the once vaunted security Republicans (like Giuliani or Powell) only had a last gasp this year with Huntsman (don't worry if you don't remember him, he didn't last long). The moderate right as seen in the days of Dole or others is now gone. There are still some wonks out there, like probable VP pick Paul Ryan, but volume is starting to out pace validity in terms of what people want. Seriously, is there any reason other than small bit of charisma that Sarah Palin is still a player enough in the party that the RNC chair wants her to speak at the national convention? She has long since quit her position as governor, and generally former governors of unimportant states are not invited to speak; then again, neither was she, which is what he was bitching about. So, the republican party, once being famous for being "trunk-to-tail" in terms of organization and unity has a lot to decide about its future.
Of course, so long as they are deciding, they will get people like McCaskill trying to muck up their water to make races easier to win. Earlier today, the DCCC announced more races in their Red-to-blue program designed to turn currently Republican held seats to the Democrats. That brings the current number up to 51, with a few others races being watched for potential as later additions. They know they aren't going to win most of those races, but those are all races where Tea Party candidates are running. They often have had a term in office or fought in vicious primaries, leaving them open to charges of being outside the standard political mindset. While the Tea Party famously has no set code, there do seem to be some things on which a lot of people who claim the title all share: cutting government spending (except for defense and medicare), anti-gay marriage, anti-Obama, strong Christian identification and protectionist policies. While many people might have a similar views on one or two of those issues, they often don't feel as strongly and won't go for the whole package. As an example, there are plenty of people who identify as christian, but not all will go for teaching intelligent design in classrooms or more stringent laws about immigration. For a long time, the Republicans had the big tent: it was easier to find a pro-choice Republican than a pro-life Democrat, as well as varied opinions on spending, government involvement in personal lives and all kinds of other issues. Now, as the Republican party has gone further to the right, many are left in the middle with no allegiance (including yours truly).
And until the Republicans remember the fight is about the middle, they will keep losing it.
So it is written, so do I see it.