THE HILL
 

2009 election — The Republican Party’s ‘lose, lose, lose’ scenario

By Chris Kofinis - 10/30/09 08:43 AM ET

With just days to the 2009 election, we can prepare for ourselves an avalanche of media reports, blog posts, tweets, e-mails (OK, you get the idea) of what the results in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races mean for President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party.

Truth to be told, it won’t mean much no matter what happens. Why, you say? First, with about a year to the 2010 midterm elections and three years to the presidential elections, the results of what happens in Virginia (McDonnell will win, unfortunately), and New Jersey (Corzine will win, fortunately) will be long forgotten. Second, as much as people want to make state races in an off-year about the incumbent president’s popularity or lack thereof, they really come down to state issues (not national ones), and how candidates and campaigns ran against each other. That being said, nothing will stop the avalanche of stories and comments by the political intelligentsia, who will try to extract national meaning from two state races that at best can be described as traditionally blue (New Jersey) and purple (Virginia).

On the other hand, the special election in New York-23 has, in my opinion, national implications for the Republican Party. And, regardless of whether Dede Scozzafava (R), Bill Owens (D) or Doug Hoffman (C) wins, the outcome is “lose, lose, lose” for the Republican Party. In fact, the Republican Party, in its zealous pursuit of ideological purity, has decided to play Russian political roulette with itself and willingly decided to load the proverbial gun with six bullets. In other words, or to get to the point, regardless of who wins in NY-23, the Republican Party has found a way — incredibly — to lose, even if it happens to win.

How so?

Well, if Bill Owens (D) wins, he will have a won a seat that no Democrat has held since before the Civil War. Translation — Republicans lose big.

If Dede Scozzafava (R) wins, she will be persona non grata with her party’s leadership, she will find it nearly impossible to raise money, she is GUARRANTEED to face another primary challenger and, most amazingly, she will become the constant target of the far-right grass roots, which will use her candidacy to scare every Republican who dares utter support for progressive causes.

As a result, moderate Republicans or moderate independents will watch a Republican Party attack one of its own for many of the views and progressive positions that a majority of the country now supports.

In other words, Scozzafava should pack very lightly. Or, translation — Republicans lose again. But it gets worse.

If Doug Hoffman wins, he will become a champion of the far right and its grass roots. He will be seen as a modern version (OK, distant fifth cousin) of Ronald Reagan. The conservative voices, from Sarah Palin to Dick Armey (OK, what is it with Republicans who are named Dick and how they seem to find new ways to bring down their own party? Yes, I know: so many jokes, my head is exploding), will rejoice and cry to the heavens, “We did it. We made a safe Republican seat a safe Conservative Party seat. Umm … d’oh!”

Actually, it’s worse than that. If Hoffman wins, the Republican (Conservative) Party will have basically declared war itself. The Republican-Conservative Party will have declared war on every moderate in the Republican Party, not to mention will have told every moderate Republican out there to not even consider running for office because we will get you. If Hoffman wins, an emboldened far-out conservative grass roots fueled by Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin will use what it did in NY-23 against every moderate Republican in the country. (I can see it now: Don't dare cross us, "moderate Republican," whomever you are, or we will "Scozzafava you.")

In fact, this little civil war brewing within the Republican Party that is currently being played out in all its glory in NY-23 will spill over into the midterms and even the Republican primary. In fact, I can already see it now — Republican presidential candidates falling all over themselves to be seen as more conservative than Palin.

Even worse, the far-out wing of the Republican Party will have basically said to moderate voters that you and your progressive desires for more affordable healthcare, equal rights, clean environment, etc., are not welcome here

Now, if I weren’t positive this wasn’t the case, I would start to think that “Republicans” like Palin, Armey and Tim “Pawlenty-of-trouble,” not to mention folks like Beck and Limbaugh, are actually all Democrats. Because, the truth is, this cast of keystone right-wing politicians are doing more to help Democrats win than even some Democrats.

In any event, NY-23 is the race to watch on Election Day. But whatever happens, the Republican Party faces another lose, lose, lose scenario. And, amazingly, it may only get worse for them.

Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/campaign/65581-2009-election-the-republican-partys-lose-lose-lose-scenario

Comments (26)

You like throwing around the term 'moderate'. So lets see your definition of moderate. From where I'm sitting, your definition of a moderate Republican is someone who is indistinguishab le from a Democrat and supports big government, rising taxes and centralisation. So are you suggesting anyone who opposes this is an extremist?BY Dave on 10/30/2009 at 10:46
Where did you learn how to write? That was terrible.BY Bob on 10/30/2009 at 11:54
I agree with Dave and add these thoughts. The value judgements to determine who can legitimately wear the label of "progressive" by those who call themselves progressive, are, in most cases, just that, judgements: re. opinions. But a judgement is definitely open to discussion when the core of it is subjective rather than factual. As an example, abortion. Whether you believe that conception results immediately in a person or only a growing collection of cells will determine if you oppose or favor abortion. Your belief is subject to many factors that will be considered "extra-factual", untestable in a way that both sides can agree on. Whether either of us likes it or not, our society allows all judgements to be tested in open debate. And the determination whether a particular judgement is right or wrong will be debated until God finally steps in to end the debate. So we all need to accept that today's progressiveness may very well be tomorrow's regression. I believe there is absolute right and wrong in some judgements and that others should be open to interpretation. Not a comfortable life at times, but certainly a dynamic one.BY Jim Kenney on 10/30/2009 at 12:14
Perhaps the most absurd and condescending article on the NY 23 race that I have read to date. And that's saying a lot.BY Kate on 10/30/2009 at 12:24
We Republicans are just sick and tired of charlatans who call themselves Republicans, but have a more liberal voting record than a lot of Democrats. If you walk like a Democrat, quack like a Democrat, and vote like a Democrat, then don't call yourself a Republican. That's all we're saying.BY Chris on 10/30/2009 at 12:34
I think he's saying that a Conservative Party candidate is likely to lose in 2010 to a Democrat in any district that hasn't gone to Republicans since Reconstruction—the definition of a Republican "moderate" is fairly irrelevant, since Palin et al. are on a search and destroy mission against any Republican who is not just like them..And that makes this liberal Democrat happy.BY Lou on 10/30/2009 at 12:38
Who is this idiot Kofinis. "Pundit: is supposed to mean a wise person, not a fool.BY Corwin on 10/30/2009 at 12:47
Great rundown. Very good job. I live in Watertown (smack dab in the middle of this district). I ran against John McHugh in 1994 and LOST during that old Gingrich revolution, and now today we have some sort of Hoffman-Palin-Thompson-Pataki- whoever (far right) revolution in tow? I worked to get the nomination this time also that is based on my long record of service and especially in the military, wartime, DOD, Education and that fact that I am a former Marine Interrogator … but no. My party picks a non-DEM, INDY to be a DEM and carry the banner. A huge slap at the lifelong DEMs like me. That part of this story needs to be told, too, plus. Also, Hoffman does not even reside in the district (he lives in the 20th CD) … that too should matter. If things matter at all, those two points should matter, but they apparently do not … so why not? STRONG ARM POLITICS and all that HUGE, HUGE OUTSIDE MONEY. And, boy ARE WE STUPID — again, good rundown. Regards.BY Dan Francis on 10/30/2009 at 12:59
Have you stopped to consider that conservatives(l ike Hoffman)are actually for equal rights, a clean environment and reforming out of control health care costs? you make lots of of assertions and provide no facts, just the scary prospect of puppy killers getting in office and ruining life for country club republicans. Your analysis is so biased that you are overlooking the polls that show how disgusted all but the hard left is with the arrogant power grab happening in front of our eyes. We see it and what you will see is more and more people wanting less government control, not more. Get used to conservatives.BY Dick on 10/30/2009 at 13:05
Higher taxes, Government Motors, Government Healthcare, Cash for Clunkers giveaway, and on and on. In SC, Lindsey Graham is your man Kofinis. HeBY Rob on 10/30/2009 at 13:13

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.