In this piece in the American Spectator, Quin Hillyer points out that no matter how the senate ends up for Republicans, 2010 is around the corner. And the need for getting strong candidates needs to start yesterday.
One of the reasons that the Republican National Committee Chairman battle needs to be settled is the winner should be the one to look at and get some good people to try to wrest some senate seats from the Democrats. And to keep some Republican seats going the other way.
The same needs to be done at the House level as well.
Mr. Hillyer has some interesting names in the mix, but that aside, the highlight of the article is Alabama senator Jeff Sessions.
Sen. Sessions was originally nominated for a federal court during the Reagan administration but the Democrats voted him down.
Eventually, Sen. Sessions ran for and won the senate seat he holds now. And he won reelection to a third term in the election just passed.
Why is this important? Because Sen. Sessions ran as and has legislated as a conservative.
Granted, that is not hard to do in a state like Alabama, but it is instructive to those running in other parts of the United States that people will vote for you on principle if you articulate it and stand by it.
The reason that the Republicans are in the state they are in is that they claimed to be for smaller, efficient government and have governed like liberal Democrats. As I have noted in the past, when the voters have that choice, they vote for the real deal and that would be the Democrats.
It is not a "branding" problem the Republicans face but one of going back to what the voters will vote for. It has been done before and can be done again.
We could look at someone like a Sen. Sessions rather than someone like our unesteemed governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger to be the way back.
But our battles for control of the party structure at the national level needs to be resolved now so that the recruiting can begin. Yesterday!
3 comments:
The reason that the Republicans are in the state they are in...
Look at last week's electoral college map, dude. The repubs have been pushed back into the worst of the old south (which includes Alabama), and that strip of plains running north to south from the Dakotas to Texas where nobody lives, except for some big cities in Texas.
Montana and Georgia are well on their ways to turning blue.
If you look at a nationwide map based on counties, and plot those counties where the repubs increased their share of the vote in 2008 compared to 2004, you get red counties clustered in Appalachia. That's pretty much it.
Oh, and Alaska where convicted felon Ted Stevens has fallen behind as the final count concludes in that race; and where soon-to-be-indicted congresman Don Young appears to have prevailed in his bid by about 10,000 votes.
The problem with repubs is that, outside the areas I've mentioned, people just aren't buying what they're selling. It's called a shrinking minority.
But please get serious about pushing Bible Spice. That's your ticket to success.
What amazes me, Mr. Snarkle, is that you seem to be pretty smart. Look, a lot of those that voted for President-elect Obama voted AGAINST President Bush. I know that and readily admit it. Do you really think that if the economy is in bad shape two years from now, President Obama and the Democrats will be awarded with more votes? NO WAY! I am impressed by the fact that President-elect Obama was able to run against President Bush and the voters bought it. Now, it is all on President-elect Obama and the Democrat shoulders to carry out their bloated promises. I seem to remember a lot of the same hyperbole bantied about when the Republicans took congress in 1994. Why there was a lot of talk if then President Clinton would not be defeated if he ran for reelection. So, let your team get in and see if they are able to straighten things out.
a lot of those that voted for President-elect Obama voted AGAINST President Bush.
Do you have any evidence for your assertion? Is this based on fact? If so, what's your source?
My own impression is that this appears just the latest rightwing rationalization and talking point; the latest in a series of attempts to delegitimize Obama's electoral achievement.
It's also a nice example of 'Conservatism can't fail, it can only be failed.'
As far as the state of the economy is concerned, this unraveling has been underway since the days of St. Ronnie the Demented. It's not going to be turned around before November, 2010.
I think the electorate has spoken with regard pretty clearly about who they feel is responsible for screwing things up, and on what policies and governing philosophies are responsible for screwing things up, based on right track/wrong track polling, and on polling regarding who the electorate feels is better able to address these problems.
If the Democrats can show that they're taking action, they certainly won't be punished. If the repubs can be shown to be obstructionists, they'll be the ones to suffer further losses.
The repubs have to be able to convincingly develop and articulate actual solutions, which has never been their strong suit (empty rhetoric about taxes/boogeymen/gays doesn't work anymore).
Besides, if you just look at the electoral map, and at basic demographics, there's not a lot of good news for you.
Post a Comment