Tuesday, October 27, 2009
We're hearing a lot about the 23rd district in NY about the current disagreements between the Republicans and Conservatives. I find it fitting that they have started acting as if they are 2 different parties. I'm a Conservative first and a Republican second.
I have been listening to the debate in these last few days regarding this race and figured I may as well give my thoughts about this race, (everyone else is). I'm worried about all the faith being given to the polls regarding this race.
First thing we should do is read this story. Note the first 2 words in the title of that article, "Conservative Pollster". That's where the problems begin.
The polls being used in Hoffman's defense that show him in the lead were all conducted by groups that back Hoffman. While more independent polls show him in third.
"the Minuteman PAC -- which is supporting Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman -- finds Hoffman in first place, and the moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava in third."
"This runs contrary to independent polls, which have put Owens in first, Scozzafava second, and Hoffman third, while it's consistent with a poll from the Club For Growth (which also supports Hoffman)."
Do you see my concern here? The polls that show Hoffman gaining the most in New York are being conducted by groups that have backed Hoffman. I'm worried that the bias they understandably have may be clouding their judgement of how well Hoffman is in fact doing.
Hoffman is no doubt gaining steam on the national stage since conservative heavy hitters like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck have publicly backed Hoffman but this race isn't about the national stage, it's about the 23rd district in NY. I'm no big fan of Scozzafava but if she ends up split with Hoffman and the Democrats win, it will present 2 major problems between the Republicans and Conservatives.
1. The Democrats will treat this as though the party is divided when it isn't.
Remember how great it was to see Hillary Clinton and President Obama going after each other in the debates? We are giving the Democrats the same kind of satisfaction that we had watching those debates.
2. Conservatives are presenting an image that there is no room for moderates in the Party.
That is the angle Newt Gingrich is trying to point out. The next year leading up to the 2010 elections will be played out much like a political chess game. In some areas we have to help moderates where Conservatives are likely to lose. The Conservative criticism of Scozzafava will be remembered by her. In that regard it's good that this controversy exists, if she wins she will remember how disappointed the conservatives are with her and how close she's being watched by the party.
I agree with the conservative critics of Scozzafava on some of the things she supports. Card check being one of the worst. However, one thing you can be sure of is that if we hand this election to the Democrats because of this rift between the Conservatives and the more moderate Republicans, then you can be sure that everything you dislike about Scozzafava and more will be supported by Bill Owens.
Given the fact that so many of you backed McCain in '08, even if it was only for Palin it looks hypocritical. Remember this? The point of showing you that reminder is simply that we will never get a perfect candidate.
The same could be said for Romney fans, remember Romneycare? Glenn Beck is a vocal critic of Romneycare in MA yet he was backing Romney for president. How about Ronald Reagan? He had to work with the Democrats for the good of the country since they were in control. Newt Gingrich had the same experience with Bill Clinton. I think it's that experience that is guiding his decision here.
You can bet that Newt Gingrich hasn't abandoned conservatism. After all, he stepped down as speaker and formed American Solutions because he saw Republicans shifting from conservatism, (and other reasons). He was right. The Republican party did abandon conservatism.
The leaders of the Republican party must be conservative but think of this. I mentioned earlier in this post that the next year must be played like a political game of chess. Let me explain that.
Think of the pawns in a chess game. They are the weakest pieces on the board but if cleverly used they can set up the win with the more powerful pieces. I think that Newt, and John Boehner by the way, are trying to place Scozzafava in Congress to act as a pawn. If cleverly used against the Liberals it can set up a Conservative victory in the bigger and more important races in the future.
I'd love to be able to elect all conservatives across the board but it's not possible. Without some moderates helping in more Liberal areas we will lose.
Many Conservatives stood up for principles in the November election and cost McCain a few states by voting for Bob Barr. It wouldn't have won him the election but it did make a point. Standing up against the "moderate" may have sent a good message to the party about returning to conservatism in '08 but did that make you feel any better when you realized that Obama had been elected?