A look back, Hodge in May 2009 at Red County — On Florida’s Charlie Crist vs. Marco Rubio, and the NRSC’s poor decision to immediately back Crist
Benjamin Hodge wrote this article at Red County in May 2009:
When the National Republican Senatorial Comittee, headed by Senators John Cornyn and Mitch McConnell, decided to back Florida Governor Charlie Crist over former Florida Speaker of the House Marco Rubio, Redstate’s Erick Erickson began aFacebook group called “Not one penny to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC).” At present time, there are 1,085 members, and I’m one of them.
It appears there are two major arguments with regard to primary races: issues, and strategy. And Erickson is getting heat from some Republicans with those two themes: that either Erickson is not being tolerant to GOP moderates on issues, and/or that Erickson is not focusing on the idea that Crist is the best general-election candidate.
………………………….
I’ll first focus on issues.
The battle for the heart of the Republican Party right now has little to do with “social issues,” at least in the common vernacular. It has everything to do with an issue which some define as a moral issue, and which some do not: socialism.
Under Democrats or Republicans, we’re getting a less and less freedom-based nation. The only difference is the speed of progression of socialism.
Some find the Club for Growth or Erick Erickson or whomever to be “not tolerant enough.” I find this to be somewhat of a pointless argument, similar to calling an anti-abortion person like myself “intolerant” — just as I wouldn’t win an abortion-related argument by calling a pro-choice voter “intolerant.” Ideas are ideas, and people of all viewpoints often hold very firmly to their positions; it’s natural they will “tolerate” conclusion over another one.
Here’s the deal: I don’t want more socialism; I won’t tolerate it. I also won’t tolerate judicial activism. And, fortunately, both of those messages (perhaps stated in a different manner) are messages that at least 65% of America will embrace.
If somebody can provide me convincing evidence that will lead me to be confident that Charlie Crist will courageously defend economic freedom and the rule of law on the Supreme Court, then I will consider re-considering my current support of what Erick Erickson is doing, in terms of directly challenging the NRSC.
Until then - relying either on hope, or on Crist’s limited-but-somewhat-concerning record - I will argue that this it is faith-based reasoning to assume that Charlie Crist will defend the two principles of economic freedom and the rule of law.
Let’s also step back a moment and re-evaluate what we are defining as “center” - whether in the overall electorate, or within the GOP. Fellow Republicans, we must not allow ourselves to believe the left/media when they tell us that the following principles are “controversial”:
- National defense;
- Judicial originalism;
- The idea that your money is YOUR money;
- Economic, consumer-based freedom, as opposed to government-dictated, centralized “choices.”
Frankly, I found Arlen Specter to be fully acceptable for the party; not ideal, but acceptable. In a mildly Democratic-leaning state, the Republican Specter was strong on judges and national defense, and he even gave mild support to a super-majority constitutional amendment to increase taxes. To be clear, I found it unfortunate that he decided to leave the GOP. That said, the idea that he was “kicked out” by an intolerant conservative base is nonsense. “Fiscal restraint” is not a “controversial” issue for anyone - again, for America, and most certainly not ever for the GOP - and Specter made the voluntary choice of supporting the least acceptable budget in American history.
Back to Crist-Rubio: If those defending the NRSC (by backing Crist) are going to be satisfied long-term if Crist turns out to be a pre-2009 Specter - or a Kit Bond or most of the Senate GOP - then I believe they are too easily satisfied. What we are moving towards is European-style socialism, where most of the positive meaning to the term “American” will be lost. And, again, we will get there with either the current GOP or Democratic Party; it doesn’t matter much in the long run.
We do not need “tolerators of creeping socialism” in the GOP. We need “defenders of freedom.”
………………………….
To the concern about “general election strategy.” A legitimate debate to have, but come on:
- Jeb Bush is to the right of most elected Republicans nation-wide, and he won Florida by enormous margins.
- This is not Charlie Crist versus city councilman Marcus Rubio. This is the Florida Governor Crist versus Speaker of the House Rubio. The promotion to Speaker of the House, particularly in state government, is generally very difficult to obtain (I will argue far more difficult than most state-wide offices). These individuals are highly respected, are trusted, and often (for better and worse) they are very politically savvy.
- Nor is this incumbent Crist versus Rubio. This is an open election.
- Forget the Lincoln Chafees and the Specters: legitimately, does the current NRSC have a proven ability to win elections? Is there some amazing strategery going on at the NRSC? I’m not saying the job is easy, or that they’ve currently done a bad job, but I will say that it’s very difficult to argue much “success” under the current leadership.
- No, the argument that “we must keep our 40 Senators and not go any lower″ is not a persuadable argument.
- This is not Massachussets, where I recall that there are, for reasons I do not know, about 15 GOP state house members. Nation-wide, few expect the current levels to hold.
- I encourage Republicans to ask how we DESERVE our 40. To be fair, we could have better managed the Iraq War, and we could have done a few other things to make the “brand” a better seller right now.
- Remember that there’s a lot of luck in politics, and it’s currently working in the favor of Democrats:
- People grow tired of any majority party.
- George Allen, Larry Craig, etc. on the GOP side - unfortunate events occur with regard to individual politicians from time to time.
- The anti-GOP 2006 (once every 15-25 years) and the 2008 Obama effect (once every 25-40 years). These kicked out good-to-acceptable GOP candidates for no individual faults of their own, but largely because the 25% of the voters who only shows up every 4 years for presidential elections decided that they weren’t big fans of Republicans (or liked Obama)
- Regardless, I point back to the reality - whether some like it or not - that a significant (if not majority) of GOP voters are absolutely fed up with Washington under either party. These people are willing to risk going down to 30-35 conservative US Senators, if it means the promotion of a message that they a)view to be correct and b)view to be a message that WILL win back the majority in short time.
………………………….
Bottom line: the current GOP establishment mindset - apparently reliant entirely upon on “luck” with regard to the theme of “oh, things will turn back around” - this mindset is not tolerated by a significant portion of the GOP base. More importantly, the GOP base doesn’t want a majority, if it merely means a repeat of Hastert/McConnell leadership on government spending - they’re nice men and effective leaders, but they do not possess the willingness and/or ability to reign in government spending.
We don’t need fewer of the Club for Growths or the Erick Ericksons. We need more. I find it unfortunate that many GOP establishment-types find their views to be “controversial.”
Related Posts:
- Editorial: Do Congressmen Jerry Moran and Todd Tiahrt support John Cornyn’s effort to elect Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio?
- Charlie Crist challenger Marco Rubio picks up endorsement of Jeb Bush, Jr.; reportedly will soon receive Mike Huckabee’s endorsement for 2010 Florida US Senate race
- Meet Marco Rubio
- One of the real winners of NY-23 is Marco Rubio. Today, Club for Growth PAC Endorses Marco Rubio over Governor Charlie Crist for U.S. Senate.
- Marco Rubio very competitive against Charlie Crist among most knowledgeable voters
