This is a disgusting fit of pique by the same crowd that handed super majorities to the Democrats in the first place.
Foxnews is reporting that the NRSC is refusing to back Christine O’Donnell in the general election even though she is the clear choice of Delaware Republicans.
Party fractures on full display, Republican aides told Fox News Tuesday that O’Donnell would not be getting national fundraising support. State party leaders had warned that O’Donnell cannot compete against Democrat Chris Coons and vigorously backed Castle, a nine-term congressman and former governor.
This, more than a reflection on the O’Donnell campaign, shows the very real disdain that establishment Republicans have for us unwashed–tea-partiers and conservatives. I was ambivalent about the O’Donnell campaign before, now I want her to win in the worst way.
The establishment Republican party, maybe even more than the Democrat party, is one of the main obstacles to real reform in Washington. The American people are demanding reform but the establishment doesn’t care. They want to shut out real conservatives where they can and co-opt them where they succeed.
Many people think that 2010 is another 1994. I hope not. I don’t want another Republican takeover until conservatives have successfully taken over the Republican party. This is the message that the rank and file sent in Delaware tonight, this is why they sent the progressive RINO Castle packing. But they still don’t get the message.
I don’t know if O’Donnell is a good candidate or not. But at this point, I don’t care. I want her to win. Scratch that–I want the Republican establishment to lose.
I am tired of Republican lip service and betrayals. I want a purge. I want a witch-hunt. I want them all gone. Every last one of them. I want litmus tests. I want lots of litmus tests. I want to fold the big tent. I want to burn the big tent. I want conservatives darn it!!
September 15, 2010 at 4:59 am
Excellent! I couldn't agree more.
September 15, 2010 at 5:03 am
Before we go all knives out on this one, from which candidate should the NRSC divert funds? Sharon Angle? Miller? Paul? Rubio? Typically national committees do not get involved in races where the nominee is way down in the polls. It will almost certainly not give any money to either of the NY Senate Republican candidates, or the Maryland Senate candidate, or any other candidate that is ten points down in the polls. Conversely it probably won't be spending any money on Demint, Hoeven, or maybe even Toomey, or other candidates that look like locks.
This isn't about the NRSC being spiteful. It is backing Miller, Angle, and Paul even though they all beat the establishment candidate. There are a finite number of resources, and they are best placed where the candidate is in a real battle. Now if the next poll shows O'Donnell is close, then the NRSC will almost certainly get involved.
September 15, 2010 at 5:09 am
Sorry Paul, announcing that on election night is a fit of pique. If what you said is true, they we be quiet and sit on the sidelines to see if she can get close. Instead they try to undercut her 5 mins after her selection. There is no spinning that.
September 15, 2010 at 5:18 am
The NRSC didn't announce anything. Some aide speaking on background said that the NRSC isn't getting involved until she proves to be viable. How is that unreasonable?
Again, there are finite resources. Every dollar spent on O'Donnell is another dollar not spent on a candidate in a toss-up election. I'd actually be pissed if the NRSC spent money on long-shot candidates and diverted money away from someone who really needs it. And if O'Donnell makes it a close race, they better damned well get involved.
September 15, 2010 at 5:23 am
Oh, and don't get me wrong, I'm not enamored of the national committees. As someone on Ace pointed out, they've done a terrible job of recruitment in some places, and have unneccessarily gotten involved in primary races. I have no love whatsoever for any of national committees. I'm just not going to rip the NRSC over this decision.
September 15, 2010 at 6:00 am
This is awesome in every way. So many of us see ourselves in these beleagered candidates. What if I, typical Joe six-pack, were to make a run to further the conservative cause? I would be villified by both the media and RINOS, they'd go after my family, they'd call me an ignorant, ill-bred hick with an inferior education, clinging to my guns and religion.
Screw them. Good Americans are standing up everywhere for conservative values, and they no longer need the NRSC to make decisions for us. Goodbye. Dismissed.
September 15, 2010 at 7:20 am
Patrick, I share your attitude toward the national and state GOP committees, but Paul Zummo has it right. This is not the NRSC being spiteful. It is the NRSC playing unsentimental hardball politics by allocating limited resources where they have the opportunity to do the most good. There will not be any funding going to Maryland, Vermont, Hawaii or Oregon either. It is just the same kind of triage the DCCC is doing right now in pulling resources from seats they no longer believe they can defend.
I would much rather we lose with O'Donnell than win with Castle. Unfortunately, I am afraid that is exactly what we will do.
Hopefully there will be enough newcomers in the Senate that Mitch McConnell will be returned to the rank and file.
September 15, 2010 at 7:45 am
Paul You are correct. Why should O'Donnell get money and that guy in VT not?
People need to clam down. There is a lot of tribalism and conservatives in this race that could not back O Donnell' are now being called RINOS.
Sore Winners Sore Losers makes bad election year. People need a cooling off period
September 15, 2010 at 10:57 am
Nope. Pat is right. If it was a matter of funds alone, they would sit on the news in the hope that she could get close.
This is the "Moderates" read: (those with no principles) and who like to "compromise" (read: give in) on life issues like Mike Castle trying to hide *their* daggers behind "being practical".
In an election cycle where it has become ABUNDANTLY OBVIOUS that conservatives in swing state situations (which is what Delaware is) can make up huge deficits in the polls. Moderates are reacting negatively to being exposed for what they are: lukewarm fence-sitters.
The idea of an aide feeling comfortable stabbing a newly minted GOP nominee in the back and having no fear of getting fired for it? That comes from the top; his boss believes it too, and his boss is a RINO. They know very well how the media will spin this, so it is intentional.
Not supporting O'Donnell is one thing. Stabbing her in the back is entirely another.
September 15, 2010 at 12:02 pm
I've ran a few political campaigns and never…I mean NEVER has the party (in the form of the NRCC or the NRSC) come out and told the press that they will NOT be pushing money into a race.
If politics is war, you don't tell your opponent which hill you're attacking. The NRCC or NRSC typically reserves ad time in races all over the country and then pulls it out and pushes more in before the ads actually go up based on what the polls say.
And to say that the NRSC has made its mind up here using just the polls is inaccurate, I believe. Polls this early in a race are somewhat meaningless, especially after a divisive primary because the party is split and when you ask Republicans in the middle of a primary fight would they vote for the other Republican in the general you get a lot of "Hell no" answers which skews the poll. Often, those Republicans will come home in November.
And let's face it, independents and Dems aren't paying that close attention yet to the Republican candidates so they're likely not very aware of who O'Donnell even is. The NRSC knows this.
Their announcement last night was spite. I've never seen an announcement like that before.
I've been on some real dogs of campaigns too who had ZERO shot of receiving NRCC funds but the NRCC still said nice things about us to the press and acted as if there was always the possibility of them coming riding in over the hill to help. They never told the press they wouldn't be helping. It's as Patrick says -a fit of pique.
September 15, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Would the NRCC prefer that the Democrat win?
September 15, 2010 at 2:09 pm
"Many people think that 2010 is another 1994. I hope not. I don't want another Republican takeover until conservatives have successfully taken over the Republican party. This is the message that the rank and file sent in Delaware tonight, this is why they sent the progressive RINO Castle packing. But they still don't get the message."
I think this is wrong. If the Republicans fail to take Congress, the ones who will be blamed will be the ones most likely to lose: Angle and O'Donnell. Rightly or wrongly, the national party will feel vindicated in their choices of moderates. Many conservative-leaning voters will also think that they can't win with true conservatives and return to voting for those who are electable in primaries. Anything other than tremendous gains in the fall elections would be a cataclysmic set back for conservatives.
September 15, 2010 at 2:35 pm
But gains without ideological clarity or cohesiveness do nothing for us. A "Republican" win that doesn't advance a conservative pro-life agenda does nothing for me.
September 15, 2010 at 3:09 pm
Two things: First, 2010 better be another 1994, or in 2012, there won't be any pieces left to glue back together. Second, I also wish the Republicans would become conservative before winning, but that's no reason to grant the Dems the power to finish the destruction they have set in motion — an amnesty for illegals would so skew the voter base as to give Obama the dictatorship he seems to crave.
September 15, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Bill,
Mike Castle is an amnesty supporter. How would he have helped with fighting amnesty?
September 15, 2010 at 4:42 pm
The Archbolds are right.
And the problem they identify is not just this one-time occurrence, either. For all the talk of social conservatives not being "team players", it is the RINO establishment that is a bunch of sore losers who take their ball and go home whenever they get beat by grassroots conservatives.
Examples:
* Jim Jeffords, unhappy with conservative leadership on various Senate committees (and the fact that he didn't get some pork project he wanted) decides to become an "independent" and caucus witht the Democrats, giving them control of the Senate;
* the establishment-backed Lincoln Chafee takes GOP campaign contributions and then decides to run for Rhode Island Governor as an "independent";
* the establishment-backed Arlen Specter and Charlie Crist take GOP campaign money, realize that even with that edge they're going to lose to more conservative grassroots-supported candidates, and then bolt the party to run as a Democrat and an "independent", respectively;
* the establishment-backed Dede Scozzafava takes GOP campaign money, realizes that all the GOP grassroots are supporting the Conservative Party candidate, drops out of the race and endorses the Democrat;
* the establishment-backed John Ensign loses the GOP primary for his House seat and then goes on Chris Matthews' show to talk about how racist and mean-spirited the GOP grassroots are;
* the establishment-backed Lisa Murkowski loses to a more conservative opponent in the Alaska GOP primary for the U.S. Senate and has flirted with running as a Libertarian (before the LP heads nixed her) and is currently contemplating a write-in campaign;
* the establishment-backed Mike Castle loses to a more conservative opponent (despite relentless and RNC-coordinated personal attacks upon said opponent — let's not forget the RINO establishment's "nuts and sluts" gauntlet through which any conservative woman running for office must negotiate – see also, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Nikki Haley), and, upon losing, decides not to endorse the GOP nominee and the national leadership backs up that non-endorsement by announcing they will not support her with much-needed campaign money.
Leon Wolf, in his scathing review of Meghan McCain's "book" has also identified the problem:
"By far the biggest problem the Republican coalition has right now is moderates who refuse to accept defeat at the hands of conservatives. Think Dede Scozzafava endorsing the Democrat in NY-23. Think Charlie Crist and Arlen Specter bailing the party and running against the Republican when it became clear that they would lose their primaries. Think Lincoln Chafee currently running as an independent for Governor of Rhode Island despite the NRSC spending millions to help him defeat a conservative in the primary. I defy Meghan McCain to identify a conservative candidate who acted or behaved in this way towards the party after a primary loss.
"
We know the problem is there. So, what is the solution? (I'll offer that in my next comment.)
September 15, 2010 at 4:59 pm
The solution to the problem I just described is this:
The GOP doesn't support us? Then we don't support them. It's time to drop out. Walk away.
The Republicans have a prime, yet wholly unearned and undeserved, opportunity for historic gains in this year's elections. What have they done to merit it? The recent actions by the GOP prove that the party establishment has not learned their lesson after 4 years in the wilderness.
So, why should we reward them by putting them back in power just so that they can go back to the same old, same old that they were doing the last time they were in power and that was used by the media and the Democrats to discredit conservatism (even though it wasn't conservatism).
The GOP thinks they're going to win big in November? So, what if we taught them a lesson by snatching victory from them? What if we stayed home on election day or voted 3rd party?
Okay, the downside is another 2 years of Democrats controlling Congress and the White House. A lot of damage can be done in that 2 years.
But a lot of damage can be done if we return the GOP in its current form to power, as well. They don't respect us. Just look at how they've treated our candidates. Just listen to the calls for a "truce" on abortion. Just watch as the establishment types in the party, the "conservative" legal community, and the "center-right" media stumble all over themselves to push for same-sex marriage. Our presence embarasses them. They don't want us here, as their sore-loser actions clearly indicate.
They don't support us? Then we don't support them.
September 15, 2010 at 5:03 pm
The check is in the mail as of this morning. They must have read your rant.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/nrsc-sends-42000-check-odonnell
September 15, 2010 at 5:12 pm
I'm with Jay. After a great argument like that how could you be against him?
September 15, 2010 at 5:19 pm
People like me paid little attention to primaries until just very recently. What caught my attention was a Weekly Standard piece printed a week ago. In it, the author described Mike Castle as a moderate while digging up dirt on O'Donnel (it appears all of it was true). But it wasn't O'Donnell's past behavior that got me interested (after the last 3 decades, it appears that being a loon is the first requirement for national office). What got my attention was the Weekly Standard's revision of Castle's moniker. To call Mike Castle a Moderate is like calling Barney Frank a Centrist. Castle's voting record as govenor and Represenative are about as liberal as one can get.
The Weekly Standard not too long ago (2001-2006)was THE Beltway source for insider info. The editors of the WS are about as insider as you can get. And it is obvious, they saw Castle's run for the Senate as the key for the GOP if it can run the tables this November. If the GOP retake 10 Senate seats, the Weekly Standard would gain as well. It makes no matter if the GOP does anything usefull, as long as it controls the Senate's agenda. There is a lot of money and prestige being wired into the center of power. And it is the power that matters. As it turns out, quite a few Republicans think along these lines. Even Charles Kruathammer had to slam O'Donnell. It appears civility goes only so far. And I remember not too long ago about every GOP pundit, bigshot, and operator had nothing but praise for the late Sen Kennedy (God rest his soul). Calling O'Donnell unfit for office while singing praises to a man who not only had monumental "moral" issues, but wielded power like some Mafia Don is problematic at best.
O'Donnell will probably lose in a few weeks. But, I think the word got out to the RNC and Beltway Courtiers.