|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Top Donors to Republicans Seek More Say in Senate Races
Cliff Owen/Associated Press
Representative Steve King of Iowa could be an early target of the Conservative Victory Project.
By JEFF ZELENY
Published: February 2, 2013
COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa — The
biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.
Steven J. Law, a leader of the Conservative Victory Project, say they are taking steps to steer Mr. King away from a Senate run.
The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races
.
“There is a broad concern about having blown a significant number of races because the wrong candidates were selected,” said Steven J. Law, the president of American Crossroads, the “super PAC” creating the new project. “We don’t view ourselves as being in the incumbent protection business, but we want to pick the most conservative candidate who can win.”
The effort would put a new twist on the Republican-vs.-Republican warfare that has consumed the party’s primary races in recent years. In effect, the establishment is taking steps to fight back against Tea Party groups and other conservative organizations that have wielded significant influence in backing candidates who ultimately lost seats to Democrats in the general election.
The first test of the group’s effort to influence primary races could come here in Iowa, where some Republicans are already worrying about who will run for the seat being vacated by Senator Tom Harkin, a Democrat. It is the first open Senate seat in Iowa since 1974, and Republicans are fearful of squandering a rare opportunity.
The Conservative Victory Project, which is backed by Karl Rove and his allies who built American Crossroads into the largest Republican super PAC of the 2012 election cycle, will start by intensely vetting prospective contenders for Congressional races to try to weed out candidates who are seen as too flawed to win general elections.
The project is being waged with last year’s Senate contests in mind, particularly the one in Missouri, where Representative Todd Akin’s comment that “legitimate rape” rarely causes pregnancy rippled through races across the country. In Indiana, the Republican candidate, Richard E. Mourdock, lost a race after he said that when a woman became pregnant during a rape it was “something God intended.”
As Republicans rebuild from losing the White House race and seats in the House and Senate last year, party leaders and strategists are placing a heightened focus on taking control of the Senate next year. Republicans must pick up six seats to win a majority.
Representative Steve King, a six-term Iowa Republican, could be among the earliest targets of the Conservative Victory Project. He said he had not decided whether he would run for the Senate, but the leaders of the project in Washington are not waiting to try to steer him away from the race.
The group’s plans, which were outlined for the first time last week in an interview with Mr. Law, call for hard-edge campaign tactics, including television advertising, against candidates whom party leaders see as unelectable and a drag on the efforts to win the Senate. Mr. Law cited Iowa as an example and said Republicans could no longer be squeamish about intervening in primary fights.
“We’re concerned about Steve King’s Todd Akin problem,” Mr. Law said. “This is an example of candidate discipline and how it would play in a general election. All of the things he’s said are going to be hung around his neck.”
Mr. King has compiled a record of incendiary statements during his time in Congress, including comparing illegal immigrants to dogs and likening Capitol Hill maintenance workers to “Stasi troops” after they were ordered to install environmentally friendly light bulbs. But he rejected the suggestion that his voting record or previous remarks would keep him from winning if he decided to run for the Senate.
“This is a decision for Iowans to make and should not be guided by some political staffers in Washington,” Mr. King said in an interview, pointing out that he won his Congressional race last year even though President Obama easily defeated Mitt Romney in Iowa. “The last election, they said I couldn’t win that, either, and the entire machine was against me.”
The Conservative Victory Project will be a super PAC operating independently of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. It will disclose the names of donors and raise money separately from American Crossroads, officials said, because some donors were uncomfortable about aggressively weighing in on Republican-vs.-Republican fights.
“It is a delicate and sensitive undertaking,” Mr. Law said. “Our approach will be to institutionalize the Buckley rule: Support the most conservative candidate who can win.”
But by imposing the rule of the conservative leader William F. Buckley, the group could run afoul of Ronald Reagan’s “11th Commandment” to not speak ill of a fellow Republican.
In Iowa, Cory Adams, the chairman of the Story County Republican Party, said the criticism aimed at Mr. King was unfair and misdirected. He warned of resistance from conservative activists if outside groups tried to interfere in the Senate race.
“If he wants to run for the Senate, he should be allowed to run,” Mr. Adams said of Mr. King, whose Congressional district includes Story County. “The more people get to know him, the more they will like him.”
The retirement announcements last month from Mr. Harkin and Senator Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia, have created wide-open Senate races that are expected to attract several prospective candidates. The Conservative Victory Project is working to build a consensus with other groups on candidates who have the strongest chance of winning.
Grover Norquist, who leads Americans for Tax Reform, a fiscally conservative advocacy group that plays a role in Republican primary races, said he welcomed a pragmatic sense of discipline in recruiting candidates. But he said it was incorrect to suggest that candidates backed by Tea Party groups were the only ones to lose, pointing to establishment Republicans in North Dakota and Montana who also lost their races last year.
“People are imagining a problem that doesn’t exist,” Mr. Norquist said. “We’ve had people challenge the establishment guy and do swimmingly.”
Sue Everhart, the head of the Georgia Republican Party, said she did not object to outside intervention. But because open Senate seats do not come along very often, she said,“we have six congressmen who want the job,” which could create a messy and divisive primary regardless of the efforts to control the race.
“The primary has to sort itself out in Georgia,” Ms. Everhart said. “That’s what primaries are for. But we cannot afford to take our eye off the ball. This is going to be a very important election, and it’s paramount that Georgia keeps its Senate seat in Republican hands.” |
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:18 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Moyers and Company
Karl Rove’s New Plan to Take Over the Senate in 2014
February 4, 2013
by John Light
Karl Rove and his American Crossroads super PAC are back with a new plan to achieve a Republican majority in the Senate in 2014. The New York Times reports that American Crossroads is creating the “American Victory Project,” an outside spending group whose purpose is to support moderate Republicans who are threatened in primary races by far-right challenge
rs.
American Crossroads spent about $104 million on the last election with little success. Nearly all of the candidates the group supported lost. The Sunlight Foundation calculated that only 1.29 percent of Crossroads’ spending lead to the result they were looking for.
In 1967, William F. Buckley memorably told the Miami News that for those voting in the Republican primary, “The wisest choice would be the one who would win.” The president of American Crossroads, Steven J. Law, told the Times that the Conservative Victory Project’s goal is to “institutionalize” the so-called Buckley Rule and impose “discipline” on Republican candidates. The group will oppose outside-the-mainstream Senate candidates such as Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock who lost elections after making controversial comments about rape that drew national attention. The Times’ Jeff Zeleny writes:
The effort would put a new twist on the Republican-vs.-Republican warfare that has consumed the party’s primary races in recent years. In effect, the establishment is taking steps to fight back against Tea Party groups and other conservative organizations that have wielded significant influence in backing candidates who ultimately lost seats to Democrats in the general election.
Unsurprisingly, many conservatives are not happy about Rove’s pitch for favoring viability over ideology. In one of many columns decrying the group’s assault on Tea Party candidates, Erick Erickson, editor of Redstate.com, fired back:
I dare say any candidate who gets this group’s support should be targeted for destruction by the conservative movement. They’ve made it really easy now to figure out who the terrible candidates will be in 2014.
|
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:24 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
There's also a battle in Michigan. The establishment wants to keep Bobby Shostak. US House Republicans approved every dime of Obama's spending.  |
_________________
Adam
-
Mysearchisover.com
-
FB
-
Jobs
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:56 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| I hear rumors they may endorse Ananich for Gleason's seat. |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:32 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
With Rove's past failure rate, he is sure trying to ingratiate himself to McConnell. Jud has not even announced her candidacy.
Ashley Judd Targeted By Karl Rove's Super PAC In Ad (VIDEO)
The Huffington Post | By Ariel Edwards-Levy Posted: 02/06/2013 9:12 am EST | Updated: 02/06/2013 9:32 am EST
Karl Rove's American Crossroads is spending $10,000 on an online ad taking aim at actress Ashley Judd's political views -- the latest sign that her possible challenge to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is one Republicans take seriously.
The ad, released Wednesday and called "Ashley's Story," highlights clips of the actress professing her support for Obama and his health care plan, and quotes a Daily Caller story where her grandmother called her a "Hollywood liberal."
It also hits Judd for saying, "Tennessee is home." While Judd grew up in Kentucky, she currently lives in Tennessee, and attended the DNC as a delegate for that state.
“Ashley Judd: An Obama-following radical Hollywood liberal, who’s right at home in Tennessee. I mean Kentucky,” the narrator of the ad intones.
The ad will run for two weeks in Kentucky, starting Wednesday, according to American Crossroads.
:
The video's lines of attack closely follows some of the talking points that McConnell's camp tested in a December poll, including her ties to Tennessee and the "Hollywood liberal" line. Both McConnell's internal polling and a survey by the Democratic firm PPP showed the senator leading Judd by a 4-point margin.
Judd has expressed interest in the race, but hasn't announced whether she will run.
• |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:48 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Why American Crossroads' millions weren't enough on Election Day
By Bill AllisonDec 10 201211:56 a.m.
American Crossroads, the super PAC whose success in the 2010 elections heralded a new era in big money in politics, came nowhere close to matching that performance in 2012. Of the 30 largest outside spending groups that backed more than one candidate in the general election, it had the second lowest return on investment in the races in which it intervened.
Despite having the second largest pool of money to play with among super PACs--it spent $104.7 million (only Restore Our Future, the organization backing Mitt Romney, spent more), in race after race it bet on the losing side, with the lone exception of former Sen. Bob Kerrey, who sought to reclaim a spot in the Senate he'd left in 2001.
American Crossroads fared so poorly for three reasons: First, the PAC risked a huge sum for a huge payoff--defeating President Barack Obama--but the Romney campaign and its surrogates came up short. Second, it spent heavily on Senate contests in battleground states where the Obama campaign mounted ad blitzes and a hugely successful get-out-the-vote operation. And third, because American Crossroads did not to intervene in primaries--perhaps not wanting to alienate the Tea Party faithful--it had weaker candidates to support in the general election.
Contacted by Sunlight, American Crossroads emphasized the first reason. Jonathan Collegio, the group's communications director, emailed:
You can’t have an honest conversation about the impact of outside groups without looking first at the gargantuan monetary advantage Obama enjoyed over Romney on the TV airwaves throughout the campaign. Obama outspent Romney on television ads by $30 million in Ohio, $27 million in Florida, $21 million in Virginia, and $16 million in New Hampshire – four states Obama carried by a total of only 340,000 votes, and which had they switched would have swung the election to Romney. In some cases that’s the equivalent of five to six weeks of unanswered television ads in those markets.
And these dramatic disparities understate Obama’s advantage because Romney was purchasing airtime week to week at the end of the campaign, and not reserving time back in the summer when rates were sometimes two-to-three times less expensive. Outside groups helped to level those disparities out and kept the race close, but it was not enough. Obama leveraged the financial power of his incumbency and its four long years to build a financial and grassroots campaign that ended up just overpowering Mitt Romney.
The Presidential Contest: All told, American Crossroads spent $91.1 million to win the White House for GOP candidate Mitt Romney. Despite polls showing that most of the public knew little about GOP nominee in June 2012 and early indications from Democratic strategists that the Obama campaign would attack Romney's character and record at Bain Capital, American Crossroads spent just $6.5 million on positive ads about the Republican nominee. All but $47,500 was spent during the last five weeks of the election
.
In contrast, Restore Our Future, the super PAC that supported Romney, spent $4 million in May and another $7.2 million at the end of July to run positive ads about Romney, which was still a drop in the bucket compared to the $88.6 million the group spent attacking Obama. American Crossroads showed a similar disparity: the bulk of its spending on the presidential contest--some $84.6 million--went for ads attacking Obama. In a replay of the 2004 election, when GOP and outside group attack ads against Democratic candidate John Kerry went unanswered, that left the field open to the Obama campaign and its surrogates to define Mitt Romney.
According to figures from Kantar Media obtained by the Washington Post, the Obama campaign spent $333 million on more than 562,000 ads--82 percent of which attacked Romney. Team Romney, by contrast, spent $147 million on more than 223,000 ads. Some 91 percent of Romney's ads were negative. And in October, the Wesleyan Media Project, which tracks spending on political ads, concluded that the Obama campaign consistently aired more ads than the Romney campaign and its independent surrogates like American Crossroads while spending less for those ads.
Battleground States: In addition to the presidential contest, American Crossroads sought to deliver Republicans a majority in the Senate, and concentrated its spending on candidates running in three battleground states--Florida, Virginia and Wisconsin--where its combined spending totaled $7.4 million. All three states had increased voter turnout compared to 2008, according to Nate Silver of the New York Times, and in the presidential contest, all three were won by Obama.
In Wisconsin, high turnout for Obama helped elect Rep. Tammy Baldwin to the Senate; American Crossroads spent $2.7 million on the race. Just months before, Gov. Scott Walker easily survived a recall effort, winning 1.3 million votes. Thompson actually improved on Walker's tally by roughly 50,000 votes, but the general election turnout machine for Democrats delivered 1.5 million votes to Baldwin, about 340,000 more than Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, Walker's opponent in the recall, could muster.
Senate winners ran ahead of Obama in contests in both Virginia, where American Crossroads spent more than $728,000, and in Florida. In the contest between former governors Tim Kaine and George Allen, the former won more than 2 million votes--about 40,000 more than President Obama, who bested Mitt Romney by a 4 percent margin.
In the battle for the Sunshine State, American Crossroads spent $4 million--more than in any other congressional contest--to defeat Sen. Bill Nelson. The incumbent garnered 4.5 million votes, about 350,000 more than Obama did, cruising to an easy victory or Rep. Connie Mack, a candidate with a troubled past but endorsements from the GOP establishment.
Primary Indifference: If Mack was a problematic candidate, others proved to have electoral death wishes. In Missouri, American Crossroads spent more than $64,000 attacking Sen. Claire McCaskill, a candidate beset with ethics problems running in a state where her vote for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act--Obamacare--seemed at odds with an electorate that overwhelmingly voted for a state measure that aims to invalidate the law's requirement that individuals purchase insurance or pay a fine.
But challenger Todd Akin self-destructed in August when he asserted that it is impossible for pregnancy to result from "legitimate rape." After the comments, Republicans urged Akin to withdraw from the race. For McCaskill, who aided Akin in his three-way primary by running ads attacking him as the real conservative, the race was never again in doubt. The $64,000 American Crossroads spent, which came in September, long after Akin's remarks, was lowest amount for any Senate race in which it intervened.
While McCaskill's campaign spent in the primary to get the opponent she thought easiest to beat, American Crossroads continued its policy of not intervening in Republican primaries. In 2010, two weak candidates in Nevada (Sharron Angle) and Delaware (Christine O'Donnell) won in part on the strength of outside spending by other groups. And in 2012, both Akin and Richard Mourdock in Indiana, who defeated long-term incumbent Richard Lugar in the primary, won their nominations with the help of outside spending. Like Akin, Mourdock damaged his campaign with a remark about rape and lost to Rep. Joe Donnelly. American Crossroads spent $1.38 million on ads attacking Donnelly.
Silver Lining: Not all the spending was in vain. In races in non-battleground states that had Republican challengers whose views of rape didn't alienate the electorate, American Crossroads' went one out of three. They failed to unseat Sen. Jon Tester of Montana or to elect Rep. Heather Wilson in New Mexico, but Nebraska voters opted for Deb Fischer over Kerrey, giving American Crossroads its sole Senate victory of 2012.
|
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:57 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
RIGHT WING NEWS
Stop Giving Money To American Crossroads Until Rove Stops Targeting Conservative Candidates in Primaries
Written By : John Hawkins
February 4, 2013
After American Crossroads frittered away 200 million dollars in the 2012 campaign cycle, mostly on ineffective TV ads, you’d think Karl Rove and his organization might be asking some tough questions about their strategy. But instead, they came to the same conclusion establishment Republicans always do: the problem is those darn conservatives
So, Rove and company have created a spin off group to try to sandbag conservatives in primaries in order to make sure we’ll have a slate full of Charlie Christs and Arlen Specters in 2014.
The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.
Steven J. Law, a leader of the Conservative Victory Project, say they are taking steps to steer Mr. King away from a Senate run.
The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races.
“There is a broad concern about having blown a significant number of races because the wrong candidates were selected,” said Steven J. Law, the president of American Crossroads, the “super PAC” creating the new project. “We don’t view ourselves as being in the incumbent protection business, but we want to pick the most conservative candidate who can win.”
The effort would put a new twist on the Republican-vs.-Republican warfare that has consumed the party’s primary races in recent years. In effect, the establishment is taking steps to fight back against Tea Party groups and other conservative organizations that have wielded significant influence in backing candidates who ultimately lost seats to Democrats in the general election.
Not once has Karl Rove, the NRSC or the RNC EVER backed a conservative candidate over a moderate in a competitive Republican primary (The exception for Rove would be W. over McCain, but W. was paying Rove’s bills). That’s because they start with the presumption that the more moderate candidate is ALWAYS more electable.
That’s the same mentality that made the establishment pick Trey Greyson over Rand Paul, David Dewhurst over Ted Cruz, Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio, Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey, Bob Bennett over Mike Lee, John McCain and Mitt Romney over the rest of their competitors — and even Gerald Ford over Ronald Reagan. So, when people with that mentality decide to get involved in primaries, nothing good will come of it.
Oh, but maybe they can stop us from getting terrible candidates….again, like Rand Paul, Pat Toomey or Ted Cruz? Well, you may say, what about the really bad candidates? Well, for every Christine O’Donnell, there’s a Linda McMahon. For every Sharon Angle, there’s a Tommy Thompson. For every Todd Akin, there’s a Carly Fiorina. Oh, but they were obviously the best candidates available because….of what exactly? The establishment liked them? Because they were more moderate?
Karl Rove doesn’t care what I have to say, you have to say, or what the grassroots thinks. He cares about precisely one thing: fund raising. His power comes from raising and spending money. Cut into his donations, then you cut into his power — and that will get his attention.
So, stop giving money to American Crossroads. Not one more dime — and let the people know why if they pitch you for a donation. There are lots of great conservative organizations out there that need help and if you specifically want to aid candidates, the Senate Conservatives Fund is a better place to put your money. Jim DeMint is behind that organization and just about anybody you love in the Senate who has been elected over the last couple of cycles did it with the help of the Senate Conservatives Fund. You’ll also never catch those guys trying to kill conservative candidates.
Now, can blog posts like this one shut off the flow of cash to American Crossroads? Nope, but we can slow it down. If we peel 10, 20, 30 million dollars off its totals, then that will get some attention. American Crossroads may not speak grassroots or Tea Party, but green, it speaks just fine. It’s time for conservatives to start speaking to American Crossroads in a language that it can understand.
|
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:07 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
CNBC FINANCIAL TIMES
GOP Heavyweights Fight for Party’s Future
Published: Wednesday, 6 Feb 2013 | 3:03 AM ET
By: Stephanie Kirchgaessner
The battle for the soul of the Republican party is getting nastier following the launch of a new effort by some wealthy donors to strike back at ideologically driven activists– including conservative billionaires – who have steered the party to the far right.
A new fundraising group spearheaded by Karl Rove, the former top adviser to George W. Bush, called the Conservative Victory Project is aiming to prevent "poor quality candidates" from winning Republican primaries and then losing against Democrats. A spokesman for the group said that the elevation of candidates like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, who lost Senate bids to Democrats last year following controversial remarks about rape and abortion, have cost Republicans five to seven Senate seats over the years.
The effort, which is seen as helping more traditional and mainstream Republicans fend off conservative challengers, will ultimately pit wealthy donors to Mr Rove's group against wealthy activists at the Club for Growth and other organisations who have made it their mission to rid the Republican party of politicians they say are not conservative enough and replace them with hardliners.
"This has nothing to do with message and everything to do with quality of the candidates. And our solution to this is to identify candidates, the most conservative possible,that can win primaries and general elections well," said Jonathan Collegio, a spokesman for Conservative Victory Project.
But in a sign of just how messy the intraparty fight has become, influential conservatives have quickly turned on the new plan, pointing out that Mr Rove backed a slew of candidates who lost in 2012.
"I dare say any candidate who gets this group's support should be targeted for destruction by the conservative movement," said Erick Erickson, the conservative blogger.While Mr Rove was trying to "lend a veneer of conservative credibility" to certain kinds of candidates, Mr Erickson said the Republican strategist was really trying to recreate the "big government conservatism" of the Bush era.
Top donors to another Rove-backed group, American Crossroads, include Harold Simmons, a wealthy investor, and Sheldon Adelson, the gaming tycoon, and his wife, Miriam.But the new fundraising effort could alienate donors like John Childs, of JWChilds Associates, who according to public records donated both to American Crossroads and the conservative Club for Growth in 2012.
One conservative activist said it was too early to tell whether Mr Rove's efforts would have an impact, and noted that it was likely more of a fundraising ploy than an effort to drive a wedge between Republicans.
Amy Kremer, a Tea Party activist, told The Hill newspaper that the Rove-backed group was willing to "sacrifice principle for power".
Another Republican, John Feehery, a former senior staff member in the House, said there were many different kinds of donors in the Republican party – from activists like the conservative Koch brothers to wealthy hedge fund executives who are socially liberal but fiscally conservative, and others who simply want to oppose Mr Obama.
"You have these tea party groups out there and the hard right and they seem to spend a majorityof their time attacking Republicans. They waste a lot of money, too," he says.
The effort comes as party leaders in Washington are seeking to soften the Republican image following a devastating election in which Barack Obama won a second term and Democrats held on to their majority in the Senate. In a speech on Tuesday, Eric Cantor, the majority leader, sought to "rebrand" the party by shifting emphasis away from budget and fiscal fights and focusing on issues like immigration and innovation.
Last edited by untanglingwebs on Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:22 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:11 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Karl Rove's New Super Pac-Republicans Attacking Republicans
—By Andy Kroll
| Mon Feb. 4, 2013 3:06 AM PST
No more Todd Akins. No more Richard Mourdocks. No more Republican primaries that produce divisive, gaffe-spewing GOP candidates.
That's the aim of a new super-PAC, the Conservative Victory Fund, spearheaded by Karl Rove and his big-money juggernaut, American Crossroads. Rove's new project plans to raise millions of dollars from the biggest GOP donors and then spend it on hard-hitting television ads and mailers during GOP primaries in marquee Senate races. The goal, as the New York Times reported this weekend, is blocking future Akins and Mourdocks from winning Senate primaries, while paving the way for less-divisive candidates with broader appeal and better odds of winning the general election. "We don't view ourselves as being in the incumbent protection business, but we want to pick the most conservative candidate who can win," Steven Law, the president of American Crossroads and a force behind the Conservative Victory Fund, told the Times.
Law singled out Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who could run to replace outgoing Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin, as a controversial candidate the Conservative Victory Fund might target. King has a penchant for howlers: He's hinted at questions about President Obama's US citizenship, claimed minority students all "feel sorry for themselves," insisted that the idea of diversity making American stronger "has really never been backed up by logic," and compared illegal immigrants to dogs. "We're concerned about Steve King's Todd Akin problem," Law said. "All of the things he's said are going to be hung around his neck." (King, for his part, said choosing the candidate to replace Harkin "is a decision for Iowans to make and should not be guided by some political staffers in Washington.")
The Conservative Victory Fund's creation threatens to stoke an already fiery internal battle over the future of the Republican Party. There are the Roves and Laws of the GOP, the pragmatic Beltway operators who backed Mitt Romney and who believe the party must tone down the demagoguery on immigration and social issues if they ever want to control of Congress and the White House again. On the other side are the ideologues, the GOP's conservative wing, the Koch-backed groups and tea partiers and Grover Norquist acolytes who believe the party's future lies in veering hard to the right and doubling down on pure conservative ideals.
With Rove's new super-PAC in the mix, the GOP's slate of 2014 primaries will be even nastier than expected in states such as Iowa, Georgia, and Kentucky, among others. The GOP needs to win six seats in 2014 to take back control of the Senate, and if that requires some intraparty combat, the Conservative Victory Fund looks ready to go to war. By the end of 2014's primary season, don't be surprised, to borrow a phrase from Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, to see quite a lot of blood and teeth left on the floor. |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:16 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
untanglingwebs schreef:
I hear rumors they may endorse Ananich for Gleason's seat.
I think they do want him to win the primary. Are you saying they might endorse him over me in the general? It's seems pretty clear to me they aren't planning on getting behind me after the primary. |
_________________
Adam
-
Mysearchisover.com
-
FB
-
Jobs
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:02 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
I only hear bits and pieces from the Republican Camp. Do the Republicans believe Ananich is the weaker Democratic candidate? He does have some issues but so does Woodrow Stanley?
Who did you piss off? Who else is running for the Republicans? |
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:10 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
untanglingwebs schreef:
I only hear bits and pieces from the Republican Camp. Do the Republicans believe Ananich is the weaker Democratic candidate? He does have some issues but so does Woodrow Stanley?
Who did you piss off? Who else is running for the Republicans?
I think Ananich is pretty moderate so he probably goes along with Snyder a lot of the time. Even I know this district is mostly unwinnable so they think Ananich is the more "Republican" of the dems.
You had me worried there for a second. lol I'm an outcast renegade "Ron Paul Republican". Robert Daunt is running against me. |
_________________
Adam
-
Mysearchisover.com
-
FB
-
Jobs
|
|
|
Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:50 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Think Progress
How The Civil War Between Karl Rove And The Tea Party Could Cost Republicans The Senate
By Scott Keyes on Feb 7, 2013 at 2:00 pm
Think of the brewing Republican civil war between establishment-types like Karl Rove and right-wing Tea Party activists as a bullfight.
Initially, in 2009-10, Rove and establishment Republicans were scared of this new, large group that had entered the ring. It was unruly, unrefined. As time progressed, though, Rove came to see its strength and the way it brought in crowds. It moved quickly. It attacked relentlessly. However, the more Rove waved his red flag in an attempt to win contests for his side, the more his sparring partner became enraged. By 2013, Rove had made his decision: this group was too unpredictable to be dealt with. It was time to end things before he and his party got gored.
That’s why Rove announced this week, to much Tea Party consternation, that he was forming a new group—the Conservative Victory Project—to try to undermine far-right candidates who might appeal to Republican primary voters, but would get trounced in a general election. In at least seven races over the past two election cycles, Tea Party candidates prevailed over establishment types in Republican Senate primaries: Todd Akin in Missouri (2012), Sharron Angle in Nevada (2010), Ken Buck in Colorado (2010), Linda McMahon in Connecticut (2010 and 2012), Richard Mourdock in Indiana (2012), and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware (2010).
Unfortunately for establishment Republicans, winning a bullfight is easier said than done.
Like a cornered animal, many Tea Partiers are wildly lashing back. On Thursday, FreedomWorks emailed their list accusing Rove of “working in tandem” with President Obama “to silence grassroots conservatives in the freedom movement.” Rep. Steve King (R-IA) also emailed supporters to declare that “Nobody can bully me out of running for the U.S. Senate, not even Karl Rove and his hefty war chest.” Citizens United president David Bossie simply offered, “The civil war has begun.”
To a certain extent, this conservative reaction is expected. When Tea Party groups think of contested Republican primaries, they don’t think of Akin and Mourdock. They think of some of the right wing’s most beloved figures, like Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mike Lee (R-UT), who defeated establishment Republicans and won the general election. On the other hand, those Akin and Mourdock group of losses are the difference between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
That dynamic could play out again in 2014, in what could otherwise be a banner year for Senate Republicans. Of the 33 seats up for election, 20 are currently held by Democrats and 13 by the GOP. Republicans likely need to pick up six seats to win a majority, but their chances in at least five races—Alaska, Georgia, Iowa, South Carolina, and West Virginia—are already being threatened by establishment-Tea Party fighting.
Tea Party groups aren’t exactly lining up, baby duck-style, behind Rove as he tries to shepherd electable candidates through these races. As Politico writes, some are even threatening to back third-party candidates if Rove’s picks prevail in the primary:
If tea-party-backed candidates lose GOP primaries after they’re attacked by Rove’s group, the Tea Party Express might support them as third-party candidates, suggested the group’s founder Sal Russo. His group has spent $17 million in the past two election cycles and is credited with boosting a pair of 2010 Senate candidates to GOP primary victories only to see them lose general elections that Rove and his allies deemed winnable.
“We discourage our people from supporting third-party candidates by saying ‘that’s a big mistake. We shouldn’t do that’,” he said. “But if the position [Rove’s allies] take is rule or ruin — well, two can play that game. And if we get pushed, we’re not going to be able to keep the lid on that.”
If the conservative vote gets split between Republicans and third-party candidates, Democrats might not just hold the Senate, they could increase their majority.
Tags: |
|
|
|
Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:48 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
The Fix by Chris Cizilla
The dirty half-dozen: Six Senate candidates who could foment GOP civil war
Posted by Aaron Blake on February 7, 2013 at 3:31 pm
The tension between establishment Republicans and conservative outside groups has reached a fever pitch with the launch of a new Karl Rove-backed project aimed at nominating electable GOP Senate candidates.
The national Republican Party, quite simply, is tired of having less-electable GOP candidates emerge from primaries and — to their minds — cost them Senate seats.
But even as the new group is being launched, GOP primaries in a number of key states already are threatening to test the new project’s ability to weed out less-electable candidates and could create battles between more moderate/establishment-friendly candidates and very conservative/outspoken alternatives.
Below, we detail six candidates who could cause problems for the GOP in 2014:
1. Iowa Rep. Steve King: King has been long among the most outspoken conservatives in the House, particularly on immigration and social issues. During the Todd Akin flap last year, King defended Akin and said that he wasn’t aware of victims of statutory rape and incest becoming pregnant. He later backed off that position, and it’s notable that he recently said he likes the Senate’s bipartisan proposal on immigration. That suggests King might be looking to moderate his image, but coming to the middle will be difficult for a guy who has spent much of his career as a bomb-thrower. GOP leaders would much prefer Rep. Tom Latham as their nominee. King said in a recent fundraising e-mail that he won’t be “bullied” out of the race by the Rove group, the Conservative Victory Project.
2. Georgia Rep. Paul Broun: Broun, who launched his campaign Wednesday, was tea party before the tea party was a thing, coming out of nowhere to upset an establishment-favored Republican in a 2007 special election (flashback!). Since then, he has been a card-carrying member of the GOP’s saying-unhelpful-things caucus. He has dabbled in birtherism and once said, “All that stuff I was taught about evolution, embryology, Big Bang Theory — all that is lies straight from the pit of hell.” He also has accused the president of upholding the “Soviet constitution” and flat-out labeled him a “socialist.” The good news for the GOP establishment is that there are likely to be some other conservative options in the primary, like Reps. Tom Price and/or Jack Kingston, who could attract the support of conservative groups. In addition, the state’s runoff law means Broun couldn’t simply skate by in a crowded primary field.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) during a 2012 presidential debate. (Toni Sandys – THE WASHINGTON POST)
3. Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann: After her presidential campaign, we’re all well aware of Bachmann’s very conservative record and style, along with her propensity to say odd things. And polls show that if the former presidential candidate wanted it, she could probably walk to the GOP nomination to face Sen. Al Franken (D) in 2014. Even as she would be a huge favorite in the primary though, the same polls show she would start out with a 14-point deficit against Franken — bigger than any of Franken’s other well-known opponents. Bachmann hasn’t said much about a potential Senate run, but running against Franken might be her last, best chance for a promotion.
4. Former Alaska GOP Senate nominee Joe Miller: Miller may not belong on this list, if only because he stands little chance of actually winning a Republican primary to face Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska.). After he upset Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) in a primary in 2010, Miller became hugely unpopular and, even today, is disliked by many of the state’s GOP voters. But the fact is that he has won a primary and could conceivably do it again if the primary field — as expected — is very crowded. Even in that case, though, conservative groups may not pick Miller over their alternatives.
5. Montana state Rep. Champ Edmunds: The least-known name on this list is one to keep an eye on. The GOP field to face Sen. Max Baucus (D) is expected to be a crowded one, and Edmunds has already signaled his interest and has reserved the champforsenate.com Web domain, where he’s accepting donations. He’s very conservative across the board, including spearheading efforts on illegal immigration, fighting against same-day voter registration and criticizing a Justice Department probe into sexual assault allegations in Missoula. Edmunds is the kind of outspoken conservative who is happy to take on basically any conservative cause and happy to speak bluntly about it. That’s not terribly helpful in a Senate campaign, though. Establishment Republicans would much prefer someone like former state senator Corey Stapleton, who announced his campaign this week.
6. Former Louisiana congressman Jeff Landry: The one-term congressman lost in 2012 after having his district merged with the more senior Rep. Charles Boustany (R), but Landry is already talking about taking the next step — a potential Senate race. Landry won his congressional seat by knocking off the former state House speaker in a primary and then an incumbent Democrat in the general election, so he’s shown he can win. During his brief tenure in Congress, Landry was a big ally of the oil and natural gas industry, once holding up a “drilling = jobs” sign at an Obama speech. He also was active in the tea party and at one point said the Obama administration was granting “special status or waivers to Muslims as they go through TSA screenings.” One of his final acts as a congressman was to accuse Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) of giving in to Obama on the “fiscal cliff” deal. If he ran, Landry would likely join a field that includes Rep. Bill Cassidy, the current Republican favorite. |
|
|
|
Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:58 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:05 pm |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
