Thread: What's better for conservatives: A GOP win in November? Or a

http://www.townhall.com/blogs/capitolre ... 97780.html

That is a question being debated by Mark Tapscott and Jim Geraghty. And lest you think this is an academic debate, think again -- there are indeed many conservatives who, like Tapscott, think that a minor drubbing at the polls this November is just what the Dr. ordered to remedy the GOP's current big spending ailment.

Tapscott argues that a GOP loss of the House would set conservatives up nicely to retake the House and keep (or some may say retake) the Presidency.

There would be lots of talk about insanities like impeachment, congressional investigations, repealing the Bush tax cuts and the like. But the lack of actual results would drive the Moonbats into venegeful desperation and a general revulsion among independent and conservative voters, with a bloody and perhaps permanently crippling splintering of the Democrats to follow.

It would in short be the perfect setup for a stengthened conservative majority to return in Congress in 2008, most likely with a White House occupant wise enough to recognize that the "emerging Republican(i.e conservative) majority" had become a reality.

Geraghty is not so sure:

We can strongly suspect that voters would be repulsed by Speaker Pelosi and a Kos-style legislative agenda. But we don’t know for certain. Remember that a Democrat-controlled Congress is also likely to be getting astonishingly glowing press coverage. You know that roaring economy? You’ll start hearing about it, and it will all be credited to the Pelosi-Reid Economic Stimulus Bill passed in January 2007. Congressional hearings accusing oil companies of “illegal profits” will be welcomed by consumers frustrated by high gas prices. Bush’s approval rating will take another hit after he vetoes the “Every Voter Gets Free Health Care And Free Prescription Drugs And Rent Or Mortgage Subsidies And A Pony Too Act of 2007.” Senator John Kerry’s summit meeting with French President Jacques Chirac will be credited with dramatically reducing anti-Americanism around the world. And so on.

Of late, I have been inclined to see things the same way Tapscott does. It would be disasterous for limited government conservatives if House and Senate leadership maintained the status quo into the election season and then lost no seats. It would be, in their eyes, an affirmation of business as usual.

But leadership on both sides of the Capitol have been slowly waking up to the fact that their conservative base is ticked. And to their credit, they are taking baby steps towards fixing the problem. House leaders Boehner and Hastert have drawn a line in the sand on the emergency supplemental spending bill. Boehner has been very outspoken against the pork contained therein. The duo also appear poised to hold the line against a wishy-washy immigration reform bill. Also, the earmark reform recently agreed to in the House should not be overlooked.


Now granted, these are baby steps and there is still more to be discouraged about than encouraged, but they are not nothing. However, if they build on these actions over the coming months then the case conservatives have for wanting to see some pain extracted in November diminishes. That's not to say conservatives can be bought -- because they can't be -- the actions must be real and not simple gestures to the conservative heart and soul of the GOP.


Additionally, Geraghty's points must be taken seriously. What happens if the Dems win the House and then use their newfound subpoena power smartly -- i.e. not overreaching. I know this is a stretch given their Feingold-esque track record, but the point is that with the majority they will have the power to score political points if they take a measured approach to their political theatre. They will have the power of subpoena and they can use it to highlight every single perceived (doesn't matter if it is real) corruption of the GOP Majority. They will have over a decade worth of history to parse through and manipulate. If they are smart -- again a big if -- they could make real political hay.

I know the chances are they can't hold back their crazies, but the more I think about it the more I am not sure I want to take that bet.

Yesterday, RSC Chairman Mike Pence speaking to a group of bloggers reinforced this point. Pence, no tool of leadership, told the group that the loss of the House would be "disastrous." Pence just returned from an overseas trip and he noted that a Democrat victory would "send a deafening message to the capitals of the world about our commitment in Iraq."

As conservatives on the outside looking in, we are going to have to figure out pretty quickly exactly what we are willing to wager. This is indeed high stakes.

UPDATE: An example of continued good rumblings from the House...this release from Speaker Hastert's office:

(Washington, D.C.) Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) today made the following statement regarding Senate attempts to use an across-the-board cut to make room for additional spending it included in its $109 billion emergency supplemental bill. The Senate passed its bill, which is more than $15 billion over the President’s $92 billion budget request, earlier this month.

“Any calls from the Senate for an across-the-board cut to make room for a bloated supplemental will be met by a busy signal in the House. The House will not join a shell-game spending spree with taxpayer dollars. President Bush requested $92 billion for the War on Terror and Hurricane Katrina relief spending. The House has passed a bill that exercised fiscal restraint. The Senate needs to throw overboard, unnecessary add-ons and help us get the needed funds to our troops in the field and our fellow citizens suffering the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.”




Please Login or Register to Post Comments

Comments
Display Mode: threaded nested minimal flat


Wholeheartedly Agree - by Nanman, May 17 2006 04:34 PM

Tim -

Came in on Instapundit's link, and wanted to say I completely agreed. I addressed the issue here, in case you're interested:

http://influencepeddler.blogspot.com/20 ... tigue.html

Arrogance - by Freddy, May 17 2006 06:42 PM

George Bush and Congress, not only the Republicans, need a slap down. For instance, here is what George Bush said on signing the extension to the tax bill: '"With this bill, we're sending the American people a clear message about our policy,". "We're going to continue to trust the American people with their own money."' Note the arrogance - who are 'they' to decide whether or not to trust us with our own money. And this from a man presiding over the borrowing and spend policies that will eventually seriously damage our children's economic prosperity. We'll trust you with your own money but you certainly can't trust us with current or future generations' money. Arrogance. Posturing. Pandering.

How to tell Reps they are wrong? - by TomGrey, May 18 2006 02:32 AM

Dem victory in Nov., much like Hamas victory in Palestine, might well be a disaster. And for the same anti-corruption / anti-pork reason.

Angry Reps are 6 months late -- all the big-spending Reps should be facing small gov't / tough immigration enforcement challengers in the Primary. I think most, like Jerry Lewis (41 CA), are unopposed.

Talk of a third party is silly -- if your "third party" faction can't win in a Rep primary, it ain't gonna win in Nov. either. [Being a Libertarian or Green for consistent ideological reasons is OK, to attempt to shift the debate and pull the nearest Party to change so as to steal the most popular issues.]

What is the best way, now, to push Reps to change? It is for more Rep voters to stop sending money, to write opposition letters, to promise not to vote Rep (even knowing they don't mean it), and promise to mean it, unless Congress gets serious about cutting pork and stopping illegals. Yeah, lie to politicians like they lie to us; with the out that in Nov, we might hold our nose and vote the lesser of two big gov't evils, again.

And be looking, now, for better small-gov't Reps for 2008 primary challenges. There should be 12 year term limits for all elected officials.
Tom Coburn for 2008? -- at least it would give his porkbusting a louder media megaphone.


GOP Loss in November! - by Rick, May 18 2006 07:45 AM

Wash your mouths out with Lava. Don't be idiots! If the Democrats get a majority you will see instant amnesty and citizenship for every illegal within flying distance of us. Why? Because they will all vote Democratic! According to the Heritage Foundation this little "Amnesty that isn't an Amnesty", like a duck isn't a duck, for 12 million of these yahoos will ultimately result in 100 million of them. And this is a conservative figure. One Congressman estimates as high as 217 million. Do the Math! Kennedy and his pals have already sabotaged the Immigration Bill. I think it is on page 520. The bit about the Immigration Judges.

The last thing this country needs is a Democratic majority and/or President Hillary. I get chills just thinking about it. Don't be idiots! Yeah these boys and girls are losers, but consider the alternative! Think long and hard what it was like all those years with the Dems in control. Do we really, really want that. From the frying pan into the fire

A word to the wise: it would be in the best interest here to NOT get all partisan and all gooey over Republicans staying in Congress etc. THis is NOT the place for it! Why? Because this is supposed to be a non-partisan forum. There are a LOT of Democrats who are as furious over this issue of illegal immigration. But they have no interest in reading about how bad the Democrats are.
And to compare the Democrats to Hamas is a major insult. Tha is about the same as the far left ( which are not the majority of Democrats ) comparing the Republicans to Nazis. That is also a major insult.
We need to unite rather than to be more divided than we have been. And by insulting members of another party who are as fed up with the sellouts in their party is not the way to do it.
We are ALL Americans. Of course we are Republicans, Democrats, Independents. BUT can we please stop with this partisan name-calling etc? I feel it doesn't belong here. This issue is more important than the political party we are a member of. And if we don't do something about it, at some point in te future it will not matter what party we are a member of. The people we vote for should not be corporate shills but people who are willing to serve the American people. I am a Democrat thinking as re-registering as an Independent. I have family and friends who are Democrats and Republicans.

I am a Rep. but I am among the GOP voters who will not be voting for them. This was from Google news .....I do see post from others that are referring to Dems and Reps and Independents, it is a sorce of what the other party is up to and who can be trusted, as far as I am concerned neither party that is in the government now deserves to be re elected not even as to dog catcher. This post was not ment to be bipartisan it was giving facts of the two parties and what they are doing. After all it is both the parties in our government who are willing to destroy us, not just one, so if we don't direct their issues, how are we to know what's going on. I do see plenty of insults about Bush who I voted for, and I am among the people insulting his actions....this has nothing to do with either party it has to do with both....there isn't anyone or anything trying to make this immigration thing happen,(outside of Fox) it is the government run by both parties. Who if not both parties are destroying our country with immigration...tell me then I will know who to blame, other than a Rep or a Dem. If this is how you feel I am sure you are sending each one of the posters a note on it, since I do see a lot of post criticizing and insulting both parties.

The only thing that matters to me at this point is what's better for the country.

My hot button issue is border security. Obviously, on that the Republican President and Senate have been appallingly bad. Unfortunately, given Senate Minority leader Harry Reid's recent comment that declaring English as the national language is racist, I have to conclude that the Democrats would be even worse.

The House is a different matter. The Republicans in the House do seem to understand that border security is a national security issue, the Democrats less so or not at all.

So keeping Republican control of the House is a must to me, even though I'd love to stick a huge party loss in Bushs eye. Unfortunately, Bush would be quite comfortable with a Democratic Congress, since he agrees with them on so many things.

Vengence isn't the best policy when the fate of the nation is at stake.

CountFloyd,

RE:The Republicans in the House do seem to understand that border security is a national security issue,

I don't care what republicans understand.

I know that not one of them has stood up for this issue when it meant something. Not one of them is proven in the moment of heat. And if amnesty passes I will vote against every R on the ballot on election day and I will support the position that the price of amnesty should be the republicans losing the majority in the House. It is time for conservatives and patriots to stop being cannon fodder for the Replutocrat party.

I know that not one of them has stood up for this issue when it meant something.

I disagree about the House.

Tom Tancredo, James Sensenbrenner, Dana Rohrbacher, Steve and Pete King among others have stood up.

It was the Sensenbrenner bill that passed the House that got the illegals all mobilized in opposition.

Now, as far as the Senate goes, I wish I could just pull a lever and drop every single one of them to the bottom of the sea.

As much as I'd like to stick it to Bush for his treason, giving him a Democrat Congress to work with would just allow him to destroy the country at an even faster rate.

CountFloyd,
NO republican in the house has stood up for this issue when it meant something.
If you are going to disagree with that I will ask you if you and/or any of your associates were at the RNC convention in 2004 in Manhattan when this issue was "supposed" to be addressed? If yes you already know what I am talking about

Now there are plenty of republicans in the house that are sound bite warriors and WWF trash talkers.......that is......as long as it is not near election day or as long as it is in an environment that don't mean anything......because as election day approaches or when it means something they don't even have the guts to be sound bite warriors and WWF trash talkers......hmmmmm

And if amnesty passes I will vote against every R on the ballot on election day and I will support the position that the price of amnesty should be the republicans losing the majority in the House.The only thing that matters to me at this point is what's better for the country.
My hot button issue is border security. Obviously, on that the Republican President and Senate have been appallingly bad. Unfortunately, given Senate Minority leader Harry Reid's recent comment that declaring English as the national language is racist, I have to conclude that the Democrats would be even worse.

Ditto on all insights......

Reid should have gotten my note of disgust on his comment....I contacted Sen. Reid today to demand an apology for his insult to the American people.

http://reid.senate.gov/email_form.cfm
If you would like to do the sam......

swtncgram,
I am not sure what you are saying? Are you saying that if amnesty passes and the R loses the House, that the dems will repeal the amnesty that aready passed and replace it with another amnesty?? And the get it through the senate and get the prez to sign it? Very very unlikely.

You are right about Reid and if you have been following the senate debate you surely must be aware af the ARROGANT and BULLYING attitude of McCain over the definition of amnesty. Spectre also displayed an attitude. So Reid, McCain and Spectre displayed unproffessional behavior.
But why is amnesty even being debated on the senate floor? Because the Republican majority party wants it to pass.

So if amnesty passes how could someone be even worse on this issue?

Originally Posted by dxd

CountFloyd,

RE:The Republicans in the House do seem to understand that border security is a national security issue,

I don't care what republicans understand.

I know that not one of them has stood up for this issue when it meant something. Not one of them is proven in the moment of heat. And if amnesty passes I will vote against every R on the ballot on election day and I will support the position that the price of amnesty should be the republicans losing the majority in the House. It is time for conservatives and patriots to stop being cannon fodder for the Replutocrat party.

That's simply not true, but it's the same DNC propaganda you keep pouring out on this site. My own Congressman, Jeb Hensarling, is among those who managed to author a pretty good House Bill.

If you're going to start punishing people at the polls, punish the ones who are actually deserving of punishment like McCain, whose views are so out of touch with his own state that it isn't even funny, and like Reid, who slams Americans who have the temerity to want to protect their country and its heritage as "racist." If we toss out ALL the Republicans, we are tossing out the majority of people in Congress who are actually trying to ameliorate this situation!

DXD is a Democrat activist, pure and simple. He/she has yet to miss an opportunity to try to talk Republicans into sitting out this election or voting Dem., but refuses to ask the same of HIS OWN party. Why do you imagine that would be? My simple question is whether posters like dxd are in fact DNC plants here with a totally separate agenda from the immigration debate?