McConnell’s plans for the 2022 Senate races
[NOTE: Let’s just assume for the sake of this post that the 2022 election will be basically fair, although I realize that might not be the case.]
McConnell said some interesting things yesterday. The first is that, if there is a SCOTUS opening during the last year of Biden’s term – as there was during Obama’s last term after the death of Scalia – and if the GOP has won the Senate in 2022 and McConnell has become majority leader (a rather large “if”), then McConnell will do the same as he did with Obama’s Garland nomination, which is to block a vote on it.
That will no doubt get Democrats’ blood boiling. McConnell explained it this way:
I think in the middle of a presidential election, if you have a Senate of the opposite party of the president, you have to go back to the 1880s to find the last time a vacancy was filled. So I think it’s highly unlikely. In fact, no, I don’t think either party if it controlled, if it were different from the president, would confirm a Supreme Court nominee in the middle of an election. What was different in 2020 was we were of the same party as the president.
Of course, in order for that scenario to occur, one of the things that must happen is that the GOP needs to get a Senate majority. This is difficult but not impossible. McConnell has a plan for that, too:
[In] 2010 and 2012…[the Republican Party] nominated four or five candidates by [the Senate Leadership Fund] being passive in primaries that simply could not appeal to a general election audience. There’s no question that in order to win, you have to, in most states that are going to determine who’s in the majority next time, you have to appeal to a general election audience. And some of the candidates who filed in these primaries clearly aren’t. I’ll be keeping an eye on that. Hopefully, we won’t have to intervene. But if we do, we will.
Now, that’s something that might make a lot of conservatives’ blood boil. It also might put McConnell in conflict with Trump-supported candidates at times.
Or maybe not. The problem is that nominating RINOs isn’t usually helpful but in certain states it may be the only way to win (Maine is a good example), and that some losses in 2010 (see see this, for example) and 2012 occurred in races that probably could have been won by more conventional GOP candidates as opposed to the more extreme and/or eccentric ones that actually won the primaries.
I’m not going to rehash all those old arguments, except to say they were heated. I think that who to support in each race should be decided on a case-by-case basis. If a candidate isn’t conservative enough, he or she runs the risk of losing the support of the base, and runs the risk of voting with the Democrats on important issues. If a candidate is too conservative (in certain states, anyway) or too extreme or too eccentric for the state in question, then he or she will probably lose in the general even after winning the primary.
The importance of taking control of Congress can’t be overemphasized. The Democrats have moved so far to the left, and have so many plans to make their power permanent, that it is of the utmost importance to block them. A Republican Congress doesn’t solve a host of other problems, to be sure. But it is necessary as a step in making the left’s task at least somewhat harder.
Maybe don’t nominate witches or a candiate who has made silly public comments on stuff like “legitimate rape”? I mean that sort of thing should be the minimum standard… I hope.
GOP Senate candidates have to be pretty savy and not have too many skeletons in the old closet. It’s a much higher standard than Dem candidates. It sucks but that’s the way it is.
How many of the losing GOP Senate candidates in 2020 were McConnell picks?
I’m pretty sure at least the two candidates in Georgia and Martha McSally in Arizona were more GOP establishment selections than Trump insurgents and those losses sealed control of the Senate right there. Throw in John James in Michigan, who previously lost in 2018 before running against a different Democrat in 2020, and that’s four theoretically winnable races that the McConnell crew screwed up.
Mike
Legislating, the primary job of legislators, was surrendered to the rule-making, predominantly Democratic, entrenched federal bureaucracy, and to SCOTUS, long ago.
SCOTUS has invented “rights” based on “emanations” and has repeatedly ridden roughshod over the Will of The People. There has been a consistent Leftward shift at SCOTUS since the threat of court-packing by FDR the socialist in the 1930s. Texas and 19 other states were declared to have “no standing” before SCOTUS when the 2020 election screwups had tipped the balance for Biden, the Mr. Magoo of American politics. No standing! It is not whether legal arguments are valid or invalid when the party seeking the opinion of the Justices is not even granted a hearing. No Justice, not even Thomas, dissented from the no-standing ruling, to my knowledge.
Nice word, ruling. It derives from Ruler.
If the Democratic Party is not crushed in 2022, this country is finished. We will have enshrined Evil.
Maybe don’t nominate witches or a candiate who has made silly public comments on stuff like “legitimate rape”? I mean that sort of thing should be the minimum standard… I hope.
Actually, stand behind your candidate when they’re the object of a contrived disinformation campaign by the media. The RNC and the clown congressional leadership shouldn’t have to be instructed in this.
The ‘witch’ candidate you’re referring to was Christine O’Donnell. She’s a bad fit for public life for a menu of reasons not having to do with stray comments on a talk show years earlier. Bad fit though she was, she knocked off Michael Castle. Maybe we don’t pour donor money into graceless stiffs who vote with the opposition a third of the time.
You’ve been stewing about this for 10 years, I see. What did Michael Castle hire you to do?
Donorist Fredocon Party Delenda Est.
Throw in John James in Michigan, who previously lost in 2018 before running against a different Democrat in 2020, and that’s four theoretically winnable races that the McConnell crew screwed up.
Don’t know that he was some sort of ‘McConnell pick’. Republicans win statewide in other contests, but the Senate seat seems to defeat them. Kind of odd; the Democrats who’ve represented Michigan in the Senate haven’t been appealing people. They have won four out of 24 U.S. Senate contests held since Arthur Vandenberg died. NB, there have been over the last 90 years four Republican waves – 1946, 1952, 1994, and 2010. One of these Republican wins occurred in 1952 and another in 1994. They did win the seat in 1972 with a 5% plurality; Richard Nixon won the state that year with a 15% plurality. They won the seat in 1966 with a 10% plurality, their best performance in the post-war era; the Republican gubernatorial candidate won that year with a 21% plurality.
Nonapod:
The “legitimate rape” guy, Akins, made that remark some time after his nomination, I believe.
“Don’t know that he was some sort of ‘McConnell pick’.”
I’m pretty sure nobody loses a Senate race in 2018 and gets the nomination to try again in 2020 without McConnell and the NRSC backing him.
Mike
“Let’s just assume…” that a spectre shall hover and loom over the republic until it is forthrightly addressed.
Art+Deco-
“Actually, stand behind your candidate when they’re the object of a contrived disinformation campaign by the media. The RNC and the clown congressional leadership shouldn’t have to be instructed in this.”
This is essential. Democrats stand with their clowns through thick and thin. We have to diminish the individuality of conservatism in favor of party unity. A bleep comment should not be taken for more than it is, which is merely giving the other side more ammo with which to shoot us. No one is perfect. We must, however, tether our tongues when the temptation to loosen them arises! Prudence often yields victory.
As to McConnell and the RNSC, I doubt they have the tight control others suggested they have. Yes, it is about money, so contribute directly to your candidate, not to the RNSC.
I’m pretty sure nobody loses a Senate race in 2018 and gets the nomination to try again in 2020 without McConnell and the NRSC backing him.
As Republican candidates for the Senate in Michigan go, his performance was way above the median, even though it was a bad year for Republicans. NB, the last time an incumbent Democratic Senator was bounced out of office in Michigan was in 1942. Would have been a tour de force had Mr. James managed it.
I’m watching the Senate race here to replace Richard Burr. First to announce was former Rep. Mark Walker, and I was interested in him until I got a letter for a fund-raiser for him headlining Paul Ryan. This is probably why Trump endorsed current Rep. Ted Budd instead of Walker or former Gov. Pat McCrory.
Inarguably, McConnell’s longevity and position is proof of being a skillful politician. Arguably, the foremost ‘skill’ a politician must possess is the ability to lie persuasively.
The ability to distinguish the part of the truth that will support the lie, while simultaneously misdirecting the target(s) away from comprehending all of the truth is what sets apart the unskillful from the skillful liar.
McConnell’s comment is a fine example of a persuasive lie.
He’s right that a sufficient appeal to the general electorate is necessary to election. What he leaves out is the rest of the truth, that once in office, RINOs invariably betray the electorate.
Latest example; allowing the Jan 6th “insurrectionists” to languish indefinitely in solitary confinement. The list of betrayals is literally, beyond calculation.
So which is worse? A Paul Ryan who slowly marches America to the gallows or a Biden? Who, for those with “eyes to see”, makes no bones about where he’s leading America?
Self-preservation is the most powerful of instincts. To arose it, a mortal danger must be seen. The democrats, in all that they are doing are revealing just where they’re leading America.
Is Paul Ryan in hock to the CCP and is Paul Ryan able to complete a sentence, coherent thought, or not get handsy with young girls? I know it is a very tough choice, a conundrum, a horny dementia, a Gordian Knot (or not).
More food for thoughts about McConnell
“If not for Pres. Trump’s ability to get dozens of new Appeals Court Justices nominated, and Mitch McConnell’s ability to get those nominees through the Senate, the very existence of the GOP as a viable political entity could have been at risk.”
From shipwreckedcrew’s article about the DOJ and the Arizona audit of the 2020 Election.
https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2021/06/15/attorney-general-merrick-garland-announces-that-dojs-civil-rights-division-will-be-a-democrat-party-operative-n397213
Wait for it, …., ‘the GOP is no better than the Democrats of today.’ No?
om,
Pardon my lack of clarity, I am not strictly comparing Ryan to Xiden per se. Biden is not in charge, his puppet masters are in charge. Of course they are far worse than Ryan. Yet arguably, RINOs present a far greater danger, simply because they ‘boil the frog’. Whereas, the Left’s agents are done pretending to be something they have never been.
Thus the rise of the justwalkaway movement, the increasing visability of articulate and blunt spoken black conservatives and the recent victorys of Hispanic conservatives in deeply liberal areas.
Will it be enough? Time will tell.
I keep fixating on the terrible disappointment of Gorsuch, Comey-Barret and Kavanaugh.
Who to trust when nominating?
His Plans?
Backstabbing, Treachery, and Whoring on the Grandest of Scales.
Is there much more to be said?
Something insightful or original would be unusual.
The problem is the PR wing of the Democrat party, IE the media. I doubt very much the people you’re talking to had any problem “standing behind their candidate”. People like Christine O’Donnell lost because of a media narrative that sways “moderate” or “independent” low info voters, not people who would comment here. Until such time as there is an effective counter to the overwhelming leftist mainstream media, candidates like her and Akin are doomed to fail, So the original point remains. To win in places like that, you absolutely have to start with electable candidates. And do not for one second expect the GOPe to help get second tier candidates like that to win. They won’t.
Look at what Manchin is doing for Democrats. The progressive base hates him, but there is probably no other Democrat who could hold a Senate seat in West Virginia right now. Manchin is literally the only reason that Biden’s agenda is anything other than DOA. After Manchin retires, it will probably be decades until Democrats even get within ten points of retaking that seat.
Collins does the same thing for us. As frustrating as she can be sometimes, she is literally the only reason that Democrats’ dirty tricks over Kavanaugh failed. When Collins calls it quits, that seat will probably be blue for a generation.
Gaining a Senate majority very often requires winning some seats that you’re not supposed to win with candidates that the base may not prefer.
That’s what frustrated me about Christine O’Donnell. Chris Coons was probably always going to hold that seat until I’m collecting Social Security (if SS is still solvent). Would it really have been so bad to have had six years of Mike Castle first?
That’s what frustrated me about Christine O’Donnell. Chris Coons was probably always going to hold that seat until I’m collecting Social Security (if SS is still solvent). Would it really have been so bad to have had six years of Mike Castle first?
Did you ever ask yourself how Michael Castle managed to lose to her? (And what it says about him that he refused to endorse her when he lost?).
Until such time as there is an effective counter to the overwhelming leftist mainstream media, candidates like her and Akin are doomed to fail,
He was elected to six terms in Congress, so, no, not doomed. One thing Donald Trump demonstrated was that if you were steadfast, you could survive the worst the media would throw at you. The Republican Party in 2012 wasn’t run by steadfast people. It was run by dithering nincompoops like Paul Ryan.
I should note that Akin is a perfectly functional adult with a large family and a varied career which included military service and business and well as politics. Christine O’Donnell is a mess of a person – never married, no children, spotty employment history, bad credit, a history of tangles with her neighbors and with building inspectors, &c.
You get to a leadership positions in either the House or the Senate by raising lots of money for your colleagues. Policy chops and/or charisma have nothing to do with it.
You get to a leadership positions in either the House or the Senate by raising lots of money for your colleagues.
Does anyone ask our wretched crew in Congress why fundraising should be a specific task of the parliamentary floor leader? What do they expect RNC employees to be doing all day?
Art+Deco – As it so happens, I have asked myself how Castle lost the primary. That’s kind of the point my comment. The base chose ideological purity over winning the election – and over basic competence in the case of O’Donnell. (The fact that O’Donnell was the best candidate the Delaware Republican Party could get to run against Biden in 2008 is very telling.) Better to have the seat vote our way 60% of the time than 0% of the time with a Democrat.
I’m not saying that you always choose electability over beliefs. I suspect we could win in Alaska with a candidate significantly less squishy than Murkowski, for example. If R’s have a good chance of nabbing a Senate seat in a blue or purple state though, they should take it!
The base chose ideological purity over winning the election
Did it occur to you that they might have chosen someone who (1) asked for their vote and (2) took an interest in their priorities and not the Chamber-of-Commerce priorities? This framing of yours stinks. Try a different frame: the choice between an eccentric with principles and a careerist who just sucks up to donors and takes your vote for granted.
Art+Deco – Eccentric with principles = Senator Chris Coons. You can’t frame your way out of that one.
Democratic principles (not Democrat party principles) – Manchin and Sinema seem to have some.
Chris Coons? Haven’t heard a peep from him about any of those “principle” things that have gotten Manchin or Sinema into trouble with the Democrat Party in 2021. Funny thing those eccentric principles displayed by Coons (they are the invisible kind).
om – The result of nominating an “eccentric with principles” in the 2010 Delaware race was that Chris Coons became a Senator.
I was not suggesting that Chris Coons is an eccentric with principles. Sorry, I thought that was clear.
Art+Deco – Eccentric with principles = Senator Chris Coons. You can’t frame your way out of that one.
Did it occur to you that people make decisions under uncertainty as a matter of course? The ‘=’ sign is inappropriate. Here’s a more constructive suggestion to the Delaware Republican Party’s donors and recruiters: quit ginning up useless careerists. Already plenty of those on Capitol Hill, including both Republican floor leaders.
Art+Deco – Your point in the Delaware Republican Party is well taken. I understand that it was a dumpster fire in the early part of this century and have no reason to believe it is any better now. It would have been better if Delaware Rs had a viable candidate other than Mike Castle, but they didn’t.
I get your point about Castle refusing to endorse O’Donnell. I even think that she would have done better if he had. But O’Donnell lost by 16 points. I really don’t think that Castle’s non-endorsement made the difference.
I get your point about uncertainty too. (Of course it occurred to me BTW.) I can even cut a little more slack to Delaware Republican primary voters in 2010 because that was before the GOP gave away so many Senate seats by nominating poor candidates. Here in 2021, however, we have a pretty strong record suggesting that it is a bad idea to nominate very conservative candidates in blue and purple states, especially very conservative candidates with big vulnerabilities (e.g., history of witchcraft, etc.).
Just for reference, Kevin Wade, the guy who couldn’t get within 30 points of Carper in 2012, gave Coons a tougher race in 2014 than O’Donnell did in 2010.
Of course there is uncertainty, but the case that O’Donnell would have won if only she’d had more party support is very weak.
especially very conservative candidates with big vulnerabilities (e.g., history of witchcraft, etc.).
When she was about 16. You’re really scraping here.
Actually, pretty much all the candidates the Delaware Republican Party has nominated in the last 20 years have lost by similar margins, so I’m not sure why you fancy her ideology is the problem.
And the only Republican to have won statewide in Delaware since the early 1990’s is . . . none other than Mike Castle. He did it nine times between 1992 and 2008.
I don’t have a problem with conservative candidates at all. I prefer them – when they can win. FWIW, I suspect that a more conservative candidate than Castle could have won in Delaware in 2010. It was a great Republican year. But there wasn’t a serious “more conservative” candidate available. Taking a flyer on Christine O’Donnell because she was more conservative was a sucker’s bet.
(I’ll grant that the witchcraft attack was over the top, even at the time, but her decision to respond with the “I am not a witch” ad was nuts – not the mark of a serious candidate. )