Tea Party Candidates Replacing More Conservative GOP Types

Calling this group of primary winners more conservative is obvious observation but are they too whacky to be elected by centerist voters? November will give us that answer but I think the label the Right continually brandishes the Left with of being too extreme is more aptly applied to thier own ranks. These people are too far Right for even the GOP.

A former professional wrestling executive, a libertarian ophthalmologist and a man who thinks bicycle use could empower the United Nations filed to run in elections. That’s not the start of a joke: that’s a sampling of the deeply unusual pool of candidates running — and actually being nominated — for high office this year.

A phenomenon that began with physician Rand Paul’s victory in the Kentucky Senate primary has effectively gone national: Primary voters are again and again choosing offbeat candidates shunned by national party strategists and imperiling potential Republican gains this November in the process.

Elections this week in Colorado and Connecticut yielded a new crop of oddball nominees. Ken Buck, a gaffe-prone prosecutor once ordered to take ethics classes for his handling of an illegal guns case, defeated former Colorado Lt. Gov. Jane Norton in a Republican Senate primary. In Connecticut, Linda McMahon, who founded World Wrestling Entertainment with her husband, Vince, was linked to steroid investigations and appeared in numerous violent and sexually suggestive sketches, bested Rob Simmons, a former congressman and decorated veteran, for the GOP’s Senate nomination.

Perhaps the week’s most out-of-right-field nominee was Colorado Republican Dan Maes, a conservative activist and first-time candidate who capitalized on a plagiarism scandal involving primary opponent Scott McInnis to capture the Republican nomination for governor.

It’s almost impossible to imagine a group of nominees like this emerging in any other election cycle, and the willingness of primary voters to embrace such downright strange candidates underscores just how violently the 2010 electorate has turned against political institutions and the would-be officeholders who belong to them.

“A great many Americans think that the entire Washington political process is terribly broken, and they’re not interested in candidates who come from that process or defend that process,” said Republican pollster Whit Ayres. “They’re far more attracted to people who want to radically change the status quo.”

For a Republican Party hoping to ride the revolt against Washington back into power, the latest round of primaries represents perhaps the most magnified version of a now-familiar challenge: how to benefit from the electorate’s anger without being driven off course by it. And even Republicans expecting a powerful electoral shift in their favor acknowledge that the circus-like primary season could have lingering effects in the general election.

“The wave is coming. The question is, which Democrats survive the wave and why? There might be one or two who survive because the Republican nominee was not the optimal candidate,” said Glen Bolger, who heads the Republican polling firm Public Opinion Strategies.

“Ultimately, Republicans are going to pick up a chunk of seats in the House and a chunk of seats in the Senate,” he continued. “The question is whether the wave is high enough to switch control or whether it crests just a little bit short of taking control.”



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/40978.html#ixzz0wPa5ulLs

 

I hope both of the main parties keep up their tradition of nominating whackos in the primaries. It is killing our country in the short term, obviously, but it may save it in the long term if enough people wake up.

 

Waking up? IMPOSSIBLE.

 

Really! Which far, far Left equivants are you likening to the loons on the far Right if I may ask?

 

Well, the leader in the House is pretty far left compared to the 'centrist voters' you allude to. Far, far left. Extreme left, really. Kookie, Krazy, Left, actually. Bat Sheet Crazy Loonie Left, probably.

 

So exactly what has Nancy Pelosi done or said that makes her so far Left? Nothing really comes to mind but I don't follow her that closely either. Maybe I've missed something.

 

Really? I can't think of an issue that she is not far left on...abortion, gun control, illegal immigration, recent health-care reform, and on and on. Look at her voting record to easily see where her ideology lies. She is way left of the President.

Even if you actually do have no idea how she has voted, do you at least know what district she represents? lol

 

Are you telling me that any position the Left takes is now considered "far" Left? Because the Left has always been for a woman's right to choose so that makes them far Left? Because they have always advocated for sensible gun laws, they are far Left? Because the Left doesn't agree with the Right's position on immigration, they are automatically far Left? Because they believe everyone has the right to health care and have believed it for over 70 years and have actually have done something about the problem of the nearly 50 million uninsured people, that makes them far Left?

Well, that's an interesting way to define either political party especially in the context of the Tea Party movement on the Right these days and how much they have moved as far right as is possible. Candidates that are saying some the things coming out of the likes of Sharron Angle in Nevada, Rand Paul in Kentucky, and let's not forget Michele Bachmann up in Minnesota just to name a few certainly are treading in territory mainstream Republicans would not have dared to tread. But because there are people on the Left pushing issues that have been part of the Democratic platform of decades, they are suddenly defined as "far" Left. I guess when you are so far out on the fringe Right, everything looks like far left. Don't you think it is funny that the further the Right moves to the right, the more they see the same positions the Left has held for decades as far Left? The point is that the Left hasn't changed. The Right has simply headed for the outskirts.

 

Yes. That is exactly what I am saying, of course.

 

Cryptic response but seriously, how have the positions on the Left become “far” Left?

 

One example would be that generally many on the left are pro-abortion. Pelosi is pro-partial birth abortions. I see that as a left of left issue. There are many other examples. Like I said...look up her voting records if you really are interested.

 

Regardless of how you choose to characterize the issue of abortion i.e. pro-choice verses pro-abortion, abortion is a legal medical procedure. So in essence, Nancy Pelosi is "far" Left because she, as a woman and a politician, wants to keep abortion safe and legal if a woman chooses to have an abortion rather than restrict all women from ever having the option as the Right wants. No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion if they feel it is wrong but there are those that want to force their opinions on all women and their fertilized egg. Which sounds more extreme to you?

I really don't think abortion is the issue here because the Democrats have always advocated for a woman's right to choose her own reproductive situation. This is no different than the stand they have taken since long before Roe V. Wade. Putting an arbitrary line in the sand that says you have no right to an abortion after this point IS an abortion restriction that will lead to making abortion illegal. That is why you didn't hear of partial birth abortions until the Right ran out of legal challenges and needed a new tactic.

My point that you seem to be ignoring is that the Left isn't any further to the Left than they have been in the past, they simply seem further to the Left from the perspective of those out on the fringes of the Right wing and of course those that have bought into their rhetoric. To gain a proper perspective, sometimes you have to look down at your own feet to figure out just where you are standing.

 

Moen,

Perhaps you should follow your own advice. If you look left, you might see the wall where the sliding scale ends.

 

Right! Because I'm always advocating for those far far Left ideals. Anyone who can't see the Right wing in this country homesteading the fringe on their side, isn't paying attention. The cast of right wing extremos is growing daily.

 

The idea that right wing extremists are becoming more extreme is a far left perception.

 

Tell Robert Bennett of Utah that. Tell Charlie Crist of Florida that. I'm sure it was the left's perception that caused them to lose.

 

There are extreems at both ends of the political spectrum but in all honesty not a one of your major players has actualy reached those points yet. Unfortunatly you in America have no real concept of a extreem left or right political ideal all you have is drifts away from the center.
Now I know this will upset some here but it is the truth, you want extreem left then try looking at China under Moa or Russia under Stalin Extreem right Strosna or Hitler
What you have at the moment is a left of center goverment not communism as some would sugest or even Socialism, Under the previouse administration things did begin to drift towards a more millitaristic state just look at the growth in Homeland security that now begins to rival the old KGB in it's complexity Did you know it is the 3rd largest Cabinet dept after Defense & Vetrans affairs? It directly employs over 200,000 personel!! now this guy's was created under a Republican administration and it can interact with nighe on every aspect of a citizens daily life. Dont believe me check it out for yourselfs LOL

 

How does that prove that they lost because they became too right wing?

 

I didn't say that they lost because "THEY" became too Right wing, they lost because they weren’t Right wing enough. That is the whole point here. The Right, indisputably, has headed further to the Right. Nobody questions that reality. The argument from the Right however, is always framed as the Left moving to the extreme Left which I asked Stu to give me examples of. All he provided was the Left political platform which is pretty much the same as it has always been i.e. Left of center. Now anything the Left is for is characterized as far Left even though they are relatively in the same place they’ve been for decades but try and tell the Right wingers that. They have bought into yet one more fear mongering lie. Seems to work well on that side of the political spectrum.

 

I think the only mistake you make here is assuming that the far Left is either Socialism or Communism. The far Right isn't a military dicatorship if you go far enough Right either. Granted, that is the only concept many Americans have of either end of the political divide but it is more of a scare tactic than reality. Nobody in their right mind of the Left wants communism and nobody in their right mind on the Right wants a military dictatorship either. The Left wants less of the status quo that keeps the have-nots from ever achieving success and the Right pretty much wants the haves to remain wealthy. They both try to stack the deck in their favor to achieve their goals.