Dede Deja Vu?

Republicans across New York are practically salivating at the prospect of turning New York red at the Governor’s mansion, United States Senate, and at tons of state and local races from Broome to Queens County. It’s the kind of excitement that should raise the brow of New York’s Senator Chuck Schumer, former Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, but the GOP need not worry, he’s one of those politicians so self absorbed that if he was playing right field he wouldn’t see a pop-up until it hit him in the face!

Schumer is also plenty busy trying to secure his party’s leadership (now that polls show the current majority leader is about to lose his seat in a landslide) and is fully immersed in partisan behind closed door discussions that would, he hopes, transform the shape of American healthcare from a market driven industry to a government-run universal program.

The current conservative, freedom loving, flag waving, waive of enthusiasts that unite Americans against big government, large deficits, and wasteful spending, are no doubt part of the reason why Republicans think they can win even in liberal New York. Ironically conservative New Yorkers have been talking about these issues for decades, and for decades the GOP leadership have, all too often ignored them, even though the party touts conservative principles in its platform.

The media circus-like race in New York’s 23rd Congressional District this past November is one example of how the GOP has spurned conservatives before. Recall that this was the race that pitted a liberal Republican vs. a Conservative Republican vs. a liberal Democrat. Third party candidate conservative Doug Hoffman in normal circumstances would not have a chance in hell against deep pocketed and intrinsically politically connected – the Republican and Democrat Party respectively – but because he was the only true conservative in the race, this unknown and boring accountant came a hairline away from becoming one of just a handful of third party candidates elected to the United States Congress.

No one could have predicted that the Republican-endorsed candidate Dede Scozzafava would drop out of the race just three days before the election, endorse the Democrat and burn the Republicans, but what happened is more than just a bad turn of events, it is a result of choosing the wrong candidate to begin with. And it appears they are about to make the same mistake in New York’s 19th Congressional District race this year.

Nan Hayworth is seeking the nomination of the Republican Party in her endeavor to unseat Democrat John Hall. Previous to the election of Hall in 08, the seat was held by a Republican for twelve years. All things considered, it’s a winnable seat.

UrbanElephants.com reports that the “[National Republican Campaign Committee] sees Hayworth as a tremendously unimpressive and uninspiring candidate who has not warmed to local party support and is considered too liberal to get the grassroots base excited.” Now is probably the time for the state party to start looking for a new candidate lest they lose much needed resources and support from the national campaign operation. The article goes on to say “The NRCC, which had been very optimistic about GOP chances in New York, is disappointed with the state and will begin to focus on other districts across the country. Unless a better candidate steps forward immediately and shows an ability to build true party support, the New York GOP will flounder in a year where congressional wins are expected everywhere.”

I have a few suggestions for the GOP:

a) Look for a candidate that is not a wealthy liberal;
b) Is likable enough to get the support of the tea party and conservative movement; and
c) Is serious about real change in New York and in Washington.

Mr. Cox – it’s a pop-up, put your glove out and catch the ball!

Excellent insights…I agree wholeheartedly.

By Michael Ackerman on Feb 6, 2010

I agree wholeheartedly! It is time to take a close look at ALL those who call themselves Republican, Conservative, etc. We have entered “1984″ where it becomes necessary to ask for a definition of the words being used. The Republican Leadership has to decide quickly whose side they are on. The game is on and we are in the 3rd inning…it is time for unity and common sense (unfortunately the least common of all these days) – especially among “politicians”.

By PBob on Feb 6, 2010

The light gray text makes your blog very difficult to read.

By Ge0ffrey on Feb 6, 2010

I have been checking out the Progressive Caucus and gues who is a member? John Hall. The “leader” of this caucus is none other than Bernie Sanders, the self acclaimed socialist. Look at who else makes up this 83 member group of leftists. Very interesting.

We need a strong conservative in the 19th and all over the country so that we get a representative government again.

By Dan Wiko on Feb 6, 2010

but have you actually checked Hayworth out?

http://www.nanhayworth.com

She’s no liberal–seriously. She talks about the Constitution and free markets and means what she says (at least, I think so, after watching her videos). Notice that the UrbanElephants article (which I read last night with great interest) was completely unsourced, and she does have a couple of primary opponents.

By Pardon Me on Feb 6, 2010

I did see her website and all the catch phrases are there to be sure, but nothing in real detail, and for me comes off as vague.

I don’t know a lot about her, but am in the process of finding out, and any information you can provide here, is appreciated.

The article at UE is sourced – just anonymously. It’s my understanding that the statement is true in its content, and I stand by my reporting.

By Raquel on Feb 6, 2010

I had this comment as an improvement to the presentation of another candidate; Drop the “change” terminology, and use that that comes from our founding fathers, rather than that of Rules for Radicals or Cloven and Pivon. It is a marxist tool.

Lets stick with our own language, like “restoring liberty” or procuring freedom”. Firstly, its more specific, positive and constitutional.

By Patricia A Carfagno on Feb 6, 2010

Good point Pat!

The NYS Republican Party is in terrible shape–controlled by self-serving leaders–they need to be replaced–time for the membership to stand up, speak up, and insist upon change—

By Florence on Feb 7, 2010

Hi! It was so nice to meet you Raquel at the Meet and Greet for George Phillips who is running for the 22 district. Interestingly enough I received this blog before I went off to the Meet and Greet. It is becoming a small world for The Tea Party Movement.

This article is right on the money. Nan Hayworth is also a social liberal and as a Catholic, pro-life, conservative, Tea Party Patriot, I can not support Nan Hayworth. Please visit http://www.citizens4freedom.com for local happenings. Thanks! Let’s stand for freedom!

By Jennie on Feb 7, 2010

Thanks Jennie, it was very nice to meet you too — you and I have a lot in common!

I am looking forward to seeing you at the next meeting — this tea party thing is awesome.

By Raquel on Feb 7, 2010

I agree with Patricia, on wording. Change has become negative.

When is the last time any of you read the constitution??
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

The G. Phillips meeting last night was good and it was great being with those that love this country.

By Ruth Raabe on Feb 7, 2010

Hi Raquel! It was nice to meet you last night at the meet and greet for George Phillips.. It feels good to get together with people who feel like you do about the direction of America.. I feel that we need new blood to represent us.. I like Mr Phillips and he seems honest.. Too bad that I live in the 19th CD and I am not too pleased with Nan Hayworth as the candidate opposing John Hall.. I hope a more conservative candidate appears!!!

By Carol on Feb 7, 2010

Here’s another more conservative candidate in the race:

http://www.putnamcountycourier.com/news/2010-01-28/Around_the_County/Yorktowns_DeChiaro_enters_2010_GOP_primary.html

http://ltpbazzo.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/hayworth-vs-dechiaro-which-republican-can-deck-hall/

I guess the sources *were* wrong after all, Raquel. Because Hayworth’s on the contender list now:

http://nrcc.org/races/youngguns.aspx

By truth hurts on Feb 17, 2010

It’s still early truth hurts, time will tell if I was wrong, but a boost to contender’s list means nothing to me, the information is out there, that’s what they wanted.

By Raquel on Feb 17, 2010

That’s what who wanted, Raquel? And the only information is misinformation, evidently: an unsourced rumor from a low-level blog by a no-name correspondent. As they say in the news profession, you’re only as good as your sources.

When I say “they” I mean people much more important than me who are involved in the decision making. This is not misinformation, and I have my sources, whom I trust.

Ha ha, truth hurts, I am a no-name, but you’ve got to admit getting a reply from the husband of a US Congressional candidate, is no small feat.

It’s misinformation because it is evidently not backed up by the NRCC’s actual actions. Your sources are currently 0 for 1 to public knowledge. You trust them because…?

I also wouldn’t label you a no-name in the first place, and you seem to be more about commentary than claiming to have a scoop. Logic and reason are accessible to all; facts have to be made so, which is where credentials start to matter.

To clarify, by the way, I meant the commentary-scoop distinction not as a jibe but as further illustrating my point. I do enjoy what I’ve read of your writing so far, you know.

Again truth hurts it’s not misinformation. I have a source, it’s credible, you can take it or leave it, but please don’t question my integrity.

Yes, my blog is mostly commentary. I got a lead and I ran with it. I’m glad the questions are out there, the people deserve to know. Thanks for commenting at my blog, btw, I do appreciate differing viewpoints!

I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to call it misinformation on the sheer basis of it not correlating with the truth. I don’t mean it as a comment on your integrity, per se (which I’ve seen no reason to question in all this); I don’t believe that you have a personal agenda outside of expressing your own views.

Also, our viewpoints aren’t so different, you know. It’s just a matter of my having very strong feelings about some fellow Putnam residents who are still angry about a certain candidate’s having exited and proceed to take it out on what is (so far, at least) our only hope to put someone reasonably conservative in Congress.

I don’t publish a story on my blog until I obtain two confirmations from named sources. I also prefer to physically confirm the story, either through research or investigation.

The art and craft of winning a campaign is often subjective.

Seems to me we have two issues here:

(1) How do Republicans win back the 19th?

(2) How do we prevent the lack of integrity that plagued the 23rd Congressional District from repeating itself in the 19th or anywhere else?

I find that sometimes political troublemakers want to lobby an issue so manipulatively that they (a) start believing their clippings, and (b) want everyone else to believe them too.

It doesn’t mean it is true.

The voters in the 19th Congressional District of New York are not “moderate” nor have they embraced the support of abortion rights in any majority in the past. Therefore, it would make sense from a political science perspective not to feed sugar to a diabetic.

Then again, I know of some political sweeteners that substitute for these beliefs — but sugarcoating it usually kills the patient before Election Day.

If Nan Hayworth wanted to win, she never would have accepted money from a healthcare PAC already giving 81% of its monies to Democrats.

She also would have articulated a pro-life stand without mumbling so intolerably that everyone during her “listening tour” wouldn’t have raised doubts about her commitment to more than one issue.

The tangent on green initiatives and her only recent NRA membership set off all the alarms long before the abortion issue was mentioned.

Eventually, one’s skin gets so uncomfortable being scripted that the voters get as uncomfortable. That is what happened to Nan Hayworth. The NRCC likes her money but the political diabetes on both sides of this debate can only poison the 19th later on.

We should find a candidate who reflects the beliefs of those who reside in the 19th, not force the beliefs of troublemakers with an agenda.

I would dare say that the pro-life sentiments on this blog reflect the district — and the pro-abortion sentiments reflect people who are out of touch.

Hayworth won’t win. Worse, the Republicans will alienate their base.

That’s bad politics.

By Bob Fois on Feb 25, 2010