Prelude to Republican fratricide

GOP candidates in New York and New Jersey should be cruising to victory this November. But angry conservatives would rather hand power to Democrats than help moderate Republicans win.

Thursday, October 22, 2009
Prelude to Republican fratricide

David Frum

David Frum

At the beginning of the summer, most observers expected Republicans to win all three of the big elections on Nov. 3. Two weeks out, it suddenly looks very possible that Republicans will win only one: the Virginia governor's race. The other two will be lost—not to superior Democratic organizing and messaging, but to the GOP's own divisions.

By all rights, the special election in New York's 23rd Congressional District should be a Republican cakewalk. Stretching across the hunting and fishing towns along the Great Lakes and Canadian border, the district contains Fort Drum, base of the 10th Mountain division, and re-elected its Republican congressman in the disaster years of 2006 and 2008 by margins of 60-plus percent.
 
Yet polls show the Republican candidate in serious trouble. State Republican Party leaders prevented an open primary race and instead engineered the nomination of one of their own, moderate, pro-choice Assemblywoman Deirdre Scozzafava.
 
Angry conservatives in the 23rd rebelled, rallying to the third-party candidacy of local accountant Doug Hoffman. Hoffman and Scozzafava are splitting the Republican vote between them, allowing Democrat Bill Owen to emerge as the front-runner.
 
Conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt this week offered a stern condemnation of this fratricide on his popular program, calling the third-party candidate:
 
.... a wrecker, a selfish "look at me" poser .... It takes an outsized ego to look at poll after poll that puts you behind not one but two candidates by more than 10 points and still declare yourself in the hunt.
 
Whoops! Sorry, rewind. Fzzzzwwwwvvvvwwwzzzp. That was an editing error. Hugh Hewitt was not blasting Doug Hoffman, the third-party candidate in New York. In fact, Hoffman is the darling of talk radio and Fox News, which have helped to spread Hoffman Fever for the past few weeks.
 
No, Hewitt was attacking the third-party candidate in New Jersey's gubernatorial race, an independent named Chris Daggett who has drawn votes from the official Republican standard-bearer, Chris Christie.
 
From the point of view of most Republican commenters online and on the air, party loyalty is a highly variable principle. As they see it, third-party races by liberal Republicans who want to combine environmental protection with fiscal responsibility are selfish indulgences. But third-party races by conservative Republicans who want to combine pro-life appeals with their economic message? Those are completely different. Those are heroic acts of principle.
 
I've written elsewhere about the fascinating parallels and contrasts between the New Jersey and New York races. 

Here I want to look forward.

What lessons will Republicans draw? You might think that the impending defeats in New York and New Jersey would drive home the need to broaden the Republican coalition. A candidate like Hoffman would have been the better candidate for New York's 23rd CD; a candidate like Daggett the better candidate for suburban New Jersey. Republicans have to find ways to accommodate both types of candidates and both kinds of constituencies.
 
But the risk is that the party will draw a very different conclusion. From the New York experience, Republicans will be tempted to draw the lesson: Always nominate the more conservative candidate. From New Jersey: We need to drive pro-environmental fiscal moderates out of our party and into the Democratic Party where they belong!
 
And if the Republicans pick up an Arkansas Senate seat and a dozen blue-dog Democratic House seats in 2010, you can see this "tea party" mentality taking strong hold of the GOP in the run-up to 2012.
 
But a political formula that encourages Republicans to write off the suburbs, the Northeast, and California is not a formula for a national majority. It's a formula for a more coherent, better mobilized, but perpetually minority party.
 
It's always painful to lose. But defeats can be useful if they lead to wisdom. In this November's races, however, the risk is real that Republicans will lose much—and learn nothing.

Show: Oldest | Newest

84 Comments

Posted by chris, Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 11:42 pm Republican in Virginia is going to win because of a weak democrat. Tim Kaine is doing an excellent job as governor but democrats will lose because Deeds is an awful candidate.

Posted by Jim, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 10:19 am Why is anyone wasting time on David Frum? For instance, David Frum on Sarah Palin as President: She has governed a state and ... it says something important that so many millions of people respond to her as somebody who incarnates their beliefs and values. At a time when the great American middle often seems to be falling further and further behind, there may be a special need for a national leader who represents and symbolizes that middle.

Posted by Cato, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 11:06 am The problem with Frum's argument is that Dede isn't a moderate Republican she's endorsed by Daily Kos and several unions, supports card check, the Obama bailouts, cash for clunkers and apparently a public option on heath care reform. I favor a big tent Republican party, but just because someone says they're a Republican doesn't make it so. I oppose bright line 'litmus tests' of party positions, when you find someone whose positions are diametrically opposed , not just a little left, to the views of most Republicans, just say NO!

Posted by datechguy, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 11:06 am And what will be the lesson if Hoffman wins?

Posted by Jason, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 11:07 am WRONG. We are tired of electing neocons and rinos. McCain and Bush were both neocons and rinos look what that got us. We need conservatives that are small government types, fiscally responsible. The national RNC is behind a rino for no real reason. If we lose we lose but I'm tired of the same old better of two bad choices view.

Posted by Curtis, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 11:07 am You also leave something out of this article. You complaint that Hoffman should let Scozzafava run alone against the Democrat, yet at the same time you seem to imply that Taggert running in New Jersey is a good thing. So you are essentially the opposite of Hugh Hewitt and that makes you a voice of moderation?I think people's problem with Scozzafava is that she is not Fiscally or Socially conservative, and I think being at least one is a requirment for being a Republican. I want a big tent too, but how big? At what point is someone a democrat

Posted by tom, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 11:13 am frum why don't you take the moderates and join the democrats? people like you are why the republicans lose. I will never vote for a moderate republican. your 'big tent' is all about nominating liberals and berating conservatives to support them. think again, loser.

Posted by Mike O, Thursday, October 22, 2009, 11:16 am I heard these same arguments made against supporting Reagan in '76 from the Ford people the old name was Rockefeller Republicans. That concession on perceived winnability gave us Ford then and McCain this last time. Which led to Carter and now Obama.Why on earth would we listen to you guys now?

Post a Comment

David Frum »

a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of six books, including most recently COMEBACK: Conservatism That Can Win Again. In 2001 and 2002, he served as speechwriter and special assistant to President George W. Bush. In 2007, he ... Read Bio

November 27, 2009