The NY-23 special election has led to a very interesting development: A whole lot of prominent Republicans are openly calling for the defeat of the moderate Republican nominee Dede Scozzafava, opting instead to back the Conservative Party's Doug Hoffman, while just a few are sticking by the actual GOP candidate.
This race has put two former House GOP leaders on different sides, the NRA against the Club For Growth, and the House GOP leadership against its own back-benches.
The message being sent here is loud and clear: Republicans are not allowed to nominate moderate candidates. If they do, it won't just be the grassroots activists and conservative bloggers who will complain -- the big names will do it, too, and will set out to defeat that candidate, even if means the Democrats wins. As a prominent pro-life activist told me about the prospect of a Democratic victory, "It's a shame that the Republican Party didn't do a better job of selecting a candidate."
Let's look at the list of Republicans who are supporting Hoffman, and the ones supporting Scozzafava. Let's start with Scozzafava's backers -- it's a much shorter list.
For Scozzafava
• Newt Gingrich is supporting Scozzafava as a Republican who can win, and advocating for the GOP to be a big tent -- and attacking the maturity of Hoffman supporters: "We have to decide which business we are in. If we are in the business about feeling good about ourselves while our country gets crushed then I probably made the wrong decision."
• The National Rifle Association supports Scozzafava -- quite sensibly pointing to her solid pro-gun rights record in the state legislature, and her status as the only actual elected official in the race: "During your tenure in the New York Assembly, you have been a strong and consistent supporter of the Second Amendment. You are the only candidate in this special congressional election with a solid pro-gun legislative record."
• As of a week ago, only 17 members of the House GOP had donated to Scozzafava's campaign, with that group including members of the leadership such as Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), NRCC chairman Pete Sessions (R-TX) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who is in charge of candidate recruitment for 2010. Another member of the leadership, Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN), did not contribute.
• Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), a former head of the conservative Republican Study Committee, endorsed Scozzafava: "I am backing the only Republican in this race who can win and don't want to lose this seat to Nancy Pelosi for a generation."
• Rep. Peter King (R-NY), one of only two Republicans currently in the New York Congressional delegation, and decried the possibility of throwing the election: "A vote for either of her opponents is a vote for Nancy Pelosi and her far-left, radical agenda."
For Hoffman
• Former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), the 2008 GOP nominee for Vice President and a darling of the activist right, has become one of Hoffman's newest supporters -- and she's bashing the GOP: "Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate that more than blurs the lines, and there is no real difference between the Democrat and the Republican in this race. This is why Doug Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party's ticket."
• The Club For Growth has been an important Hoffman support base for several weeks now: "In fact, Scozzafava and Democrat Bill Owens both favor higher taxes, bigger government, and more spending, including President Obama's failed 'stimulus' package and big labor's odious 'Card Check' bill."
• Steve Forbes has endorsed Hoffman, saying int he campaign's press release: "Like Doug Hoffman, I'm a lifelong Republican. But principles matter. The Republican nominee does not stand for the principles of our party, and I urge Republicans to give their support and their vote to the one candidate who does - Doug Hoffman."
• Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) has announced his support of Hoffman, saying that, "The Republican candidate has been in the process of disqualifying herself," and that while he has never before endorsed a third-party candidate, "The Conservative has a better chance of winning."
• Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has endorsed Hoffman. In her case it's less from an ideological concern than a utilitarian one -- she thinks Hoffman has a better chance of beating the Democrat than does Scozzafava. The polls haven't been agreeing with her on that, though, so you have to wonder how much of her judgment here is base on seeing what she wants to see. She is the first sitting member of Congress to openly support Hoffman.
• Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) has endorsed Hoffman, calling him "real Republican" in the race. Just think about that -- a former House GOP leader has disowned his party's official candidate.
• Former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, who has previously sought the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee, is also backing Hoffman and denouncing the regular GOP candidate: "I was elected statewide as secretary of state. Believe me, I know the corrupt influence labor-backed groups are on the ballot box. When I found out that Scozzafava had accepted ACORN's endorsement in the past, I knew she was not the kind of Republican representative we need in Congress."
• Former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN), an ex-presidential candidate, is also behind Hoffman: "If ever there was an opportunity to send a message to Washington, to the Obama Administration and to the politicians who have made careers of ignoring the will of the people they represent. Running, as the Conservative Party candidate, in New York's 23rd Congressional District, Doug Hoffman is doing just that."
• FRC Action PAC, the electoral arm of the Family Research Council, is backing Hoffman and bashing Scozzafava: "The Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava, is a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage anti-business candidate. She has repeatedly said she would have voted for the stimulus bill, even after learning most if it has gone to wasteful projects. She also refuses to say she will not raise taxes and sees earmarks as 'beneficial.' Ms. Scozzafava is so liberal she has been endorsed by the founder of the Daily Kos - the first Republican he ever has backed."
• The Washington Times declared Scozzafava unfit for office, after her campaign called the police against Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack for following her and asking questions: "This brazen use of police power to intimidate reporters is inexcusable. It alone disqualifies Ms. Scozzafava for office. It also indicts every major Republican who stays on her team."
• The Wall Street Journal is hoping for a Hoffman win, but will openly accept a Democratic victory, too: "Above all, a defeat would teach Republicans that running candidates who believe in nothing will keep them in the minority for years to come."
• National Review has endorsed Hoffman, and called upon the national GOP to stop supporting Scozzafava:
The National Republican Congressional Committee and the Republican National Committee cannot reasonably be expected to reverse themselves and throw their support to a candidate running outside of the official party fold. But the situation, as it stands, is a disgrace. Here is a proposal: Let the Republican powers that be redeem themselves by concentrating their fire on the (official) Democrat in the race, Bill Owens, and let Ms. Scozzafava duke it out with Mr. Hoffman without their intervention. The very least Republicans can do is to cease standing between Republican voters and the conservatives they desire to elect.

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

Michael A
October 23, 2009 2:06 PM
Cool. Go "conservative party"!!! That's the ticket. Abe Lincoln would be jumping up and down if the Republican Party implodes. These buffoons have been tarnishing legacy of the founding of the Republican Party as the anti-slavery party since the 1960's. It should cease to exist in it's present form.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
October 23, 2009 2:12 PM in reply to Michael A
They're going back to their roots, the Know-Nothings.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
October 23, 2009 2:12 PM
This is no accident. White House strategy: "Divide and Conquer."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
October 23, 2009 2:21 PM in reply to RhodaA
Follow-Up: It occurs to me that this divide and conquer strategy might have been devised from the outset; thus, the Fox News comments, making Rush and Beck the face of the party, provoking the far-right backlash, etc.
What do you think?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NuttyProf
October 23, 2009 2:30 PM in reply to RhodaA
I think this is great news for Sarah Palin
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
October 23, 2009 2:35 PM in reply to NuttyProf
Big Smile
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
leoklein
October 24, 2009 9:49 AM in reply to NuttyProf
Yes indeedy, this must be Great News for Sarah Palin!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TheRealFish
October 24, 2009 10:23 AM in reply to RhodaA
I'm thinking not so much.
To me the evidence began piling up during the campaigns that the Rethugs were separating (curdling?) into the camps of the slightly rational corporate whores (SRCW) on one side to the completely batsh*t crazy repressive religious biggoted zealot moral/corporate whores (BCRRBZMCW) on the other side. I think that is also the answer to the headline's question.
I think the evidence itself lay with the choices of the top two candidates themselves, and why there was no "chemistry" between the two of them. They lost, primarily, because there was not one cohesive campaign but rather two separate campaigns going on there.
The big struggle now (and where Fox plays into the equation) is Fox has a strong desire for the BCRRBZMCW to win this contest. However, I guess the fact the most conservative choice in the NY-23 race is in third place may indicate Fox chose the wrong side in terms of numbers — though if civil unrest, armed insurrection or political assassination attempts is a desired outcome then they had to go with the BCRRBZMCW wing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TheRealFish
October 24, 2009 10:40 AM in reply to TheRealFish
Oops. Sorry, Rhoda. I re-read your second comment and think maybe were agreeing a bit after all? Are you inferring the "divide and conquer" strategy is being implemented by Fox and/or other uber-right forces???
I mean, it's true, if Fox or other extremist/fringe forces are trying to divide and conquer themselves that is, of course, completely batsh*t crazy — since it guarantees losing in the short and probably long terms. Doesn't mean that's not going on...since it's batsh*t crazy. I mean the only rational explanation for doing the D&C from the right/to the right is if you simply want to foment violence.
I guess that last option is no more BS-crazy than when it was when employed prior to the (last?) Civil War. That was really a rather close contest. The South could have won had certain key battles broken just this much the other way.
Yeah. almost 700,000 dead and it was this close. And that war was fought over identity politics and their version of corporate whoredom (the South's main economic scaffolding was build on slavery and the plantation system, and that is why the Landed Gentry stirred up the populace to retain their stranglehold on both the people and the economy).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MonicaDickey
October 24, 2009 7:02 PM in reply to RhodaA
It's a beautiful thing to watch. I was getting worried that the new breed of hate-republicans was gaining momentum, that's what I get for buying into hype.
Clearly there is more at work here and the party is struggling to find its real identity. Bonus points if the meltdown stays in the public eye.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LBJs Brain
October 23, 2009 2:55 PM
By all means-let's "lose this seat to Nancy Pelosi for a generation". Thanks, Sarah!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mateo123
October 23, 2009 3:04 PM
This is sort of similar to our Virginia governor's race. Hey, Virginia Democrats, if you want to run a Republican against a Republican, chances are, the Republican will win. I don't like McAuliffe, but my hunch is that this race would have been different with McAuliffe in it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
freshwaterluddite
October 23, 2009 3:17 PM
Any indication where any of the 3 stand on trade issues? McHugh was actually a consistent "No" vote on Free Trade Agreements, making him a strange bedfellow with labor-backed and progressive Dems in the NYS delegation. McHugh was likely motivated by reactionary protectionism rather than serious labor rights concern. But the district has certainly felt the impact of trade deals.
I'm not sure how this issue falls along the Moderate-Tea Party fault lines of the GOP. Or if it could bring any votes to Owens or Scozz if they came out anti-Free Trade. Thoughts?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NJBOOMER
October 23, 2009 3:17 PM
I'm from Oswego and I look at the nutjobs coming out from all over the country for Hoffman and laugh. Let's see. Sarah Palin needs political something, anything. Hoffman will do. Rick Santorum, who was voted out of office in his own state. Michele Bachman is an endorsement that any sane candidate would run from. Dick Armey, Steve Forbes, Ken Blackwell and that venerable organization the Club for Growth. This list has every kook in the anti moderate wing of the crazies. Hmmm, what has NY 23 done to deserve so much outside support? Guys, are we really ready for Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman and Rick Santorum? I think not. I'd rather stick to Harborfest to advertise the area.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eyepublius
October 23, 2009 3:30 PM
I live right in the middle of this district (in Watertown, NY).
I am a life long Dem who ran in 1994 against McHugh and then tried in 2008 (but could not gain Dem trust: They think (always): "You ran once, lost, that's it bud, move on.") ...
I went before the 11-county chairs in August to try again... but they picked the non-Dem, INDY Bill Owens ... his huge, expensive and well-funded "PR race" is now unfolding badly for the 2 GOPers (Scozzafava and Hoffman (Hoffman, btw, does not even live in the district) and Owens cannot be a legally registered DEM until after the election. That is bad enough but the GOP in-house blood letting as listed above - wow wee ... fun to watch. But, it s well-deserved and rightly placed. About those outside endorsements - they are about as subtle and effective as a hand grenade in a bowl of oatmeal. IMHO. ~ Dan Francis (1stLt. USMC (Ret.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
El Puerco
October 23, 2009 3:30 PM
I wonder if anyone in the Republican Party other than Newt realizes that Obama won NY-23 in the last election.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hologram5
October 23, 2009 3:39 PM
Newt Gingrich:
We have to decide which business we are in.
==================================
This, inherently, is their biggest problem. They have FORGOTTEN that they are in the business of supporting the people that voted them in and that support them. Not the corporations that gave them millions of dollars in lobby/blood money. And, as such, they will not gain any seats in 2010. If they are still in existence by then.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eyepublius
October 23, 2009 4:11 PM
freshwat: McHugh, FYI, had most of hi$ $upport from Labor/Union$ ... now what cha' gonna say, eh? I know I live here and I ran against him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
freshwaterluddite
October 24, 2009 10:40 AM in reply to Eyepublius
Good point. Everybody loves an incumbent.
Still -- do you think Hoffman would fare better or worse if he came out strongly on one side of the trade issue?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe
October 23, 2009 7:58 PM
Ah, the Silly Party Vote is split :-)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
October 23, 2009 9:53 PM
Their one party away from a trilogy. The seldom seen hat trick. If we keep on beating them down they could split into some even crazier group. The GOP. The conservatives & The Whigs 2.0.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
October 23, 2009 10:54 PM
Conservatives eating their own.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tyler W
October 23, 2009 11:42 PM
According to a new Siena College Poll, the race is as follows, Bill Owens, Democrat, at 33 percent, Dede Scozzafava, Republican at 29 percent, and Doug Hoffman at 23 percent. If the rep. are so divided on a candidate then I guess all Bill Owens has to do now is just sit back and watch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hyla Brook
October 24, 2009 12:15 PM in reply to Tyler W
I don't want to jinx Owens, but if he wins by a plurality, I know how the Republicans will play it after the fact. They'll total up Hoffman's and Scozzafava's votes - which will be more than Owens - and then say the Democrat would not have won NY-23 if either the Conservative OR the moderate Republican had dropped from the race.
Fingers crossed. If Owens win this one there will be just two seats in NY to flip to blue - NY-26 (Chris Lee) and NY-3 (Peter King).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
merlot
October 24, 2009 12:44 AM
This race appears to confirm publically what many fo us have suspected is happening internally with the GOP. It's called a melt down. If the HCR legislation includes the opt-out public option, it will only throw gasoline on the melt down as it would pit radical idealogues against GOP voters. So, yes, a divide-and-conquer strategy by progressives has much to recommend it. Certainly, recent polling numbers suggests the GOP's slow bleed of self-identified GOPers is quickly moving in the direction of a full bleed out. Good.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GregorZap
October 24, 2009 2:27 AM
What the remainder of the GOP fails to realize is that different parts of the country think differently. What the remainder want is a homogenous mass of bobbleheads. Talk about a Soviet-style, one-party system!!! This will never work in Upstate NY.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbeats
October 24, 2009 3:45 AM
Why the fuck ask us how we think about an app and not give a comment section to voice our opinions Josh?
What am I missing here?
I'm not sending you an email.
You can make an iPhone app for 300 bucks. Do it, charge nothing and run a stupid banner ad.
WTF man?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Icon
October 24, 2009 9:23 AM
I'm not a partisan, but from an organizational perspective, I feel sorry for the GOP.
On the surface, we look at the NY-23 race and we see two things:
* The Republican party in NY is fairly moderate.
* Many national Republican officials of the social conservative bent don't like their party being moderate.
Why is this a problem? For starters, the ideology that the social conservatives represent is losing popularity. They're literally a shrinking demographic, both proportionately and numerically. A political party can't hope to ever hold a majority in a legislature if it appeals to no one but a tiny fringe.
The WSJ's editors should fire whatever moron wrote their editorial. "Above all, a defeat would teach Republicans that running candidates who believe in nothing will keep them in the minority for years to come."
No, it will teach Republicans that pushing the moderates out of the party will keep them in the minority until they finally end up being dissolved. If you push the moderates out of the party all you do is increase the number of people who either are Democrats or will support the Democrats (and caucus with them in legislatures).
When you have a significant ideological divide with a lot of people on the left and a lot of people on the right in a legislature, it ends up being the moderates who actually get to set policy. It's those votes in the middle that really decide whether the body is going to play ball on a certain issue. The Republicans should know this, too. They lost their Senate majority in 2001 when they made Jim Jeffords so fed up with them that he left their caucus. This year, the democrats received a 60-seat majority when Arlen Specter defected.
The moderates and the liberals won't be impressed that you have the balls to stand for what you believe in if they think what you believe in is absolutely insane. Appealing to moderates, and keeping them in your party and keeping mum the voices of the fringe is what the GOP must do strategically if it ever wants to see itself in power again.
The fact that the RNC doesn't realize exactly how self-destructive this behavior is is a testament to just how dire the straits are for the GOP internally.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
October 24, 2009 11:38 AM in reply to Icon
• I couldn't agree more. Except I find it difficult to "feel sorry for them". The behavior of these folks has been beyond reprehensible.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jason everett miller
October 24, 2009 1:09 PM in reply to Icon
Good points. I think you have accurately cataloged the dilemma facing the republican party as the moderates either leave or stay home.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
leoklein
October 24, 2009 9:51 AM
Things have to be really really bad when Newt Gingrich and Peter King represent your 'moderate' wing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
October 24, 2009 12:53 PM
Palin vs. Gingrich? Bitch Fight!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
October 24, 2009 1:03 PM
Palin vs. Gingrich? Bitch Fight!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
taikan
October 24, 2009 9:01 PM
Those Republicans supporting Hoffman rather than the Republican candidate should be commended for sticking to their principles rather than compromising solely in order to win an election. One can only hope they will continue to follow that course of action for the next 20-40 years, thereby giving the Democrats enough time to clean up the mess left by the Reagan and Bush administrations.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MJMS
October 24, 2009 10:08 PM
After reading the TPM coverage of this race, I looked Bill Owens up on ActBlue and donated - repeated today.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?