Garden State Patriot

Here are my Election Day predictions. If I get them all right I am heading straight own to AC afterwards!

In the New Jersey governor’s race, Independent candidate Chris Daggett remains the unknown factor. Some polls have shown Daggett with as much as 15% of the vote. But my intuition tells me Christie’s recent attacks on Daggett have hurt him and with Corzine and Christie within the margin of error, many voters will not waste their vote on him upon entering that voting booth. As such I don’t see Daggett getting more than double digits – and I see long-suffering New Jersey taxpayers breaking toward Christie in what will be a squeaker. Final result: Christie 48%, Corzine 46%, Daggett 6%.

In Virginia, a swing state that turned Obama blue last year, we will witness a 180 degree turn. Republican Bob McDonnell will win in a landslide over Democrat Creigh Deeds. Prediction: McDonnell 56%, Deeds 44% 

Well, in NY-23, Dede Scozzafava was forced out of this race by conservatives who said she was too liberal. Now, she has proven us quite right with her endorsement of the liberal Bill Owens over conservative Doug Hoffman (Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned?). In any case, with Scozzafava remaining on the ballot one would expect her to still receive some votes. So my prediction for this race is for a Hoffman victory, albeit much closer than recent races in this district. Final results: Hoffmann 51%, Owens 45%, Scozzafava 4%.

Great news today for conservatives. Dede Scozzafava is suspending her campaign.

Scozzafava suspends campaign
By Tony Romm – 10/31/09 10:37 AM ET
State Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava (R) announced on Saturday she would suspend her campaign to fill former Rep. John McHugh’s open House seat, citing dismal poll numbers just days before the much-hyped special election.
Her exit from the race offers serious momentum to Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate who has stolen from Scozzafava a slew of important GOP endorsements and donations in recent weeks.

“Today, I again seek to act for the good of our community,” Scozzafava wrote in a letter to supporters, obtained by the Watertown Daily Times. “It is increasingly clear that pressure is mounting on many of my supporters to shift their support. Consequently, I hereby release those individuals who have endorsed and supported my campaign to transfer their support as they see fit to do so.”

“I am and have always been a proud Republican,” Scozzafava added. “It is my hope that with my actions today, my party will emerge stronger and our district and our nation can take an important step towards restoring the enduring strength and economic prosperity that has defined us for generations.”

This is also a victory of the conservative blogosphere which exposed Scozzafava and put the pressure on for her to step aside..

This is cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude!

Michael Illions was one of many bloggers today across the right-wing spectrum to call for Dede Scozzafava to withdraw from the NY District 23 House race. The movement to call for Scozzafava’s withdrawal, though, started brewing earlier this week.  Here’s a little background.

Over at NRO, Jim Geraghty did a piece on the NY-23 House race on Monday in the Campaign Spot. In that piece, Geraghty contended that conservatives ought not fault the NRCC and RNC for supporting a Republican chosen by the local party.

This is not a defense of Scozzafava. I’m just saying it’s a contradiction if a conservative denounces the National Republican Senatorial Committee, when it backs Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio and Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey (yeah, that one went well), for not letting Republican grassroots have their say, and then denounces the NRCC and RNC when they try to help Scozzafava win. In this case, the NRCC and RNC are backing the choice of the local party, after the choice has been finalized. It may be a lousy choice, but you rarely if ever see national parties overruling the selection of local parties; once you open that door, you face the question of how often these national committees get to exercise a veto over the local parties’ selection.

Two days later, though, Geraghty changed his tune after Scozzafava had a run-in with Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack. Geraghty explains:

Earlier this week, I was noting that it was unrealistic for conservatives to expect national Republican committees, like the RNC and National Republican Congressional Committee, to do anything but back the Republican in New York’s special congressional election.

But the situation has changed.

It’s not just the inanity of Dede Scozzafava’s campaign calling the cops on a reporter; it’s doubling down and calling McCormack a liar. With audiotape now exposing the Scozzafava campaign as the liar in their account of the candidate’s interaction with John McCormack, it’s a different ballgame. I’m actually finding myself driven to a position beyond the editors.

It’s time for the NRCC and RNC to cut their ties, and more. It’s embarrassing enough when a candidate won’t answer reasonable questions from reasonable press and her campaign attempts to smear them in order to cover up their mess. Forwarding McCormack’s e-mails to Talking Points Memo just shows how upside-down the Scozzafava campaign is.

The time has come for the RNC and NRCC to ask for their money back. This goes well beyond any reasonable difference on policy. There’s room in the party for pro-choice Republicans and pro-gay-marriage Republicans and maybe even the odd pro-card-check Republican. But not this kind of arrogance, this kind of clumsy dishonesty, this kind of reckless hostility to a reporter and a publication that need not be an enemy.

The RNC and NRCC are better than the Scozzafava campaign. It’s time for them to demonstrate that they know how a candidate and her staff are supposed to react when asked a question, and to show that Scozzafava’s team’s behavior is just not acceptable.

Well, this represented the last straw for many in the right-wing blogosphere, prompting several sites this morning, starting with Red County, Red State and the American Spectator (Quinn Hilyer), to call for Scozzafava to withdraw. Red County, in particular, led the way on this starting with a post this morning from Joshua Sharf. A flurry of posts followed on Red County including here, here, here and here.

Red State and the American Spectator were also among the first to call for Scozzafava’s withdrawal. From there, the calls for withdrawal spread quickly. As Michael mentioned, all of the following outlets also joined the bandwagon: RightWingNews.com. Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com. The Washington Examiner. The Washington Times. Michelle Malkin also got on board.

All of this goes to show just how powerful this medium called blogging has become; and how bloggers, when working in concert, can affect change. In the past, a candidate like Scozzafava would have flown well under the radar. Her views not known to the rest of us until well after the horse was out of the barn. Now, we have the power to fight back when our party puts forth wholly unworthy candidates who do not uphold any of the core values the party stands for.

One can only hope that Mrs. Scozzafava now does the right thing and steps aside. In fact, that would be the only way to show any last bit of true allegiance to the party whose banner she now is running under.

Yesterday, the destructive, job-killing Waxman-Markey C(r)ap and Trade bill passed the House. While numerous Democrats broke ranks to oppose this bad legislation, it passed with some Republican support. That support, unfortunately, came from three so-called Republicans right here in New Jersey. Their names? Leonard Lance, Chris Smith and Frank LoBiondo.

Their votes in favor of this bill represent nothing less than a betrayal of Republican principles. Waxman-Markey, as I have pointed out previously, is a repressive tax for Americans. It will impact everything we produce and result in lost jobs and higher energy bills to the tune of up to $3,000 a year for the average family.

Lance, LoBiondo and Smith have now elevated themselves to the same level as Arlen Specter. Their votes are no less a betrayal as Specter’s was for the Porkulous bill.

As such, each of these Congressmen now no longer deserve our support. Each of them needs to be primaried out. Republicans need to send a strong and clear message that on certain issues you must toe the line and breaking ranks will not be tolerated. If you are a constitutent in the districts represented by these Congressmen make no mistake, they have not represented you, let alone this state and our nation. They need to be voted out.

I, for one, will do all I can to see that that is exactly what happens next year.

While Barack Obama still enjoys fairly solid approval ratings – for now anyway – Congress’ ratings have remained in the toilet. Now, a Rasmussen poll finds Republicans leading Democrats on 6 of 10 key issues.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 45% now trust the GOP more to handle economic issues, while 39% trust Democrats more.

This is the first time in over two years of polling that the GOP has held the advantage on this issue. The parties were close in May, with the Democrats holding a modest 44% to 43% edge. The latest survey was taken just after General Motors announced it was going into bankruptcy as part of a deal brokered by the Obama administration that gives the government majority ownership of the failing automaker.

Voters not affiliated with either party now trust the GOP more to handle economic issues by a two-to-one margin.

Separate Rasmussen tracking shows that the economy remains the top issue among voters in terms of importance.

Issue	Democrats	Republicans
Health Care	47%	37%
Education	44%	37%
Social Security	43%	37%
Abortion	41%	41%
Economy	39%	45%
Taxes	39%	44%
Iraq	37%	45%
Nat’l Security	36%	51%
Gov’t Ethics	29%	35%
Immigration	29%	43%

This obviously is good news for Republicans as we start thinking ahead to this November, as well as the 2010 off-year elections.

I also find it interesting to see Republicans so far ahead on the issue of immigration considering how it has been used as a wedge in the battle over the ‘Latino vote’ and with McCain losing the Hispanic vote last year by such a wide margin.

While it’s not surprising to see Dems leading on social issues like health care, this is going to be a huge, huge battle in the very near future as Obama & Co. push for socialized medicine. It is a battle Republicans must be prepared to fight with everything they have.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude!

Former Massachusetts Governor and Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is about to throw his support behind Chris Christie. Interestingly, Wally Edge at PolitickerNJ seemed to think this would help Romney in New Jersey should he run again for President – as expected – in 2012.

Mitt Romney’s decision to pick a horse in the New Jersey Republican gubernatorial primary likely accomplishes two things: it boosts former U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie’s standing among conservatives, and it strengthens Romney’s chances of picking up organizational and fundraising support in New Jersey if he seeks the 2012 GOP nomination for President.

I disagree. In fact, I find this to be a calculated gamble by Romney that could easily backfire; a gamble probably not worth taking.

Mayor Lonegan has loyal grassroots support among conservatives in this primary. He is ahead of Christie by a wide margin among conservatives, many of whom are dubious of Christie’s conservative credentials.

In fact, Romney fought hard last year during his presidential bid to convince conservatives that he was one of us. Many conservatives, myself included, voted for him because he was the closest thing we could get to a true conservative last year.

So, for Romney to inject himself into this race and back Christie he is more likely to have turned off conservatives than inspired them to vote for him in the next presidential primary in this state. As a Lonegan supporter I sure as heck won’t forget that Mitt Romney did not back the true conservative in this race. It’s one vote he will lose if he follows through with his endorsement tomorrow.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude! and Red County.

The nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court presents Republicans with a huge opportunity. Sotomayor represents the typical, very left-wing jurist Republicans and conservatives have decried over the years. A nominee who has a record and philosophy of activism, with public statements to back it up (for more on Sotomayor’s record, you can check out Michelle Malkin’s write-up)

When Sotomayor comes before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republicans should approach the hearings with the intent to educate the American people on the proper constitutional role and function of a judge; that it is NOT their role to legislate from the bench. This is a debate that is long overdue and Republicans ought to embrace it.

Republicans need to, once and for all, put to bed the ideas put forth by the Left that one’s race, gender or economic circumstances in life have any bearing on one’s qualifications for the Court. They need to explain to the American people that the only role of a judge is to fairly apply the law. Justice, as the old adage goes, ought to be blind.

Republicans might not win the battle over Sotomayor’s appointment, but they should at least strive to win in the court of public opinion by convincing the American people of the destructiveness of the judicial activism and the need to return the the kind of constitutional jurisprudence our Founders desired.

Some may cringe at the thought of having a ‘litmus test’ when it comes to judges. However, there are two areas where Republicans ought to have one. First, any potential judge who has a record of activism (read: legislating from the bench) should automatically be disqualified. Likewise any potential judge who has a record of looking to foreign law in their rulings also should be disqualified.

Senate Republicans, particularly those on the Judiciary Committee, will be under considerable pressure to oppose this nominee and advocate for the positions I have outlined above. I can only hope that they will have the backbone to do so.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude! 

Colin Powell appeared on Face the Nation today and, among other things, reacted to comments made last week by Dick Cheney while, typically, calling for expanding the party’s base. Here is the interview in full.

Let’s make no mistake. Colin Powell is an American hero and success story. His accomplishments serving his country are beyond admirable. Unfortunately, his credibility as a Republican is little. He has never run for office and compiled a record of legislative or executive accomplishments. He has not done anything to help the party win elections as far as I can recall. When he was Secretary of State under ‘W’ he was known more for being a voice of opposition in the administration. But now somehow we should listen to him when it comes to rebuilding our party?

For argument’s sake, let’s accept Powell’s premise. RINOs like Powell like to use rhetoric about expanding the party’s base and being a big tent. Shouldn’t they then be asked to provide us with a plan on how to do so? However, they NEVER say what they mean by that. They never lay out a road map for it.

Shouldn’t RINOs also then be asked to provide evidence that moderating the party’s stances will actually be effective and also be able to point to the successes of moderates in the party? This, too, never occurs.

Powell points to his previous votes for Republican candidates over the years. That may be well and good. But as in the world of sports, one has to ask “what have you done for me lately?” Last time I checked, Colin Powell was endorsing and voting for a Democrat for President. Can someone please tell me how this helps build the Republican Party? Couple this with Powell’s unfounded criticism of the party moving too far right and, in my mind, he has undermined any credibility he has as a Republican.

John McCain represented the EXACT kind of candidate Powell suggests the party needs and he publicly shunned him in favor of the most left-wing candidate in the nation’s history. Party building indeed.

(more…)

The New Jersey Young Republican Federation held one of its biggest events of the year over the weekend. I wasn’t sure myself if I was going to be able to attend but I am glad it worked out so I could. Being that I will not be a YR for much longer – the dreaded ‘4-0′ is right around the corner – I am happy that I went. Not only was the event filled with a number of terrific speakers, but it was a great opportunity to meet so many like-minded people who are trying to build the Republican Party back up. From what I saw the future looks bright.

Fellow CWA! poster Sharon Soon and myself.

Here is a brief synopsis of the day’s events:

Congressman Frelinghuysen was the first major speaker to address the conference and he touched on some of the things going on in Washington, such as proposals that will lead to nationalizing health care. He urged everyone to be ‘vigilant’ in opposing the very left-wing legislation coming from the new administration and Congress. And on another note, in no uncertain terms the Congressman said that Nancy Pelosi’s claims of not being briefed on interrogation methods were ‘a lie.’

Minority Leader Alex DeCroce spoke to the attendees about the prospects of winning this year. He said he was ‘charged up’ about this election cycle and felt we had opportunities to win in areas of the state where Republicans haven’t been successful recently. He also urged people to run for office and to not ’sell themselves short’ and that the party needs people ‘from all walks of life.’ The Assembly Leader spoke of the importance of this year’s elections and that in this state (and the nation) we have ‘gone too far left’ and need to bring things back in the other direction.

Matt Rooney of SaveJersey gave a talk about blogging. Matt did a nice job and emphasized the importance of those of us on the right using blogs and other social networks in getting our message out. Obviously, the Democrats and the Obama campaign used these tools to their advantage last year, but if I may inject my own opinion here, I believe we are catching up quite fast in this regard.

Keith Davis, Atlantic County Chairman, effectively laid out Corzine’s long list of failures, calling him the worst Governor in the country (hard to disagree with that!). But Keith also pointed out what he felt were the two biggest challenges we Republicans face: unity and money. Keith called for the party to come together after the June 2nd primary, going on to say we have the right message this year and were poised to bring back competence to Trenton.

Assemblywoman McHose was next up and addressed several issues. She mentioned that the dying print press has led to fewer press people in Trenton and, ergo, less watchful eyes there to report on things going on in the legislature. Assemblywoman McHose also spoke of women in politics, mentioning that the legislature is composed of more women now than at any time before and that she has had a hand in forming Women’s Caucus. She is also working to pass legislation to further transparency in government. Two such pieces of legislation are the Party Democracy Act and the Transparency in Government Act – the latter of which is being co-opted and watered down by Democrats in Trenton. The Assemblywoman also went on to rail against the DEP, an agency that she said is ’strangling’ the state.

Assemblyman Webber followed and also touched on a number of issues. He touted his role in defeating taxpayer funded elections. The Assemblyman also spoke of the need to use technology and for YR’s to get online and network. He spoke of the YR’s as not just the future of the party, saying ‘we are the now of the party’ (the Assemblyman himself only being 37). He urged them to run for office themselves if they saw fit and not to hold back or wait their turn.

(more…)

Yesterday, the newly formed National Council for a New America (NCNA) held its first conference. The meeting consisted of numerous prominent Republicans including Mitt Romney, House Whip Eric Cantor and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Richard Ross reported here on CWA! last week regarding this effort aimed at ‘rebranding’ the party and ‘updating’ its message.

After the meeting, though, Jeb Bush had this to say:

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Saturday that it’s time for the Republican Party to give up its “nostalgia” for the heyday of the Reagan era and look forward, even if it means stealing the winning strategy deployed by Democrats in the 2008 election.

“You can’t beat something with nothing, and the other side has something. I don’t like it, but they have it, and we have to be respectful and mindful of that,” Mr. Bush said.

The former president’s brother, often mentioned as a potential candidate in 2012, said President Obama’s message of hope and change during the 2008 campaign clearly resonated with Americans.

“So our ideas need to be forward looking and relevant. I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [Republican] messaging. I mean, it’s great, but it doesn’t draw people toward your cause,” Mr. Bush said.

Now, I understand to some extent what Jeb is saying. The party can not rely on nostalgia alone to win elections. This is true. But the problem has not been that the party has done this. The problem is we are no longer the party of Reagan. We haven’t been the party of Reagan, arguably, since Bill Clinton used the government shutdown to kill very bit of momentum built up by the 1994 victories.

And the drift away from Reaganism started before 1994 with Jeb’s dad. The minute Bush #41 took over he left Reaganism behind by supporting tax increases and employing a softer tone - think “thousand points of light” and a “kindler, gentler America.”

The 1994 elections certainly signaled a step back towards Reaganism. For about 4 years we saw the kind of vision Reagan had for America being implemented by Republicans in Congress led by Newt Gingrich and the ‘Contract with America.’. Tax cuts, balanced budgets and returning power back to the states were several of the hallmarks of this movement.

When George W. Bush came onto the scene and announced his candidacy for the Presidency, you may remember many in the media saying that he was more conservative than his father. In retrospect, “W” was only slightly to the right of his father. As they say, the acorn doesn’t fall far from the tree. In fact, “W’s” use of the term “compassionate conservatism” drew the ire of conservatives even back in during the 2000 campaign. 

George W. Bush, of course, ultimately did not govern completely like Reagan. “W” was indeed a proponent of a strong, tough foreign policy in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, but his domestic agenda was hardly Reagan-esque save tax cuts. “W” sanctioned excess spending and inexplicably signed into law the prescription drug benefit entitlement. He also promoted and signed into law No Child Left Behind which only increased intervention of the federal government in the area of education, rather than devolving that power to the states. On illegal immigration, “W” also was right there with the pro-amnesty crowd until conservatives put a stop to it (amnesty did occur under Reagan but he would later say that it was a mistake).

So, to some extent I do agree with Jeb. The party does need to update its message. But it should do so by taking the principles of Reaganism and applying them in a personal and relevant way to the problems the nation faces today.

The approach, though, that needs to be tossed in the trash and be forgotten is the “Bush” approach for it is the one that has crippled the Republican Party.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude!