The biggest political news the past few days is the NY-23 race, in which the Republican nominee, Dede Scozzafava, dropped out because of pressure from the Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.
The National Review spin is that the problem with Scozzafava is that she was a liberal on economic issues: “Tea Party” and “Club for Growth” issues. If that’s the reason Hoffman beat her and prominent conservatives lined up behind Hoffman, then it’s all good.
The fact that Scozzafava has endorsed the Democrat, Bill Owens, shows us that she was no good. No real Republican would ever endorse a Democrat.
But the way the mainstream media is portraying the situation is that Scozzafava had the wrong view on religious issues: abortion and gay marriage. Now I, personally, think that gay marriage is a dumb idea for purely secular reasons, but for most people it’s a religious issue, with Christians being against it and secular people being in favor of it. If the story is that a Republican most be anti-abortion in order to be accepted by the Republican establishment, then it’s bad for the Republican Party.
I strongly suspect that, had Scozzafava had the same liberal views on “Tea Party” and “Club for Growth” issues, but had been anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, Hoffman’s third party campaign wouldn’t have taken off.
If she's liberal on economic issues AND social issues, how exactly is she a Republican? Is she a hawk on Israel or something?
Posted by: Peter A | November 02, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Since Scozzafava endorsed the Democrat and wants him to win, couldn't she have done more to help him win by simply staying in the race? Unless, she thought that she would be taking away more votes from the Dem.
Posted by: Shawn | November 02, 2009 at 12:01 PM
I disagree. The populist anger is over bailouts and budget deficits. That's where the marginal vote is coming from.
Posted by: The Engineer | November 02, 2009 at 12:19 PM
The matter of the fact is that she only got this far because she was good at reciprocal political backscratching, and the second people had to make a choice she was canned.
Since she can take defeat so well and has a bang-up personality, she is being a very special someone.
By very special someone I mean a 4-letter word which rhymes with "punt."
Posted by: Anon | November 02, 2009 at 05:33 PM
What is this conservative 3rd party that Hoffman is part of?
Posted by: GLS | November 02, 2009 at 08:28 PM
The flack from the right on blogs and talk radio has been all about taxes, spending and regulation. Especially Scozzafava's supporting the stimulus and cap and trade. I didn't even specifically know Scozzafava's positions on abortion and gay marriage until I saw them here, though I could have guessed since I had heard her generically described as to the left of the Democrat.
So, as a matter of reality, your test is passed. As a matter of perception, who knows. I think the media is so far in the tank that trying to craft conservative and/or Republican strategy around "what won't get spun on the nightly news" is a task doomed to failure, one that can only paralyze the right.
Posted by: Dave R | November 02, 2009 at 09:32 PM
"What is this conservative 3rd party that Hoffman is part of?"
Apparently it's the "Conservative Party of New York State"
Posted by: Sideways | November 02, 2009 at 11:04 PM
What is the "Conservative Party"?
It's a complicated story, which occured a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far, away...
If you've heard the term "Rockefeller Republican", it's a puttdown of people like Scuzzafuzza who are Republican in name only, but act like Democrats. Nelson Rockefeller, governor of New York from the fifties to the seventies, was the namesake.
Because Rockefeller was so liberal, conservatives actually broke off from the New York Republican party and started their own party.
For whatever reason, there are quite a few third parties in New York. There is a Liberal party too, for example.
This party has been marginally successful. Christopher Buckley, brother of National Review founder Bill Buckley, won a Senate race on the conservative line in 1970. Bill Buckley himself ran for mayor of NYC on the conservative line in '65.
As you can see, it's been a long time since the Conservatives did anything.
Posted by: The Engineer | November 03, 2009 at 08:41 AM
The New York State electoral laws encourage third parties. As long as they get a certain threshold vote in major elections (either gubernatorial or presidential, I forget), they get automatic ballot access. SEcond, they can cross-endorse with major parties. Third, they can endorse candidates in the major party primaries.
New York allows cross-endorsements, so usually a candidate will run on the Republican AND Conservative or Democratic AND Liberal lines. There also is or was a Right To Life party, which was either a conservative-republican front or a democratic party stalking horse, depending on who stormed the organizing meeting last.
Sometimes, the third party makes a semi-surprising endorsement, like when the Liberal Party endorsed Giuliani. (Giuliani never got the Conservative line, I believe. It was either blank--you can do that in NY--or had a no-hoper candiate) The NY Liberal party has since fallen on hard times, but a lot of people voted Giuliani on the Liberal line.
Third, minor parties can endorse candidates in the major party primaries. This is especially important in otherwise one-party districts, where the primary effectively is the election. ACORN and SEIU control the "Working Families Party", which is a big factor in Democratic primaries.
Most of it goes back to the New Deal Era, when socialist Jews wanted to vote for Roosevelt but couldn't stomach the Tammany Irish Democratic Party. Throw in guys like leftist Republican LaGuardia, and there you are.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | November 04, 2009 at 08:31 AM