That should be answer that replaces “does a bear shit in the woods” as the response to all obvious answers.
In case you haven’t been watching, there is an interesting race shaping up in NY-23. Dede Scozzafava is the Republican backed candidate, Bill Owens is backed by the Democrats. Doug Hoffman is running under the banner of the Conservative Party.
While the Republicans have backed, and are providing significant financial support for Scozzafava, there is significant concern not just whether Scozzafava is a conservative but, as the The Jawa Report lays out, wether she shouldn’t actually be running as a Democrat. On the other hand, there is no doubt about Hoffman’s conservative credentials.
In a move I’m afraid we will see even more in 2010, the Republican establishment chose to support Scozzafava, the person they believe is “more electable,” than the person, Hoffman, who clearly supports Republican principles. Who the party is supporting has become so contorted that you have
Fred Thompson, Club for Growth and Bill Kristol on one side, Newt Gingrich, Daily Kos and Michael Steele on another side, and Bill Clinton and Barack Obama on yet another side
One of the things that has been interesting in watching the race is that as it bits conservatives against “the establishment,” non of the purported Presidential hopefuls had taken a position or supported a candidate in this race. That is they didn’t until yesterday.
Yesterday, Sarah Palin came out in support of Hoffman. Her reasoning was clear and sound:
Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a “time for choosing.”
Doug Hoffman is committed to ending the reckless spending in Washington, D.C. and the massive increase in the size and scope of the federal government. He is also fully committed to supporting our men and women in uniform as they seek to honorably complete their missions overseas.
Palin goes on to point out the problems with the establishment within the Republican party:
Political parties must stand for something. When Republicans were in the wilderness in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan knew that the doctrine of “blurring the lines” between parties was not an appropriate way to win elections. Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate who 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.
Republicans and conservatives around the country are sending an important message to the Republican establishment in their outstanding grassroots support for Doug Hoffman: no more politics as usual.
Another Presidential hopeful was asked yesterday, what his position on NY-23 was. While he does have positions on the VA and NJ Gubernatorial races, Tim Pawlenty claimed to be unaware of a race that has become an icon for the future of the Republican party:
“You know I haven’t been following that, I haven’t studied the race at all,” he said. “It’s not that I would or wouldn’t, I just don’t know anything about it. I haven’t taken the time to study their positions, their records, so I haven’t taken a position on it.”
Yeah, right, Tim.
Mark Tim’s response in your note book for the 2012 Presidential campaign. For all the talk about a Pawlenty Presidential run, it really should be that, just talk. Pawlenty has been successful in his vow to keep taxes down. However, on the social side, think George Bush’s passionate conservatism.
It should be clear to all Republican politicians that the political landscape has shifted. Running a party under the header of “we’re not the other guys,” is a strategy that will not work in 2012. A significant portion of what has traditionally been the Republican base are asking for representation that is specifically and concretely committed to the principles of smaller government. We (I’m one of them) believe that much of the problem with the last few election cycles is that allowing the “electability” factor to outweigh the “principle” factor has brought us a party that is rapidly and consistently brought us to our current state of “Democrat Lite.”
For Pawlenty to miss this opportunity to firmly endorse the candidate who clearly represents the “government = bad” part of the Republican platform, should show to all that he is too beholden to the “status quo” of the Republican machine to be considered a serious candidate for 2012.
I don’t hold out much hope for a 2012 Presidential run by Pawlenty. While he’s my Governor and I appreciate his ability to out fox the Democrats and keep a lid on taxes, there are too many times where he has shown that he is just another “Compassionate Conservative.” If Pawlenty wants to change this image he will need to find sound, principled reasons to vocally buck “the machine.” If he doesn’t, he’ll end up behind Huckabee and Romney in the “next in line” and behind Palin or someone else as the “True Conservative” on the ballot
