Yesterday’s announcement that Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson will not seek re-election next year was a stunning blow to a Democratic Party that had already been facing an uphill battle to retain their narrow majority in the upper house. Nelson is the seventh Democrat to retire in 2012. And as is the case with seats in Virginian, North Dakota and Wisconsin, Nelson’s exit creates another opportunity for a Republican gain. It’s arguable that Nelson would likely have lost next year anyway as a consequence of his vote for Obamacare, but the incumbent’s withdrawal now moves the seat from a “leans GOP” to “likely GOP” in any analysis of the coming battle for the Senate next November.
But the main point to be gleaned from this news is not just that the odds of Mitch McConnell assuming the post of Senate Majority Leader in January 2013 have increased. Rather, it is to point out to Republicans that despite their well-publicized dissatisfaction with their choices for president, with an unpopular incumbent president presiding over a sinking economy, the stage is still set for a big GOP triumph in 2012. Provided that is, they don’t nominate a presidential candidate who will not only allow Obama to be re-elected but sink the Republican opportunity to regain majorities in both the House and Senate.
To conservatives who scoff at the notion that electing Republicans ought to be a higher priority over choosing solid conservatives rather than moderates, it should be pointed out that the alternative–Democratic control of Congress–would be a disaster for their movement. Obamacare was made possible not just by the election of a Democrat to the White House but his carrying along majorities in both the House and the Senate. Repeal of that measure will not happen unless Obama is defeated while Republicans retain the House and seize the Senate.
Keeping that goal in mind does not mean that conservatives must acquiesce to the nomination of any candidate with an R after their name, even if he is an incumbent. Tea Party favorites like Marco Rubio won races against Democrats after beating moderates. But it means that the GOP must guard against throwing away certain victories, as in Nevada with Sharon Angle and in Delaware with Christine O’Donnell. And, yes, it also means nominating a candidate for president who can not only win but also, at the very least, not act as a drag on the rest of the ticket.
A very difficult knot to untie, Mr. Tobin. n nYou make good points about regaining control of the Senate and the White House in 2012 with the aim of repealing Obamacare. But, as usual, the devil is in the details. n nSharon Angle and Christine O'Donnell were the product of years of frustration among conservatives who have continually been asked by the GOP Establishment to just go along with squishy, "moderate" candidates because, the rationale has gone, a real conservative cannot get elected— independents will only vote for "moderates." For years, conservatives have gone along with this faulty reasoning (and its counterpart, "X may be a RINO, but the Democrat is much worse and you don't want HIM elected, do you?"). n nConservatives have learned the hard way that voting for the RINO effectively results in two unacceptable results: 1) the elected RINO goes to D.C. and invariably votes with the Dems on all sorts of horrible legislation which the Dems can then claim has that holy grail of "bipartisan support"; 2) Independents and Reagan Dems see these elected RINOs in action and assume based on the GOP label that they are conservative and therefore the GOP and conservatism are greatly discredited— any distinction between Dems and Pubs is all but obliterated and the voting public is left cynical and unresponsive. n nThis is where things stand now with the GOP and conservatives. Conservatives need to continue the efforts begun in 2009 to take over the GOP local machinery so that solid, respectable, conservative candidates can be recruited and elected. Conservatives should not get impatient and recruit candidates like Angle or O'Donnell who have not been thoroughly vetted; if there is no solid conservative candidate in a given district, then that simply means that conservatives have not done a good enough job of recruiting and organizing and a lesser candidate may have to be pushed with the express caution that support for re-election is conditioned upon how they vote in Congress. n nOn a closing note, Mr. Tobin, I must take exception to the notion that repealing Obamacare is the single, most important issue for 2012. Reducing spending and government (of which Obamacare is a part) is the single most important issue. As Mark Steyn has so effectively stated, it doesn't matter whether we repeal Obamacare if we do not immediately address the insane spending in D.C. Obamacare is but one of many, many programs that are literally driving the fiscal car off a cliff. If Pubs in Congress cannot find the fortitude to yank the steering wheel hard right in 2013, the car is going off the cliff and repealing Obamacare isn't going to make one bit of difference. When that happens we will facing the kind of austerity that will make the Great Depression look like tarts and fancy cakes. Things don't look good, though. After electing a tidal wave of Pubs to Congress in 2010, what has happened to spending? It's gone up! Maybe not as much as it would have under the Dems, but it is a difference between hanging and electrocution— you are just as dead either way.