The election in NY-23 has created quite the quandry. For those who don’t know, this is where the local GOP has selected a liberal as their nominee. Wait, she’s a moderate? On what issue? She has the NRA endorsement, so she’s probably good on guns. Anything else? I’ll be happy to post a correction on this post tonight on anything you can identify where she’s voted on the right (I don’t accept pledges to vote, I want to know what she’s actually done).
Anyway, back to the race. We have a liberal, whose landed some pretty liberal endorsements (KOS, NYSUT, and ACORN, to name a few), running against the Democrat. In steps a conservative alternative in Doug Hoffman as a third party candidate. Both sides have gotten party supporters; one on the basis of party, and one on the basis of principles.
As I’ve pointed out before, you are better off supporting a moderate Republican than a conservative Democrat if you’re concerned about conservative issues, as the vote for Speaker determines what issues will be voted on. That’s less of an issue here, because both Scozzafava and Hoffman would vote GOP for Speaker. What IS an issue is whether the fight between them will elect the Democrat. Score one point for Scozzafava.
On the flip side, there’s the question of base enthusiasm. In case you missed it, this race has angered the conservative base all over the country. Like it or not, this race will impact their willingness to volunteer and donate in 2010, with questions about whether the partyreally cares about their issues. Most wouldn’t care if Scozzafava didn’t have all the right positions, but they wany SOMETHING on which to base support. Despite the importance of the issue, guns just isn’t substantial enough. The economy and the deficit are primary concerns, and Scozzafava just doesn’t measure up with her support for forced unionizations (Card Check) and the stimulus bill. These aren’t pet issues held by just a portion of the extreme wing, these are mainstream positions held by the electorate at large. Supporting a candidate who’s bad on these issues sends the message of politics as usual, and putting the GOP in charge would only change who gets the goodies, not the direction we’re headed. Score one for Hoffman.
At the end of the day, message is more important that this seat. This isn’t a question of ideological purity (which should NEVER be the litmus test), but of what message you send the base, and whether you want to convince the general public you are serious about putting out a conservative agenda, or whether you just want your guys in power to get you the loot.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:30 am
“In case you missed it, this race has angered the conservative base all over the country.” You are correct Richard, it is not just a few yahoos like me who comment on this site who are angry, the angrer is widespread across the country, Conservatives are fed up. Just like national Conservative anger over ACORN, the Stimulus (i.e. Tea Parties) and in some cases TARP, anger over NY-23 has taken the party elite by surprise as those guys are out of touch with the people. I can hold my nose and vote for a Pro-Abortion Republican who happens to be a capitalist and Pro-national defence, but it is just plain nutty to vote for a total leftist. As far as I can tell, this loose cannon in NY-23 is only Right-Wing on one freaking issue (just one;) she is Pro-Gun. Yippie, haha! I have nothing against the NRA, but if anyone thinks I (and many others for that matter) am going to support somebody just because the NRA supports them, I would like to drink what they are drinking if you will. We hear, “oh you in the party base, calm down, can’t we allow just one liberal in the party; this is only one district.” This is exactly the time to punish the party elite for their undemocratic shenanigans. Better that they be punished for losing one seat than punished with losing the whole Congress.
Furthermore, the GOP has very little chance of winning anyways and if by some fluke she did win, she would jump ship and join the Dems soon anyways. Meanwhile, at least the Conservative has a decent chance of winning and he would vote with the GOP in Congress. To be sure it is foolish to vote for a Third party of the Dems even if the GOP candidate is not perfect all things being equal, but the senario in this case is so unique that this time it would be foolish not to take this opportunity to punish the GOP elite for their non-sence. They have been warned before, but they chose to ignore the base and the country as a whole and pick a fight. Guess what, we can fight back now.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:38 am
I’m as conservative as it gets, but they like her in NY23 so who am I to tell them who to vote for. There is room for moderates republicans, we should be more tolerant..If we don’t become more accepting, voters will move away from the Republican party.
Hoffman doesn’t even live in district 23 and doesn’t understand many of the issues and in some cases doesn’t even know what the issues are, also, his campaign workers and funds are coming from out of state.
I don’t feel like the real truth is being told about Scozzafava, like about taxes, and card check…Newt is saying one thing and others like Red State are saying something completely different. So what is the truth?
Plus, I believe that it is more important to gain seats in the House with the possibility of having a majority. We must have a balance of power to stop Obama. In the long run, that is more important than electing a Moderate.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:49 am
Our ‘tent’ should be big enough to allow different ideas and perspectives. But apparently it’s not. A republican/conserviative in upstate NY is quite different than a republican/conservative in Utah. But we are not allowed to have a difference of thoughts. We must all walk lockstep and be defined by the narrowest of standards.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:56 am
#2 “There is room for moderates republicans, we should be more tolerant..If we don’t become more accepting, voters will move away from the Republican party.”
Every word you wrote there is true. The question really becomes whether Scozzafava is a moderate or a liberal. We should be precise in describing her political philosophy.
“I don’t feel like the real truth is being told about Scozzafava, like about taxes, and card check…Newt is saying one thing and others like Red State are saying something completely different. So what is the truth?”
Another excellent point! In reading Spkr Gingrich’s comments in support of Scozzafava, he talks about her pledging not to do all the liberal things that have been tied around her neck so far. In the face of some VERY liberal groups actively supporting her, is that enough for you? It isn’t for me.
Let me be clear, if Scozzafava votes like Spkr Gingrich promises she would, I would say it’s self-destructive to vote for Hoffman. I am asking for more than promises, however, because getting the supporters she has makes that all suspicious. I DON’T TRUST HER, AND I DON’T TRUST THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT! The establishment GOP is the group who pushed Pres Bush. They are the ones who broke with the CWA, and pushed to expand the gov’t. THEY, the party bosses, decided to follow the old addage “To the victor goes the spoils.” THEY are the reason the GOP doesn’t control the Congress or the Senate, and we will continue to lose until they either rethink their approach or are replaced.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:00 am
#3 Knickers, it isn’t a narrow definition here, but a very wide spectrum. Scozzafava is a symbol of capitulation, not moderation. Name for me, other than guns, a conservative or moderate position she holds. Her political allies are mainly hard leftists (unless you think a teacher’s union, ACORN, and KOS are moderate?). She doesn’t pass the smell test of moderate. I could be wrong about her, but I want some proof before I back down on this.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:12 am
Scozzafava is a terrible nominee – no doubt. But to send the message that we are perfectly happy having Conservatives operate outside of the Republican party (making both groups weaker), is a bad idea.
See if we can get Hoffman to promise to change his registration to Republican if he wins. If he will, good. Otherwise, let one of the other two act as a placeholder, where they will change virtually nothing, and then next year, run a strong conservative candidate (Hoffman would be fine, if he’ll do it), and win the seat back.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:13 am
“but they like her in NY23″ Part of the whole point is that they do not like her. She was chosen by 4 out of 11 party hacks, not by the people.
“republican/conserviative in upstate NY is quite different than a republican/conservative in Utah.” Yes Conservatives and Republicans are slightly different in each of the 50 states, but in no state are they actually outright Socialists. A big tent is fine, but a tent so big that it is full of Blue dogs, Yellow dogs, Red dogs and Green dogs, is too unruly and stands for nothing. We are after all a collection of Republicans not a collection of Democrats.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:19 am
To the extent that I could follow it, I’ve found this to be an interesting debate. I’ve also wanted to point out a useful observation by Jay Cost at the Horse Race Blog:
The partisan/ideologue dichotomy is useful in the debate over Hoffman-v-Scozzafava debate.
I count myself among the ideological majority. When push comes to shove, the GOP and its hierarchical establishment can kiss my royal white posterior.
I would contend that the reason the Republican Party is still floundering in voter identification polls lay in its past congressional performance. Loads of compromises were made to ensure GOP caucus members were all on board for each legislative move. This inner-party compromise with the left/moderate faction gave us at least six years of ever-expanding federal government. It ended in a bubble and a subsequent fiscal train wreck, now made worse by the Democratic takeover.
The GOP thus needs to regain credibility that it actually stands for something other than ensuring its elected representatives get a chance at the federal trough. It may be true, as Adam and others have pointed out, that by demanding ideological or principled purity, we wind up under the heavy statist thumb of liberal Democrats — that’s impossible to deny. Yet some of us still feel that GOP members need to prove they offer an true alternative form of governance before they get our support.
Trust has to be earned, it cannot be demanded.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:40 am
Sorry to change the subject of the thread, but http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2009/new_jersey/election_2009_new_jersey_governor.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Yes, splitting votes between two candidates so the Dem wins sucks. But it sucks more for the group that cares about power more than principle, and that’s the GOP party bosses.
This election will send a painful message that they better support candidates that reflect the professed platform of the party, or else they risk splitting votes, disheartening the base, and losing more elections.
It’s tough love, and a relatively insignificant house race is a safe place to send that message.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:45 am
OJ, your link is bad.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:48 am
It amazes me the extent people fight for principal. I wonder how many of theose popple live in a state like Illinois. If Palin were to stick her nose in here and split the Republican vote so that we sould have to live with more Dems in office here, I would change from being Republican. I say, let the people here who feel that principal is foremost, come live in Illinois. I would give anything for a Scozzafava in office here. Again, it furthers the debate of “conservatism” has to be defined by area. Conservative Texas is NOT conservative Illinois. Now, McCain is helping Kirk here in Illinois. While Kirk is more moderate, he is a breadth of fresh air here.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:55 am
“OJ, your link is bad.”
Sorry Richard, I do not know how I screwed up, but it short, Mr. Christie is winning NJ by 3 points. I’ll try to figure it out in a bit if I can.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Frank. Exactly. The GOP types are different throughout the country. If it is indeed a ‘big tent’, then it is not mine to define who in NY may be a conservatvie, and who is not. I have my own backyard to worry about.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Richard,
ICYMI…From the horse’s mouth…
http://race42008.com/2009/10/26/pawlenty-backs-hoffman/#comment-613262
October 27th, 2009 at 9:30 am
With all the spending that Bush and the republicans did from 2004-2008, they no longer had a different message from the democrats. So, the first thing that conservative Republicans need to do is demand that the Republican party stand for decreasing the debt, stopping the spending, and limiting government involvement in the private markets.
There have been many Republicans out there standing strong on this. If a conservative republican candidate can’t be nominated by the elite republican leaders then they need to go outside the party and fight for conservative fiscal principles.
Better to start demanding conservative changes now in 2009 and lose, than to demand it in 2010 or 2012 when the party has done nothing to prove they are different than the democrats on spending, deficits and private markets.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Aron, I DID miss that. I can’t see the linked video until this evening, but I will watch it and see what she has to say. The quotes you put out there seemed like after-the-fact cover, but we should be fair to her and hear where she says she stands on the issues. There’s just a real credibility gap, based on the kinds of organizations (minus the NRA) that are endorsing her.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:48 am
“Aron, I DID miss that. I can’t see the linked video until this evening, but I will watch it and see what she has to say. The quotes you put out there seemed like after-the-fact cover, but we should be fair to her and hear where she says she stands on the issues. There’s just a real credibility gap, based on the kinds of organizations (minus the NRA) that are endorsing her.” BINGO, I admit that if I just watched the video and did not know anything else, my dislike for this woman would not be as great. However, the details of the case, her actual voting record and the fact that KOS among other liberal support her, all put this one interview into context.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Smells like
Teen SpiritBS…NY-23 Poll: Hoffman +5
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/10/27/ny-23-poll-hoffman-5/
October 27th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Excellent – “NY-23 Purge Guarantees Obama’s Re-election” http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/
October 27th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Another cooked Republican poll, eh? Nice.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Or should I say, “Another cooked TRUE CONSERVATIVE poll”…
October 27th, 2009 at 10:19 am
That is actually a great link. I agree with Gingrich.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Hoffman 34
Owens 29
Scozzafava 14
Unless the margin of error is more than 10 points and or Ms. Scozzafava gets her fair share of the undisideds, we at least know who is not going to win next Tuesday.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:53 am
It isn’t even so much the backing of Hoffman that bothers me. It is the manner in which it is being done. Folks at Redstate especially, and even Hotair, have been spewing the worst kind of venom at anyone who isn’t backing Hoffman, or even has qualms about backing Hoffman. Calling Newt Gingrich, he of the Contract with America, architect of the great 1994 election, a RINO? Seriously? Is this what the conservative movement has come to? For God’s skae, we are a political party, not a Mafia.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Yep. that’s what we’ve been reduced to. No dissent is allowed. Red State did the same thing in the primary to anyone that wasn’t gung ho over the lethargic Fred Thompson. And try telling them you don’t think Palin is presidential material. Ha!
October 27th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Or, Ohio, unless the poll is skewed. (which I think it is).
October 27th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Adam, so very true. There is no room in our party for dissent. We all must tow the party line as defined by a handfull only. We certainly can’t allow upstate NY to make their own deceisions as to who is a conservative GOP and who is not. Why, that would be… wrong.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:40 am
With all the talk about “returning to principle” and “standing for something,” the complete lack of actual new ideas and plans is absolutely stunning. Principles are great things, don’t get me wrong, but I don’t vote for people because they walk, talk, and think like me. Neither do many of the moderate voters that swing back and forth every election cycle, not because of “squishy” ideology or personal compromises, but because neither party ever has a monopoly on “good government”.
Republicans must focus on providing better government for the American people, which means abandoning this ridiculous sterilization of ideas within the party. The Americans who will return Republicans to power don’t and won’t care whether we’re 99% or 50% ideologically pure, only if Republicans offer a better government than Democrats.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:44 am
#28 “There is no room in our party for dissent. We all must tow the party line as defined by a handfull only.”
You haven’t listened very well to what the complaints about Scozzafava are, have you? This isn’t about one or two issues, it’s a wide range. It isn’t just about her social views (if it was, I’d support her; I’m a big fan of Myr Guiliani), but the fact we don’t trust her or the establishment.
Look, conservatives were hoodwinked by Pres Bush on a variety of issues, and they feel badly burned by it. Credibility is pretty low, and that’s to be expected. Pushing a candidate that has the kinds of hard left organizations supporting her that Scozzafava has, then saying “Trust us, she’s actually moderate,” is a bridge too far to cross right now. Perhaps, if the party can regain credibility (such as by actually promoting fiscally conservative policies, not just opposing bad ones), this wouldn’t have happened.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:49 am
“Or, Ohio, unless the poll is skewed. (which I think it is).” Skewed by 10 points? C’mon
October 27th, 2009 at 11:53 am
#30:
But Richard, the counter-argument to that is that we have to actually gain political power to promote good conservative policies. If radical purists like our friends at RedState have their way, there will never be anything but a Democratic-liberal majority because most of us don’t qualify in their all-knowing view as conservatives.
They also don’t seem to realize that the very nature of government is the nature of compromise. You have to give and take if you want anything to get done in government. Compromising to get half of what you want is better than just stamping your foot and getting nothing you want.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:55 am
And it appears from the most current polls that Hoffman is ahead, not only that, by the most current polls Scozzafava is last. So, at this point, principle wins!
October 27th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
“If radical purists like our friends at RedState have their way, there will never be anything but a Democratic-liberal majority because most of us don’t qualify in their all-knowing view as conservatives.” With respect, one does not have to be a radical purist to oppose Communism. We now have two polls in a row that show that the people in NY-23 support Conservatism over wishy washy RINOism.
“So, at this point, principle wins!” Haha, one has to admire the moderate fringe of our party for being willing to piss away money on a loser in order to split the vote and allow the Dems to beat the Conservative.
October 27th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
It is always right to support what is right! Not right as in “right vs. left”, but right as in correct, as in the right thing to do. Even if it means loosing an election. Lat elections an “extreme left wing” was elected for President of the USA, perhaps, because the GOP candidate did not excite anyone, as a matter of fact, nobody running at that time (on the GOP side) were appealing to conservatives. Let us see what will be our options next time. Someone outside the so-called “GOP establishment.”
October 27th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
#30 “But Richard, the counter-argument to that is that we have to actually gain political power to promote good conservative policies.”
Right, which is why I wrote the post that is linked in the body of this post. If you don’t want to read it, here’s the jist: Gov Palin hurt Conservatism by vowing to support Conservative candidates of all parties.
Of course, that’s not the argument here. Hoffman would vote GOP for Speaker, so there’s no issue there. I’ve also heard repeated reference to Scozzafava as a moderate, but were she a Democrat, I have no doubt she’d be referred to as a liberal (by contrast, Sen Specter is still a moderate, despite changing parties). Some of the statements made by her and Spkr Gingrich would, on their own, make me think she’s moderate, but given her endorsements by very liberal organizations, I have doubts, and I don’t trust the party bosses when they say she’s moderate. Simple as that.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
The Newt Nuts (yes, I’ve coined a new term) are dangerously myopic on this issue. What good does getting rid of Nancy and Harry, if we just sweep in a Republican Party full of folks like Dede? That’s not going to solve the serious economic and financial catastrophe that’s building up in store for us. We need to get people in Congress who will vote against all the spending, and who will vote in alignment with the limited Constitutional framework of our government and who will vote to stop all the spending, taxation, and inflation, regardless of what party they’re from. If we can elect a good chunk of the Congress as liberty-minded, fiscal disciplinarians, even if they come from a smattering of Republican, Democrat, and indie/third party, then we (“we” being responsible, sane citizens) actually stand a chance at stopping this problem from getting any worse. Elections ought not to be about building a party–they ought to be about building a country. That’s something Newt and his Nuts have never been able to understand.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Josiah,
Are you now working for Gary Johnson?
October 27th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Palin receives $1.25M for book retainer
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/oct/27/us-palin-book-retainer-102709/
October 27th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Aron,
No, not in any sort of official function. I have some communication with him and his staff, but in supporting him, I’m solely going rogue.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
You absolutey have to be flexible, to a degree. Our goal should be to elect true conservatives where we can, and run people who can get elected the blue states.
A good example is Florida, where you have a Governor running for Senate using a strategy and persona developed when it looked likely there would be a sweeping wave that would re-orient the nation leftward for decades if not forever. We now know that scenario to be a fading dream for Democrats.
So now, Marco Rubio, (who represents pretty solid Reagan conservatism,) looks like not only a robust challenger to Crist, but to the Dem opponent as well. Solution? Back Rubio in Florida, a purple state. It hurts not he is Latino.
But a politician like Rubio might not be the answer in New York. Having some flexibility, especially in regard to the Northeast, does not mean that Republicans are selling out their principles to become Dem Lite.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
If you, as a matter of principle, help to make the election of the more liberal candidate more likely, you are not committed to conservative principles. You are at best just a conservative fanboy with no principles at all, or at more-likely worst just a liberal.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:17 am
“If you, as a matter of principle, help to make the election of the more liberal candidate more likely, you are not committed to conservative principles. You are at best just a conservative fanboy with no principles at all, or at more-likely worst just a liberal.” That is why you guys should stop supporting Dede, you are splitting the vote.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:00 am
THIRTY POINT REPUBLICAN AND JOE LIEBERMAN PLATFORM
1 – Destroy hope in America by being anti-everything Obama which equals anti-middle class.
2 – Give tax breaks to the rich
3 – Talk conservative when spending money on Main Street, but quite liberal when spending money for corporate CEOs and their lobbyists buddies.
4 – Pass laws as favors for campaign donations even if it is not good for middle class America
5 – Use scare tactics instead of facts to influence Americans (i.e. Bush and Iraq war – death panels, etc).
6 – Complain when Obama/Dems does something for middle class, but have no plans or solutions of their own unless it is to help corporate America and their Lobbyists cronies.
7 – Party of YES for big corporations and lobbyists.
8 – Party of NO for hard working middle class Americans
9 – Distorts the truth and use gimmicks (McCain’s campaign, birthers, death panels, etc)
10 – Relies on Fox and bogus Rasmussen Polls for their facts while ignoring all other opposing polls
11 – Republicans love the color of green for money more than red, white and blue. They prove it time after time by passing laws that favor the rich who fuels their campaigns.
12 – Pretends or distorts the truth as if they are doing good for middle class while passing laws that help the rich and corporate America
13 – Obstructionists for everything that is best for Main St v.s. Corporate America.
14 – Uses polls and studies from self-serving corporations (i.e insurance company poll and study) as facts
15 – While Insurance CEOs give themselves million dollar salaries and spends millions daily to influence politicians (lobbyists) with premiums dollars from denying coverage, Hatch has the gull to discuss their profit percentage (see #3 above).
16. Don’t have the guts to stand up to the crazies like Beck and Limbaugh
17. At the 11th hour talks about preserving Medicare while at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th hour they opposed all regulation to help seniors with health care
18. Everything they say to oppose health care is true about insurance companies – death panels, rationing, etc are all done by insurance companies now
19. Speaks in generalities and sound bites and leaves out the truth. For example taxes. They talk as if Obama will raise taxes on all Americans trying to influence middle class, while leaving out that Obama has said repeatedly he will only raise it on those who make $250,000 or more (roll back to Clinton years) – see #2 and #3 above.
20 – Uses Fox news and conservative talk radio to spread their propaganda.
21 – After banks, insurance industry, wall street, etc destroyed our economy, they want to maintain the status quo and not regulate the financial industry to satisfy the financial lobbyists and get more campaign donations to defeat the Democrats. In other words, the hell with Main Street – see #2 and 3 above.
22 – Not sure, but perception is they don’t care much for minorities — blacks, hispanics, women
23 – Believes in Bush trickle down theory – see #2 above. While it only trickles to greedy corporate pockets or politicians campaign funds.
24. – Will beat Dems in campaign donations because they will get huge donations from corporate America to stop the dems from passing laws that gives corporations unfair advantage to milk the middle class by stealing their dollars and denying services to middle class Americans after paying years for those services. (Bush economy).
25. Republican’s love using buzz words. For example as soon as Obama tries to pass laws to prevent unfair practices by corporate America, the Right screams “free market”. Yet when laws are passed by the Republicans to give corporations and wall street market advantage we never hear them scream “let the free market work”. Republicans should be the party of hypocrites.
26. Good at spending our tax dollars and killing our young men and women in unnecessary wars
27. Republicans seem to believe it is ok that our tax dollars pay for their health care but not middle class health care.
28. Republicans like to reference the evils of “big government” and the Republicans will make sure they pass laws, block useful legislation for middle class and create as much red tape as possible to prove their point.
29. Republicans are great at using trivia (lets pick on what the first lady is wearing, or where the President goes to dinner, vacation, campaigning for winter Olympics, etc) to try to distract Americans from the real issues
30. If you have a few million dollars, you can buy a Republican. For a bargain price, you can get a conservative democrat a little cheaper. Any conservative movement is anti-middle class even though they disguise every policy/law as if it is for middle class America. If you believe a Republican rhetoric, I have a bridge to nowhere to sale you.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:52 am
#44 You’re an idiot who’s so steeped in meaningless buzzwords and hyperbole that no real conversation can be had with you.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
What bugs me is how much money the NRCC (Pete Sessions and co.) are throwing at this race for a loser. And then, there is another race out in California’s 10th district where they could actually flip a seat, and they are ignoring that race.
Out there, it is David Harmer, a conservative Republican, in a race in a “safe Democrat district” which has been gerrymandered to favor the Democrats. But the polls have this race in single digit margins, where historically the Dems have won by 2 to 1 margins.
The Democrats have sent Bill Clinton and Obama out there. They think they are in trouble. You don’t call in the big guns unless you need them.
But Harmer has had no support from conservative PACs, no support from the RNC or NRCC and very little support from the grass roots.
Well, he has had support from me. Maybe others would like to support him too. Check http://www.harmerforcongress.com/ for more info.