-
Tebowing and ‘Polarizing’
June 11, 2013 | 7 comments
-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Here’s a big potential difference between this year and 1994: Sixteen years ago, the stronger conservatives and Republican reformers were elected to the House. The Senate was where Contract with America legislation went to die and the upper-chamber Republican freshman class was mostly pretty conventional compared to their House counterparts. This year, the stronger batch of conservative candidates might be the Republicans elected to the Senate.
On Tuesday, there’s a good chance the voters will elect Rand Paul, Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Sharron Angle, and Ken Buck. Obviously, that equation changes somewhat if a few of those names come up short and Mark Kirk ends up being more representative of the Republican freshman class. But let’s face it: in recent elections where one party has dominated, the competitive Senate races have mostly broken one way.
In 2004, Republicans won every competitive Senate race except for Colorado. In 2006, the Democrats won every such Senate race except for Tennessee. Two years later, the Democrats won every genuinely competitive Senate election. While they briefly threatened in Georgia and Mississippi, that was more of a reflection of the expanding map — Saxby Chambliss ended up winning the runoff with 57 percent of the vote, Roger Wicker beat Ronnie Musgrove with 55 percent. The closest Senate race an incumbent Republican won was when Mitch McConnell was reelected with 53 percent of the vote.
So it stands to reason that Republicans will win most of the competitive Senate races on Tuesday, which means that all of the conservatives I just mentioned — all of them leading in at least some reliable polls — are more likely to win than not. This could prove significant even though Republicans have a better chance of winning the House than the Senate. The conservatives may arguably have more leverage in a large Republican minority than in a narrow Republican majority, where the moderates will need to be courted on every issue. Just electing Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint in 2004 had an impact. Electing five more could have an even bigger one.
View all comments (29) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/10/27/the-coming-conservative-senate
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Lean Feminism
- There’s Something About Cambridge
- The Lehrman Standard
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Siegfried X| 10.27.10 @ 12:53PM
Unfortunately, it will NOT be a "conservative Senate". All the Democrats are liberal, and a lot of the Republicans will be RINO or "moderate". 50 Democrats + 10 RINOs makes a filibuster-proof super majority.
By no math are we anywhere close to 50 to 60 conservatives. In reality we would probably need at least 80 Republican Senators or more realistically 90 in order to pass strongly conservative legislation.
Ryan| 10.27.10 @ 12:53PM
That being said, we need to temper expectations and make sure that we understand that any pickup of more than 5 seats in the senate is pretty much a win for our side there.
2012 is going to be where we really make the gains in the Senate.
Callawyn| 10.27.10 @ 1:02PM
2012 and 2014 could both be very good for conservative gains in the Senate. The D's have to defend roughly twice as many seats as the R's both years, many in states that tilt Republican.
Al Adab| 10.27.10 @ 1:31PM
The Republicans failed us after 1994 and 2000 by accomodating and compromising with The Left. It cannot be done. Do not trade cap and trade for nuclear plants, no not trade Obamacare for some "workable solution". There is none. Kill those proposals. Simply put, DO NOT FAIL US AGAIN. This election is a repudiation of statism, not a praise of Republicans. We followed you to defeat before.
Warrior | 10.27.10 @ 1:48PM
Their willingness to promote a liberal agenda with SCHIP, No Child, Medicare D, attempted imigration amnesty, TARP 1, UAW rescue, AIG bailout, etc. was the destruction of any distinction between the two parties. There needs to be a clear distinction as the more a candidate stands on truly Conservative issues, the more the electorate likes them. The only liberal attitude this bunch should have is the willingness to circumvent rules, shut the door to any bipartisan input, use information releases as a weapon and never apologize for any actions taken to bring this country closer to a Constitutional government. This group needs to take the Chris Christie example of using opponents own words in context in a public forum against them to show just how corrupt and out of touch they really are.
Lesser Weevil| 10.27.10 @ 2:14PM
Chris Christie is a vertebrate.
ncatty| 10.27.10 @ 2:17PM
Yes, he has a stiff spine, all right.
Siegfried X| 10.27.10 @ 3:16PM
Christ Christie is a gun-banning, illegal-alien loving East Coast RINO.
Warrior | 10.27.10 @ 5:19PM
Care to offer any proof or are you suffering from Tourette's disorder?
c. j. acworth| 10.27.10 @ 6:54PM
Warrior, I think Sigfried is thinking of Charlie Crist. Wouldn't be the first time I've seen the two of them mistaken for each other.
Lesser Weevil| 10.27.10 @ 8:27PM
No, Siegfried is talking about Christie. For all his awesomeness in speaking the plain truth unashamedly and refuting the conventional leftist claptrap on spending, he is far from ideal from the conservative point of view. Apart from budgetary issues, his policy positions are pretty much straight "East Coast RINO."
Warrior | 10.27.10 @ 8:57PM
Just asking for substantiation here. I can't find anything in the way he's handled being governor that supports anti-gun or illegal alien loving. I know his stance on abortion is weak, states he's pro-life but really seems to believe in choice.
Lesser Weevil| 10.27.10 @ 10:20PM
Well, his Wikipedia entry (I know, I know, but it does have references) has the following items; they are not conclusive but do suggest a RINOish "splitting the difference" tendency:
Guns: Christie has said that he supports strict and aggressive enforcement of the state's current gun laws.[44] He however supports the Second Amendment's right to bear arms.
Illegal immigration:
While serving as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, Christie stressed that simply "[b]eing in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," but rather a civil wrong; and that undocumented people are not criminals unless they have re-entered the country after being deported. As such, Christie stated, responsibility for dealing with improperly-documented foreign nationals lies with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, not the U.S. Attorney's Office.[52]
Christie has been critical about section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, enacted in 1996, which can be used to grant local law enforcement officers power to perform immigration law enforcement functions. Christie's running mate, Monmouth County Sheriff Kim Guadagno, on the other hand, applied for and was granted approval under 287(g) to have officers at the county jail deputized as immigration agents.[53]
Mark| 10.27.10 @ 1:34PM
Don't forget Joe Miller!
Mark | 10.27.10 @ 1:34PM
And Mike Lee!
Interested Conservative| 10.27.10 @ 2:00PM
And two other important misses, Ron Johnson, the truest entrepreneur of the class, and Rob Portman, perhaps not so much on social issues, but he'll certainly be the brains and know-how on building a budget.
Oldefarte| 10.27.10 @ 1:55PM
As I've said before, the taxpayer-voters need to INITIALLY ELECT REPUBLICANS, and thereafter [insubsequent elections] WEED OUT THE CORRUPT/INCOMPETENT REPUBLICANS and replace them with conservatives that are not. The primary problem in thsi country is the extremely radical Democrats [and their party leaderships] that now controls our government!!!!
Siegfried X| 10.27.10 @ 3:27PM
Yes. There's a lot of trolling / spamming crap around here about how bad the Republicans are. But the reality is that the Democrats are the enemy.
I think we also should compliment this Republican congress for being so strongly conservative. They did a great job of stopping Obama's left-wing agenda. Over 400 left-wing bills passed the House and were blocked by a unanimous Republican Senate. All Obama needed was one Republican, and he didn't get it.
The Underground Conservative | 10.27.10 @ 1:58PM
And Ron Johnson in Wisconsin as well.
Roy| 10.27.10 @ 2:16PM
Trading Feingold for Johnson would be a huge plus for conservatives. I still remember when Feingold rode a wave of media sanctimony about "negative campaigning" all the way to the Senate in 92. His act hasn't changed, but it's wearing thin. I hope. WI Dems are famous for vote fraud.
Lazy Jack | 10.27.10 @ 3:30PM
It can be fairly stated that the Republicans early in this decade were Big Government Republicans. Their majority was slim, so they were also a bit hamstrung by the need to compromise to "get things done."
In reality, they mearly continued the implementation of solution by government only introduced in 1932 by the progressive left and rerun, to our eternal detriment, in almost every one of the 39 congressional sessions since.
The real question is, with the new majority in the house and the stronger presence in the senate motivate them to deliver real results and tear down the government edifice? After 78 years of virtual legislative monopoly by the Democrats (75% of the time since '32 Democrats held majorities in the federal legislature), will the Republicans really try and force a course correction? Here's hoping.
Lazy Jack
For more:
http://thanksforthelaughs.word.....-70s-show/
All Hail The Stupid Party!| 10.27.10 @ 3:53PM
Mr. Antle, until Grahamnesty, Snowe, Collins, McConnell, Issa, McCain, Hatch, Lugar, Cornyn & Corker amongst other RINOs are given a good swift kick in the ass, & out of the U.S. Senate & replaced with real conservatives, there will never be a coming conservative Senate you are talking about. There is a BIG difference between Republicans & conservatives.
Al Adab| 10.27.10 @ 4:26PM
As we Conservatives have spent the last fifty years saying. Republicans are not Conservatives although our Left wing opposition continues to (convieniently) confuse the two. It is only when Conservatives preponderate, that the GOP enjoys success. This quite frankly is their last chance.
Johnny Crockett| 10.27.10 @ 5:48PM
Don't forget Ron Johnson; he's going to rid Wisconsin of our liberal maverick:Wussle Feingold!
mark| 10.27.10 @ 5:49PM
Feingold is toast and his replacement, Ron Johnson is the real deal.
prestonsbrooks| 10.27.10 @ 6:26PM
Doesn't matter if the conservatives win the House and/ or the Senate; Oblowme will ignore the Congress and rule by Fiat and by Czar. That's what Dictators do.
Max Leygrume| 10.27.10 @ 6:50PM
Prestonbrooks...you're wrong.
They only thing that has enabled obama to institute these czars and ignore the people's will is this liberal democrap Congress. They have been his cover. They have been his enablers . Come Nov. 2nd - they're outa here. obama no longer has any friends in high places after that. No one can protect his czars , no one can enable him to subvert the will of the people...even the media.
This is TRUELY the end of obama's reign. Truely.
Baldemar Huerta| 10.27.10 @ 8:31PM
Line them all up against a wall and shoot them.
Willey| 10.28.10 @ 1:50AM
That you, Obowmao?
We've got the guns, loser.