Palin Versus Newt: Observations On NY - 23 Debate

I find it interesting that Sarah Palin puts forth her argument for her NY - 23 position on social media site, Facebook. Newt, otoh, has his posted internally on his own association's site. Does that tell us anything about where both are coming from today, about which is actually more in step with today's culture and electorate? Don't know, but still find it interesting. In a way, it's not unlike their opposing arguments on how to foster a conservative resurgence. Newt comes across as the Party guy. Sarah, more from the ground up, or outside in.

But don't let me put words in their mouthes. You can read both of their reasonings at links.

Sarah Palin

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.

Newt Gingrich:

Through my experience as Speaker of the House and building a Republican majority in 1994, I have learned that if America wants a conservative majority in Washington, parts of that majority are going to disagree. I was elected Speaker because a number of moderates voted for me. They gave us control of the House for the first time in forty years, allowing us to balance the federal budget, cut taxes and reform welfare for America.

My endorsement of Dede Scozzafava in the special election for New York’s 23rd Congressional District is a means of regaining a conservative majority in America.

Comments

[LPARA]

I get both arguments--win the majority; get a REAL conservative in there.

I'm still a little confused as to how winning the majority helps when some of them won't vote CONSERVATIVE. The only benefit is to lead all the committees, and with the dems locking out the pubbies on everything . . . that's definitely an important factor. I still have had it up to my eyeballs with RINO's--it seems to me we have ENOUGH already!!

There also has been talk that the S-woman will switch parties once she gets in. She won't rule that out.

http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/10/23/a-study-in-2012-contrasts/

[Hangtown Bob]

Palin has just announced through Facebook that SarahPac will make the maximum allowable contribution to Hoffman's campaign. She is also calling for her Facebook followers to make individual contributions.

[Dan Riehl]

I think Palin has the correct argument for where we are now. But obviously we aren't going to purge all moderates. But to win elections, you have to give people clear choices. Newt's strategy doesn't accomplish that. I pretty much think his views have become somewhat those of the insider, the already DC guy. That's far from what we need right now. Except for his policy ideas in some cases, this might be the end of Newt - at least as regards the conservative movement. He likely won't sell anymore as genuine after this.

[Lala]

I was just talking to a candidate in my county in NY who told me the county may go back to being Republican due to the high taxes; property, school, payroll (new), utilities. The talk is that Democrats who attended tea parties liked the Republicans who showed up.

[Dante]

Did Riehl World View ever retract that outrageously indefensible smearing of the murdered Kentucky man?

[Ellis Wyatt]

The secondary issue in District 23 is that we have a solidly GOP district that was represented by a reasonably conservative Republican for many years. The former representative won his most recent elections by a 2 to 1 margin. Yet, EVEN HERE, the GOP leadership is terrified to nominate a candidate who would be considered solidly conservative by most of the country’s standards. They insist that Hoffman can’t win. This is what riles the GOP rank-and-file.

The broader issue, however, is that the GOP leadership is interfering in the primary elections. The RNC, NRSC and the NRCC, to name a few, should NOT be endorsing, promoting or otherwise suppporting one candidate over another in a Primary election. Let the rank and file decide who they want as their nominee without interference from the leadership.

I think that even the most conservative members of the party understand that you can’t run the same kind of candidate in NY that you can in Texas. That being said, what we’d like to see from the national GOP is a set of core principals that our candidates will abide by. Things like promoting: limited government, less regulation, less spending and lower taxes. Maybe a social conservative couldn’t win in many northeast states, but a libertarian or libertarian-conservative might. We’re sick of watching GOP candidates make completely unnecessary compromises just to curry favor with the media or because they’re afraid to take a stand on a controversial issue. Many of the Northeast Republicans that have been tossed out are the kind of people who couldn't take a stand in the shower. We can adapt to the local political climates without sacrificing the principals held by most rank-and-file Republicans.

[Evil Red Scandi]

The medium is barely relevant next to the message. That being said, her medium is the more powerful of the two. But if she was saying what Newt was saying they'd be dropping her in droves. Always worry about the message first. The right message on an inferior communications channel will do you more good than a bad message spread well.

[rrpjr]

Rob Harrison has a good background piece at C4P on this race, with some facts not widely known.
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/
For one, Scozzafava has sent mixed signals about even remaining a republican if she wins. Did Gingrich know this?

[RJ]

Moderates are one thing, Scozzafava is another thing entirely. Which is what makes this even more troubling. She makes Olympia Snowe look conservative (ok, that might be going a tad too far). Scozzafava is also to the left of many Democrats.

The Republican Party will have moderates. Hopefully, most will be right-of-center. But, it does the GOP no good - and this is so painfully obvious - to support a candidate such as Scozzafava. For the national GOP apparatus to have dug in as it has doesn't bode well for future elections - unless grassroots voters make the difference this time around and send a clear message.

[Ted]

The way to increase the conservative majority is not to pander to non-conservatives, it's to make conservative issues clear and concise, so that moderates of a like mind will come along. People will vote for a clear choice - that's why McCain was a terrible candidate, too much like lefty-lite.

A true conservative would, and will in 2012, completely destroy BHO in an election. And now that he will have a festering legacy of double digit unemployment and trillions upon trillions of deficits, a plain-spoken conservative like Sarah Palin will easily win that election, as long as the idiot spineless GOP elites get out the effing way.

[Steve]

Great post! Keep up the excellent work I really like your blog!
COMMON CENTS

http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

ps. Link Exchange?

[Pasadena Phil]

Glad to see you coming around Dan.

For now, Sarah is the only game in town. People should resist the temptation to criticize her as a potential presidential candidate in 2012. She isn't running for anything yet. Let's see if this snowballs into an irresistable force that either swamps the GOP leadership or turns into a new party that will leave the GOP in 3rd party status... like when the Whigs could no longer field a national candidate and so closed up shop. If Sarah can lead that movement, she will have proven to be a serious and well-qualified presidential candidate. After all, what exactly does it take? Reagan himself had to organize his own coalition of conservatives before the GOP relented. He imposed himself onto the party. That is what Sarah threatens to do. We should all be cheering her on even if it just lays the groundwork for someone else.

[Bilgepump]

Slide,

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

You are living in Carter's 1977. Have fun with that.

[Black Angus]

I would much rather have a conservative president than a Republican majority in Congress (for veto power alone). Having a conservative majority in Congress is impossible given the makeups of the states. And as many of you have pointed out, what's the point of having Republicans in there that vote like Democrats? As long as we have enough to prevent steamrolling, it will be okay. Newt is right about needing centrist votes -- whether we are talking about POTUS or Congressional elections. You can't alienate them. However, it also doesn't mean you need to put up centrist candidates with GOP labels in order to get them. In short, I think it's much wiser to go after center voters from the conservative core of the GOP than it is to pursue core conservatives from the center.

[mike191]

Newt is DEAD. Rhinos are dead. Mrs. Pallin is alive and well.For those who live under the tyranny of Democrats ,from New York City,in the rest of New York- I welcome Mrs. Pallins' help.

[Black Angus]

"Well, good luck to ya. I'll tell you it is just not going to work in many parts of the country. The "core" conservative candidates will do as well in my part of the country as Nancy Pelosi would do in Mobile, Alabama."

That's part of my point, Slider. Again, why worry about trying to compete in those idelogolically imbalanced pockets. Even centrists will lose 99% of the time. But in more winnable regions, I think it makes less sense to put all your eggs in the centrist basket. For one, centrists are much more likely to sit out an election than core voters. So why cater to centrists at the risk of losing your base? You can still have a core candidate that can appeal to centrists -- or at least not convince them to get off their duffs and go vote for the opponent.

[Ted]

"Ted, you are delusional. You are mixing up intensity with quantity. I know the "true conservatives" are very intense in their feelings but their ain't enough of you and that isn't going to change any time soon. Oh, you may win the South where there may still be a majority of bitter white males that would vote for a doorknob over BO but once you get into the rest of the country, there isn't much support for a Palin-like candidate. But, I wish you well, as a liberal I would love the internecine war in the Republican party that a Palinesque candidate would surely instigate."

Tell you what, clown, go back and check the numbers she pulled at her campaign appearances, her speech at the GOP convention, her ratings on SNL, etc. And please, keep on perpetuating the stupid idea that "bitter white males" won't vote for a black candidate. Even a liberal with half a brain, and I realize that's mostly redundant, can see that when you wash away everything that matters about a candidate for the show of personality politics, you end up with a big fat nothing. Well, not really nothing, since the deficits are bigger than they've ever been, and that's barely 10 months into this disaster.

And, speaking of bitter, how about your Dear Leader's craven attacks on Fox News? Is that your idea of leadership, or is it maybe a hint of how empty his suit truly is? You might need a new teleprompter.

[gary grim]

If Palin is proved right by voting time all bets are off. People don't like being out of work and Palin being a worker type will exploit that.She may not run but can help a conservative win. All this liberal stuff coming down is gonna cause an uproar in 2010 and 2012 just like with dear ole Jimmy.Demographics changes with the wind when liberal ideas fail.Conservative, not centerist, ideas have endured forever and liberalism like with caesar will die.

[gary grim]

I think its good president Obama is cutting off fox. I think Reagan and Bush should have cut off msnbc and nbc. And I hope the nexy President should do the same ,Republican or Democrat, I hope it's a Republican.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"You are astounded when the left uses the same tactics the right has used for years. What, Obama should just get punched around by Fox News and he should just keep quiet?"

Of course -- because that's what Barack Obama screamed and whined that Bush should have done, and what Barack Obama screamed and whined made Bush an incompetent partisan idiot.

Since the left is now using the tactics they claimed were a sign of immaturity, cowardice, and authoritarianism, they can now stand accused of the same of which they accused others.

[Ran]

Dan,
Newt can't run on his past any longer, because his past contains one Hell of a lot of Prep-S endorsed socialist garbage. His reasoning for choosing Dede comes off as disingenuous, if not a wee bit strange. Worse for Newt, this endorsement only serves to alienate Newt from the resurgent conservative-libertarian base. I miss Newt tremendously - the original Newt, the Conservative and historian. This latest version...

Likewise, Palin's doing an end-run around the statist Mob that runs the RINO farm serves to provide credibility as an outsider. Basically, she's stolen Newt's chips, if not his entire game.

I'm looking beyond this race to Marco Rubio's in Florida.

Thanks for posting this. Cheers!

[gary gulrud]

Pardon if already noted, but didn't Old Newt and Pelosi get plumped up on behalf of Climate Change action before the election?

His orifices need searching.

[davis,br]

"You are astounded when the left uses the same tactics the right has used for years."

Which statement ever so aptly illustrates that your grasp of historical accuracy is as weak as your political insights. Got disinformation, much?