After Primaries, Unity is Only Option
Those who have known me for any length of time know that I am a fan of drop down dirty, punishing, bloody primary elections. The real politics, regardless of party affiliation, is conducted while determining a party’s nominee. It has frankly always astounded me that primary elections have relatively lower turnout than their general election counterparts. The primaries are the important races that set the direction and tone of the eventual campaign, and in many districts are themselves the election due to gerrymandering run wild.
I also fully believe that the Republican Party these days could appropriately change its name to the “Confederation of Independent Right Leaning Organizations”.
Let’s face it, the GOP, like the Democrats, are a major party in identity crisis mode.
The Republican Party is made up of groups beholden to conservative leaning philosophies, but the importance placed on varying issues is differential and occasionally downright hostile and combative.
On one front are the social conservatives who believe strongly that abortion and homosexuality are wrong and that the moral fiber of America is at stake with every vote that is taken.
On another front we find the libertarian leaning wing that hold a fiscally conservative philosophy, but differentiate themselves from other factions with an “anti-war”, non-interventionist stance on foreign policy.
We’ve also got the “establishment” or “country club” Republicans that find themselves more willing to utilize government for certain “correct” purposes (as they see it), but want to make sure it is done efficiently and with as limited a level of taxation as possible to get the job done.
There are plenty of other permutations as well, but the fact is there are differences.
There are similarities as well that bind the whole party together.
In general, compared to the Democrat Party, the GOP is right of center and will default to a trust in a more limited and restricted government when given a choice.
It is my belief that the real battles should take place within the primary election, but when all is said and done, the nominee, regardless of which faction they come from, needs to be open and encouraging to the losing side.
Furthermore, on the opposite side, the losing faction needs to coalesce behind the winning faction for the sake of the overall message.
As Ronald Reagan put it, your 80% friend is your friend, not your 20% enemy.
Tuesday’s GOP primary election in the 8th Congressional District saw some mighty bloody battles being waged. This is a positive sign.
What is disappointing is that the losing candidate, in this case Tim D”Annunzio, has not checked his pride at the door and has rather continued the offensive vs. Harold Johnson.
To quote Tim from a recent Charlotte Observer article, “I cannot endorse Harold Johnson and his underhanded campaign tactics. What he’s done is a continuation of politics as usual, and for that I will not be supporting him.”
This comes despite his communications director being quoted in this article as saying; “Tim has pledged to unite around the eventual nominee if it is not him.”
So much for pledges.
Thankfully, D’Annunzio supporter Michael Kelly, founder of We the People NC, has a different take. In a recent letter to PunditHouse.com, Michael reiterates, “Now it is time to find out if we are able to rise above the bitterness and resentment that has marked the last six weeks. If so we are prepared to peacefully carry the Tea Party Revolution into the next chapter. Do we have the resolve to humble ourselves or shall we be as stubborn as those who refuse to give up their power and prestige?” While not directly endorsing Johnson, the tone is set that moving forward will take cooperation from all sides.
There is a man that gets it.
While his particular candidate in this race lost, he is willing to look at the bigger picture when moving forward, unlike his candidate.
There will be plenty of additional primaries in the future, each one impacting the future of the Republican Party. I reiterate that these primaries should be as hard fought and bloody as possible, but we need to collectively take the Michael Kelly approach to the final results and humble ourselves in the event our particular candidate loses the nomination. We need to coalesce behind the 80% that unites us in recognition that the other side is holistically an inferior option.
Even if it means supporting the “lesser of two evils”, when the primary is over and the results are predetermined to be one candidate or the other, the lesser evil is still the lesser evil. Standing idly by and not voting out of protest only guarantees that the “greater evil” is one point up.
We now have our candidates and November is just four months away. It is incumbent on us to support our team with every fiber of our being.
To do otherwise is self-destructive to the movement as a whole.
Regardless of the percieved excesses of their candidate, I think Kelly and the We The People group get it. I would not be at all surprised to see many of them support the nominee, but with the caveat that they haven’t forgotten Chairman Fetzer’s meddling in their primary. I think we’ll see the consequences of that action play out during next year’s convention cycle, which will include elections for state chairman and vice chairman. The anti-incumbent mood will not only be seen in elections for public office, but party office as well. Anyone running against the NCGOP establishment next year is going to find a lot of support in Congressional District 8.
Agreed Adam.
For the race that’s been decided, there is but one choice…Johnson. I take that back, I don’t want to discount Hill, other than to say that any vote taken away from Johnson is essentially a vote for Kissell. It’s ugly, but it’s politics.
Moving forward, there will be consequences for actions. While hopefully the majority of D’Annunzio supporters support (at least by voting for) Johnson, that doesn’t mean the “battle” is over. A party chairmanship would be the perfect opportunity, moving forward, to champion ones beliefs.
As I said, it can be bloody, and should be, up until the point that the fighting causes us to lose focus on the bigger enemy.
The 8th isn’t the only district with a sore loser, it’s a shame that some candidates cannot see the positive effect their actions and words can have on the electorate when they do support their opponent after the primary. (AND the detrimental effect when they don’t.)
I encourage ALL conservatives, regardless of your particular “permutation” of conservatism, to get involved with your local GOP. Volunteer if you can, become your precinct captain in January and go to the County, District and State Conventions next year. Those who go to these conventions are the ones who elect our party leadership every two years. We are the ones who determine the direction of our party.
Christian, I never understood the lack of enthusiasm for primaries either. It seems so counter-intuitive to think that the primary election is somehow less important than the fall election. They are THE chance to choose who will represent you in the fall.
Absolutely Pat. Get involved People! Politics goes to those who show up.
And ditto. Especially in races where the districts so favor one candidate’s party over the other, the primaries are the *real* race where the *real* politicing is done. It’s where the *real* decision is made.
The interesting thing about the light turnout in primaries, and particularly the runoffs, where the turnout is microscopic, is how much more powerful one vote becomes. Bill Randall beat Bernie Reeves in the 13th District on Tuesday by only 1,150 votes…Greg Dority beat Scott Cumbie by only 93. 93 votes! That should be motivation enough for anyone to turn out.
Again, though, the vote with the most impact is the one cast at the state GOP convention when a new chairman is elected. With the weighted voting system used in party elections, if a county has only one delegate show up, that delegate casts the votes for ALL of the county’s allotted delegates. If more than one delegate shows up, but fewer than the total allotted delegates for that county, the county’s votes are split up among the delegates present. Either way, those votes carry a lot of power, and they determine who will lead the party. We’ve seen the kind of influence a party chairman can have in the 8th District, for good or for ill.
And most people reading this blog are in Mecklenburg County. I think we get per allotment something like 700+ votes at a state convention. Given recent turnout, everyone’s vote would count as about seven. That’s saying something.
There is never a time when voting for a candidate who is “less bad” is acceptable. “Less good” maybe, but never “less bad”. Bad is bad…and the GOP is full of bad. Less bad than most Democrats, but still bad.
If a candidate is “mostly” in line with your beliefs, then go right ahead and support that candidate. Chasing utopia is a lesson in futility, I would agree. But unseating Democrats is nowhere enough.
For example, I will NOT ever support a candidate who refuses to make specific commitments about what spending cuts he will promote. Anyone can make tax cut promises; it’s the spending cuts that are hard. I don;t see many ea Party candiates actually articulating – even in private – what programs he favors cutting. The reason? They aren’t serious about cuts.
I won’t support any candidate who refuses to commit to at least a balanced budget (no ‘yes’ votes on unbalanced budgets). This should be an easy one for the Tea Party crowd, but sadly it isn’t.
I won’t support a candidate who won’t commit to a war declaration when deploying troops and my candidates will only vote to deploy troops in defense, not nation building/policing/democratization efforts under insane rules of engagement like we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I won’t suport any candiate that fails to exhibit a thorough understanding of how the Federal Reserve works or won’t commit to reeling in the Federal Reserve’s critical role in perpetuating our corporate welfare state (IE unnaturally low interest rates due to new money creation), our perpetual wars and bailouts.
If anyone thinks Republicans with ideas from our recent decades will be just fine are fooling themselves. We need Ron Paul style Republicans. I’ll take a candidate that is 80% Ron Paul, but I’m not interested in buffing up the train wreck people of recent years (Sue Myrick) with meaningless rhetoric about limited government/Constitution/fiscal conservativism/supporting the troops. People like Myrick are very much a part of the problem.
(I’m using Mrick as an example because she is known…and has a known track record).
Great article, Christian! I agree… Standing behind the “lesser of two evils” is much better than letting the “greater of two evils” prevail. If we – Republicans / Conservatives – continue to choose the “lesser”, won’t we eventually weed out the most of the bad candidates all together? Then maybe we can get back to having candidates that actually stand for us instead of having to choose between a loud mouth “nut case” & a smooth-talking nice guy.
The lesser of two evils is still evil. That being said, quite frequently, that’s the only choice we’re presented with. Voting for the lesser of two evils can only make things better if…IF…we as conservative activists are willing to not just unite behind the primary winner and get him/her elected, but also STAY ENGAGED after the election. THAT’S where the real work of citizenship gets done. We have to keep abreast of what legislation is being written and brought up for a vote, we have to bury our elected representativesin emails, and calls to tell them how to vote, and we have to make sure we let everyone know how those representatives eventually vote. If they vote the right way, great. If not, we spread the word and make them pay for it, dearly.
If we don’t do these things, if we just slap each other on the back on election night and assume our job is done, the lesser evil VERY QUICKLY becomes the greater evil. That’s how we got where we are.
The job of every citizen is to understand how to connect the legislative cycle to the election cycle. If we don’t, nothing will ever change, regardless of the letter next to the name of the election winners.
Sean,
I feel your passion. I disagree with some of it, but I feel it.
I guess my question is this. Assuming neither candidate running meets 100% of your requirements, do you not vote and allow the more liberal/progressive of the two candidates to triumph? In doing so, have you had a positive impact on the future direction of the country? Being principled is one thing, but reality is a bugger. When only two candidates are on the ballot, and one agrees with you 75% of the time and one agrees with you 25% of the time, by not voting for the better of the two, you are in fact supporting the worse. I hate to break it to you, but doing that to “make a statement” or to think that “I’ll just make things so bad that the electorate will have no choice but to see my side next time” just doesn’t cut it. Quite the contrary, when the liberal wins, it reenforces the liberal mindset and encourages even more liberal idealogues to run…thus defeating your purpose.
Abby,
Thanks for the props. I love the “choose between a loud mouth “nut case” & a smooth-talking nice guy.” quote. Classic.
Adam,
Absolutely, that’s the point. Stay involved and get prepared for the next primary (if necessary). If the previous winner wasn’t your first choice, keep them honest during their term but then run against them if they haven’t led to your liking.
It’s easier to unseat an incumbant of your party in a primary than it is to unseat an incumbant of the other party in the general. Food for thought…
Adam,
As a “loser” in the recent County Commission race I wholeheartedly endorse the three candidates running. I serve on the Corey Thompson campaign. I have encouraged all voters to support Dan and Jim as well. Vote Chris Hailey for Sheriff and take some time to help each of these folks! Rebecca Steen could use some help and so could Michael Cavallo. Don’t forget Bill Constangy and Matt Osmond. Call John Annarella and ask him what you can do. Volunteer at a Republican event booth. Too many places to help out to sit on the sidelines! Remember that this year is a redistricting year and we have GOT TO take a majority! The ballot box is not the only place to make your voice heard. It may be the best place but not the ONLY place. Stay active, help a candidate, talk to your friends and VOTE!
Absolutely Tim!
Perfect example of what I’m talking about.