Author Topic: Ted Cruz, unwilling to back McConnell or other GOP incumbents, halts work with NRSC (Read 2262 times)

Formerly Once-Ler · « **on:** March 12, 2014, 07:15:53 am »

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2014/03/ted-cruz-unwilling-to-back-gop-senators-steps-away-from-gop-campaign-committee.html/

WASHINGTON – Sen. Ted Cruz, whose friction with GOP leaders has bordered on open warfare, has effectively taken a leave of absence from his leadership post at the party’s Senate campaign arm.

The committee’s mission is to maximize the ranks of Republicans in the Senate – in part by helping to reelect Republican incumbents, a goal that Cruz has made clear he will not abide.

“At this point, I disagree with the approach they’ve taken, and so I don’t intend to facilitate that approach,” Cruz told National Journal.

Even so, he won’t resign as vice chairman at the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Asked why, he said it’s because he still wants to see Republicans win in November – he just doesn’t agree with taking sides in contested primaries, even those involving incumbents.

“I support the ultimate objective of helping elect Republicans in general elections,” he told the magazine.

Cruz was pointedly neutral in last week’s primary involving fellow Texas Sen. John Cornyn. (Cornyn won the 8-way race with just shy of 60 percent.) He has complained publicly and repeatedly about “Republican leadership” – a label that includes Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Cornyn, the deputy leader.

And he has remained allied with groups such as The Madison Project and Senate Conservatives Fund that are actively trying to oust McConnell and some other GOP senators in primaries.

“When I signed on to be vice chairman of the NRSC, I made it very explicit that I don’t believe the NRSC should be involved in primaries, that its appropriate role is to help elect Republicans in general elections,” Cruz told National Journal. “Subsequent to that time, the NRSC made a different decision, to get actively involved in primaries. I don’t agree with that.”

There’s an old saying in politics about keeping your friends close and your enemies closer. That was probably what McConnell had in mind when he asked Cruz in late 2012, newly elected and not yet sworn in, to serve as NRSC vice chairman and, effectively, its liaison to tea partiers.

The daylight is getting wider.
--------------------------------------

Rand Paul is endorsing McConnell, and defending Dole, McCain, and Romney, and cutting ads with American Crossroads to elect the establishment congressman from FL13. Ted Cruz doesn't want to dirty his hands while electing Republicans. Eventually Paul will be denounced by talk radio as a GOPe operative and Cruz will quit the GOP like Buchanan, Keyes, and Tancredo. The Tea Party is over.

Formerly Once-Ler · « **Reply #1 on:** March 12, 2014, 07:38:45 am »

http://www.nrsc.org/blog/six-in-14-rand-paul-on-the-kentucky-senate-race-and-stopping-federal-overre

Rand Paul would make an excellent VP for the NRSC

EC · « **Reply #2 on:** March 12, 2014, 07:50:12 am »

I prefer Cruz' take on it.

Primaries are for the will of the people to be freely experessed. The NRSC should stay out of them completely. Once you have a candidate - go all in in getting them elected.

Formerly Once-Ler · « **Reply #3 on:** March 12, 2014, 09:15:14 am »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 07:50:12 am

I prefer Cruz' take on it.

Primaries are for the will of the people to be freely expressed. The NRSC should stay out of them completely. Once you have a candidate - go all in in getting them elected.

The NRSC's entire purpose is to elect Republicans to the US Senate. Shouldn't the NRSC (who knows the demographics, voting pattern, and issue support of a state) work to find and support party backed candidates before a primary? Should all the vetting, polling, and organizing be left to the individual voter? The NRSC should have, and does have a duty to protect incumbent GOP Senators.

Quote

Sen. John Cornyn said during a closed-door meeting Tuesday that he expects colleagues to bring their concerns to him about candidates he recruits as National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman — and not to help mount challenges against them, Republicans familiar with the meeting said Thursday.

Although not mentioned by name, the Republicans said the Texas lawmaker’s speech was clearly intended for the ears of Sen. Jim DeMint…

While DeMint is still expected to actively support conservative candidates in primaries for open seats or seats held by Democrats, he said Thursday that he has agreed not to “plan” to support primary challengers looking to oust any of his colleagues.

“I have no plans to oppose incumbent Republicans in primaries, but I do plan to play an active role in primaries where there is a Democrat incumbent or an open seat. It’s important that principled candidates like Marco Rubio and Rand Paul are not overlooked by our party,” DeMint said.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/18/cornryn-tells-senate-republicans-instead-of-primarying-the-candidates-i-recruit-come-to-me-with-your-concerns/
That is from Nov 2010. Protecting challenged incumbents comes with the job. Nobody is forced to take a leadership position.

The NRSC is comprised, run, and funded by incumbent GOP Senators. Why shouldn't they protect the GOP brand from well intentioned but fatally flawed candidates? Why shouldn't they recruit and promote? Nobody is forced to give money to the NRSC.

In 2010 GOP RINO incumbent Sen Lisa Murkowski of AK was given little support by the NRSC. They let Tea Party Palinite and really bad candidate Joe Miller get a free ride into a primary victory. Murkowski won the general election with a frickin write in campaign but not before the NRSC dumped a million bucks into Miller's campaign because he won the primary. Sometimes the incumbent may suck but is still the best choice.

EC · « **Reply #4 on:** March 12, 2014, 11:04:36 am »

It depends on how you view flawed candidates.

Mourdock and Akin were seriously flawed candidates. McCain is also seriously flawed. Yet they were/are the picks of their constituents. Who gets priority? The GOP brand or the people these are supposed to represent? After all, it says "We the people" not "We the GOP brand."

alicewonders · « **Reply #5 on:** March 12, 2014, 11:35:27 am »

"Should all the vetting, polling, and organizing be left to the individual voter?"

Yes. In the primaries it absolutely should be left to THE PEOPLE. Everybody keeps forgetting that it's WE THE PEOPLE that elect our leaders - who go to Washington to represent US. That is exactly what Ted Cruz is doing.

It's not the other way around - they are not the boss of us!

MBB1984 · « **Reply #6 on:** March 12, 2014, 12:13:07 pm »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 07:50:12 am

I prefer Cruz' take on it.

Primaries are for the will of the people to be freely experessed. The NRSC should stay out of them completely. Once you have a candidate - go all in in getting them elected.

I agree completely. I do not want the national party funding and picking the candidates in my state for me. That is what the Soviet Union did. And, though I technically still have a "choice" it remains only a couple of steps away from tyranny as big money has tremendous sway in the primaries.

rustynail · « **Reply #7 on:** March 12, 2014, 12:18:47 pm »

"politics ain't beanbag".

jmyrlefuller · « **Reply #8 on:** March 12, 2014, 12:51:12 pm »

Quote

he said it’s because he still wants to see Republicans win in November – he just doesn’t agree with taking sides in contested primaries, even those involving incumbents.

This is an issue I totally agree with him on. (yeah, I ended a sentence with a preposition, so sue me)

The problem with these committees— other than the fact that most of them do nothing but spew rhetoric and outright lies, especially on the Dem side— is that if pressed to choose a side in a primary, they pick an incumbent, no matter how damaged (ahem, McConnell), and that can hurt the party later on.

As much as I despise these committees, they have one goal, and that is to increase the party ranks. Sometimes, though, it requires tough decisions, including ousting a weak or vulnerable incumbent in a primary, to make sure that happens. The problem with that is that the incumbent IS ON THE COMMITTEE and, unless they decide to retire, they will block any effort to get rid of them.

I think McConnell is going to have to realize he is never going to be majority leader. If he runs in the general, he will lose, probably costing the GOP the Senate. If he doesn't, obviously his political career is over.

Can we afford two more years of Harry Reid in charge of the senate, all to stoke Mitch McConnell's ego?

jmyrlefuller · « **Reply #9 on:** March 12, 2014, 12:52:33 pm »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 11:04:36 am

It depends on how you view flawed candidates.

Mourdock and Akin were seriously flawed candidates. McCain is also seriously flawed. Yet they were/are the picks of their constituents. Who gets priority? The GOP brand or the people these are supposed to represent? After all, it says "We the people" not "We the GOP brand."

Akin was not only a flawed candidate, but arguably a Democrat mole. Mourdock was a good man who got caught in the bad trap that Akin set, and it's one that hopefully the GOP learned from seeing.

Bigun · « **Reply #10 on:** March 12, 2014, 01:26:24 pm »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 07:50:12 am

I prefer Cruz' take on it.

Primaries are for the will of the people to be freely experessed. The NRSC should stay out of them completely. Once you have a candidate - go all in in getting them elected.

The NRSC's purpose is to PREVENT exactly that and they no longer get even so much as one thin dime from me!!

sinkspur · « **Reply #11 on:** March 12, 2014, 01:54:23 pm »

Quote from: jmyrlefuller on March 12, 2014, 12:51:12 pm

This is an issue I totally agree with him on. (yeah, I ended a sentence with a preposition, so sue me)

The problem with these committees— other than the fact that most of them do nothing but spew rhetoric and outright lies, especially on the Dem side— is that if pressed to choose a side in a primary, they pick an incumbent, no matter how damaged (ahem, McConnell), and that can hurt the party later on.

As much as I despise these committees, they have one goal, and that is to increase the party ranks. Sometimes, though, it requires tough decisions, including ousting a weak or vulnerable incumbent in a primary, to make sure that happens. The problem with that is that the incumbent IS ON THE COMMITTEE and, unless they decide to retire, they will block any effort to get rid of them.

I think McConnell is going to have to realize he is never going to be majority leader. If he runs in the general, he will lose, probably costing the GOP the Senate. If he doesn't, obviously his political career is over.

Can we afford two more years of Harry Reid in charge of the senate, all to stoke Mitch McConnell's ego?

Mitch McConnell will beat that bimbo Grimes like a drum. She doesn't know what she stands for.

It's gonna be a wave election, and the GOP will pick up eight seats and not lose a single one.

DCPatriot · « **Reply #12 on:** March 12, 2014, 04:40:30 pm »

Quote from: sinkspur on March 12, 2014, 01:54:23 pm

Mitch McConnell will beat that bimbo Grimes like a drum. She doesn't know what she stands for.

It's gonna be a wave election, and the GOP will pick up eight seats and not lose a single one.

sinkspur · « **Reply #13 on:** March 12, 2014, 05:00:29 pm »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 07:50:12 am

I prefer Cruz' take on it.

Primaries are for the will of the people to be freely experessed. The NRSC should stay out of them completely. Once you have a candidate - go all in in getting them elected.

Sometimes, the people elect idiots (Akin, Murdock, O'Donnell, Angle). How'd that work out in 2010 and 2012 by letting "the people" choose these dumbells?

EC · « **Reply #14 on:** March 12, 2014, 05:04:37 pm »

Quote from: sinkspur on March 12, 2014, 05:00:29 pm

Sometimes, the people elect idiots (Akin, Murdock, O'Donnell, Angle). How'd that work out in 2010 and 2012 by letting "the people" choose these dumbells?

It worked out as it should. The residents of the state chose the person they wished to represent them. Or do you think it should be done from on high?

sinkspur · « **Reply #15 on:** March 12, 2014, 05:12:52 pm »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 05:04:37 pm

It worked out as it should. The residents of the state chose the person they wished to represent them. Or do you think it should be done from on high?

I don't mind a reminder from the NRSC if they know that a candidate is a ringer. There is no reason that Delaware should have Chris Coons as a Senator. Christine O'Donnell had a troubled background, ran a terrible campaign, and ended up embarrassing herself and the entire Republican Party. Mike Castle was a shoo-in, but Delaware Republicans (probably with the help of a lot of Democrats) decided to turn over the apple cart and go with the witch. Prior to that election, every single GOP operative was warning about O'Donnell, but it was all for naught.

EC · « **Reply #16 on:** March 12, 2014, 05:26:17 pm »

I was not exactly fond of O'Donnell myself - wrote a well received article on her stupidity and all round nuttiness. But - she was the pick. Once the electorate picks someone in the primary, get behind them. You can always dump them later and let a conservative governor fill the vacant seat.

Rapunzel · « **Reply #17 on:** March 12, 2014, 06:18:35 pm »

Quote from: sinkspur on March 12, 2014, 05:00:29 pm

Sometimes, the people elect idiots (Akin, Murdock, O'Donnell, Angle). How'd that work out in 2010 and 2012 by letting "the people" choose these dumbells?

So you do prefer someone other than We The People picking our candidates? I'm sure Putin would welcome you with open arms.

MBB1984 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 12, 2014, 06:19:40 pm »

Quote from: sinkspur on March 12, 2014, 05:00:29 pm

Sometimes, the people elect idiots (Akin, Murdock, O'Donnell, Angle). How'd that work out in 2010 and 2012 by letting "the people" choose these dumbells?

Well, that's is how the primary system in our democratic republic works. The voters of a specific party are most always entitled to chose their representative for better or for worse. I suppose we could have a party caucus make the selection, or worse, the party boss structure. Overall, I doubt you would get any better of a candidate and people would be less likely to vote in the general election or may have a stronger desire to vote where their voice is heard (third party). Most always the people have faith in their government if they have participation in the election of the those who run government.

Rapunzel · « **Reply #19 on:** March 12, 2014, 06:26:04 pm »

Quote from: sinkspur on March 12, 2014, 05:12:52 pm

I don't mind a reminder from the NRSC if they know that a candidate is a ringer. There is no reason that Delaware should have Chris Coons as a Senator. Christine O'Donnell had a troubled background, ran a terrible campaign, and ended up embarrassing herself and the entire Republican Party. Mike Castle was a shoo-in, but Delaware Republicans (probably with the help of a lot of Democrats) decided to turn over the apple cart and go with the witch. Prior to that election, every single GOP operative was warning about O'Donnell, but it was all for naught.

Right... And you ignore the Rove candidate she defeated had already indicated he was going to pull a Specter and change parties...why don't you let people like Lips decided who they want as their senators..

And...didn't you support Specter in PA the year he defeated Toomey because Rove sent Bush in to campaign for Specter? How did that work out? And what about Crist who Cornyn hand picked... why Rubio was dirt for challenging the now Democrat... the NRSC, NCCC and NEC have no business in primaries... none.

Rapunzel · « **Reply #20 on:** March 12, 2014, 06:29:17 pm »

Quote from: EC on March 12, 2014, 05:26:17 pm

I was not exactly fond of O'Donnell myself - wrote a well received article on her stupidity and all round nuttiness. But - she was the pick. Once the electorate picks someone in the primary, get behind them. You can always dump them later and let a conservative governor fill the vacant seat.

Karl Rove didn't even waste five seconds in trashing her .. He did it the very minute she was announced the winner and the party which should have helped her after the primary was over hung her out to dry because their guy had lost to her.

Formerly Once-Ler · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2014, 09:36:41 pm »

Quote from: Rapunzel on March 12, 2014, 06:29:17 pm

Karl Rove didn't even waste five seconds in trashing her .. He did it the very minute she was announced the winner and the party which should have helped her after the primary was over hung her out to dry because their guy had lost to her.

Rove didn't trash her. He said she was unelectable, and we would lose that Senate seat for no good reason, and he was right.

Bigun · « **Reply #22 on:** March 12, 2014, 09:48:43 pm »

Quote from: Once-Ler on March 12, 2014, 09:36:41 pm

Rove didn't trash her. He said she was unelectable, and we would lose that Senate seat for no good reason, and he was right.

And did everything in his power to make it so! Who needs Democrats when you have the likes of Karl Rove?!

happyg · « **Reply #23 on:** March 12, 2014, 10:13:52 pm »

Quote from: Rapunzel on March 12, 2014, 06:29:17 pm

Karl Rove didn't even waste five seconds in trashing her .. He did it the very minute she was announced the winner and the party which should have helped her after the primary was over hung her out to dry because their guy had lost to her.

Karl Rove: Christine O'Donnell said 'nutty things'http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42205.html
“I’m for the Republican, but I got to tell you, we were looking at eight to nine seats in the Senate. We are now looking at seven to eight in my opinion. This is not a race we’re going to be able to win.”

Read more: Quotes: Karl Rove on Christine O’Donnell’s Delaware Primaryhttp://newsfeed.time.com/2010/09/15/quotes-karl-rove-on-christine-odonnells-delaware-primary-win/#ixzz2vmx8h3K6

I just finished watching Karl Rove trashing GOP Senate primary winner Christine O’Donnell. It was on Sean Hannity’s FNC show. Might as well have been Olbermann on MSNBC http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/14/quotes-of-the-day-453/

The night Christine O'Donnell won the GOP nomination for Senate in Delaware, party stalwart Karl Rove flipped out, and warned that she was a liar, of ill-character, and generally not the kind of person that the party should get behind.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-real-reason-karl-rove-flipped-out-on-christine-odonnell-2010-9#ixzz2vmyGPb80

This morning he followed up by training her sites on Ms. Palin, seemingly suggesting that Palin need to continue her support of O’Donnell, or risk getting blamed for the predicted loss of the Senate seat. Rove said “If Sarah Palin is for Christine O’Donnell I hope she will bring her formidable fund-raising prowess and magnetic personality to back her choice in the election.”

Fox News host Jon Scott followed up with Palin on Happening Now, and went right to the issue of her continued support of O’Donnell. Palin did not demur, saying that she would do what she could, but added the caveat that her support was a “sometimes it’s a double-edged sword there, if my name is connected to anybody, and I don’t want to hurt the efforts of the GOP in Delaware
http://www.mediaite.com/online/sarah-palin-answers-karl-roves-challenge-on-supporting-christine-odonnell/

Karl Rove Helps Campaign Against Christine O’Donnell http://freakoutnation.com/2010/09/15/karl-rove-helps-campaign-against-christine-odonnell/

Why is Karl Rove taking shots at Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell? http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2010/1028/Why-is-Karl-Rove-taking-shots-at-Sarah-Palin-and-Christine-O-Donnell

Rapunzel · « **Reply #24 on:** March 12, 2014, 11:10:27 pm »

Does someone have a youtube of what spilled out of his mouth on Hannity at the very moment they broke in to say she had won.......

BTW the RNSC did to the same things to her that the RNCC tried to do to Jolly in Florida - it worked with McDonnell - it failed with Jolly and the RNSC has egg on it's face today.