You, Me, and New York 23


Over at the Atlantic, Max Fisher writes about my involvement in New York 23.

I’m happy to serve as a proxy for you guys, but we need to be honest — you guys did this, not me. I’m sure the Hoffman campaign appreciates your efforts. I very much appreciate your efforts.

At the vanguard of the grassroots campaign has been Erick Erickson, blogger and editor of RedState.

Erickson has made NY23 his mission. Erickson called the race “a Hill to Die On” for conservatives. He accused Scozzafava of “Funnel[ing] Campaign Cash to Family.” He slammed Newt Gingrich, Scozzafava’s most high-profile backer, writing, “Today Newt Gingrich Takes Himself Out of the 2012 Running [...] Gingrich no longer wants to nor can he be seen as a conservative.” Erickson called for Scozzafava to withdraw and demanded new national GOP leadership. He even raised money for Hoffman. The wider conservative world took note, and soon endorsements for Hoffman rolled in from Sarah Palin, the Club for Growth, Steve Forbes, the Wall Street Journal, even sitting Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.

What was a small Congressional race in upstate New York has become all-out war among Republicans, one which Erickson’s grassroots movement seems to have won.

I have said all along, the effort here is, in the best outcome a Hoffman victory, but as long as Scozzafava loses, I’m happy. Note though that Mr. Fischer makes a mistake that suggests he leans left — he calls Scozzafava a “moderate” when her record and positions suggest anything but. Ms. Scozzafava is very much a liberal.

Fisher goes on to write:

Republican leadership may be forced to accept Erickson’s message that moderate Republicans will be destroyed and only strongly conservative candidates tolerated. If they do, Erickson and his vast grassroots network will have altered the party’s electoral orthodoxy.

I’m afraid Mr. Fischer has not paid attention to my writings. I have been clear that I agree with the GOP to the extent that candidates should match their districts. I am not opposed to, for example, a Mark Kirk in Illinois, or a Mike Castle in Delaware, though I won’t lift a finger to help him. I understand that to get to 51% we have to have our share of Chris Shays’s.

But, in races like the Florida Senate and New York 23, when a conservative can win, a conservative should be supported. Conservatives are the base of the Republican Party.

I hope I have helped change the party’s electoral orthodoxy. Right now it involves telling the base to fork over the dough and shut the hell up.

We will no longer stay silent. NY-23 makes very clear that the GOP needs the conservative base more than the conservative base needs the GOP.


Rush and Hannity listeners most informed about US politics


The guys at Open Left attack CNBC viewers for not being particularly well informed. I think that they missed the tastiest story about a Pew research poll about news habits.

The tastiest bit is that of all the categories, as measured in the poll, people who get their news from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are the most informed about US poltics. (at least if you accept Pew’s metric).

Let’s look at the numbers:

Outlet US House Control Name Sec State Name UK PM All Three
New Yorker/The Atlantic 71 71 59 48
NPR 73 72 57 44
Hardball 76 66 53 43
Hannity 84 73 49 42
Rush Limbaugh 83 71 41 36
CNBC 51 45 28 17
TV News Magazines 56 44 28 16
All Resp 53 42 28 18

On the question of naming the House majority party, 84% of Hannity viewers get it right. 83% of Limbaugh viewers get it right.  Hardball (MSNBC) is next at 76%. I can’t tell if that difference is statistically significant.

On the question of naming teh Secretary of State, Hannity’s viewers are again the highest at 73%, while NPR’s are next, and Limbaugh readers tie with readers of the New Yorker and the Atlantic. (presumably combined because the samples are so small) Here, Hardball viewers are down at 66%.

Now, to get an over-all number that doesn’t place Hannity and Rush at the top, there is a question about UK Prime Minister. And, admittedly, they perform worse. However, somewhat ironically, more Hannity viewers can identify the UK Prime Minister than BBC viewers. And Rush listeners are only 3% less.

Now what to make of all this? Rush and Hannity get bragging rights of a sort.

How does that work for the arrogant lefties who think that they are smarter than everyone? Like those guys at OpenLeft. Not so hot? Then maybe they shouldn’t have started the debate…