« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Senate Scorecard: RedState vs NRSC

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  November 8th, 2010 at 11:30 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The time has come for the Senate Republicans to begin thinking about what to do with the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which this last cycle was run by Senator John Cornyn along with bureaucrat Rob Jesmer. Before any Republican endorses that team to go ahead and run the committee for another cycle, I urge them to consider alternatives.

The NRSC has the name and the databases to be a tremendous force for good for the party, much as the RGA was this cycle. But to do so it has to make the right decisions with those resources that it has. I submit that it could have done much better this year.

The NRSC’s scorecard:

State Result
CA L – General
CO L – Primary
DE L – Primary
FL L – Party Switch
IN W
KY L – Primary
NH W
PA L – Party Switch
UT No primary position

The Cornyn/Jesmer team went 3-5 in the primaries and 2-1 in the generals. That’s a lot of primary elections to have spent on, throwing away money that could have gone to general election winners. It’s only remarkable that they didn’t do anything in Utah, honestly.

But here’s RedState’s scorecard, where the site (and not just one writer or Erick Erickson) took a position:

State Result
CA L – Primary
CO L – General
DE No primary position
FL W
IN L – Primary
KY No primary position
NH No primary position
PA W
UT W

RedState went 4-2 in the primaries, and 3-1 in the generals. Where we as a site split (Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Delaware) the grassroots conservative pick won a general, lost a primary badly, and lost a general election badly. We picked our spots and avoided two big losses. The NRSC showed no such restraint in states like Pennsylvania and Florida.

Should he be retained at NRSC, Senator Cornyn ought to be begging for RS as a group to dictate primary strategy. We have better strategic sense than they had, with no loss in general election efficiency.

Tags: , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Scope

    is RedState. We are far to conservative for his taste. Cornyn is a man with a mission, which I hope he is denied to do over the next two years. I just love how he is being credited as such a great leader and winner because “HE” won the Republicans 6 Senate seats. That article is listed on The Hill site today, and, someone here from Texas said that the same is being said in a Texas newspaper. If he is voted back in as NRSC head, that means they never learned the meaning of insane.

  • fpete13527
  • IJB

    Obviously, the “old boys” club is not going to give up the “incumbent protection” aspects of the current NRSC – so that part needs to be spun off into a separate organization. (I dunno – call it the “National Committee for Senate Republican Alumni” or something…)

    But a new organization needs to be set up, free from the ‘taint’ of the current ‘incumbent-protection’ obsessed NRSC – one the absolutely pledges *not* to get involved in Primaries (even if there is a Senate GOP incumbent running), and whose *sole* aim is to getting GOP Primary winners elected to Senate seats in the *General* election.

    I fear if the NRSC does not get reformed thusly, they are likely to never again get ‘grass-roots’ donations from almost anyone in the GOP base which will seriously hobble their usefulness and effectiveness.

  • ahab627

    does more harm to the GOP than good. Definitely, one of the establishment types that needs replaced, and soon. Whoever it is that picks people to be on the NRSC, Cornyn should be removed for cause, replaced by a real conservative. If I was in Texas, I’d be campaigning to get him defeated by a real conservative next time he’s up for a vote, as well.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Bennett they threw under the bus. The only incumbent counted against them on this scorecard is Specter. That means there’s a basic strategic problem independent of a bias toward incumbents.

  • chipbennett

    Primary strategy should be dictated at the state and local level, not at the national level.

    The NRSC, the NRCC, and the RNC should just stay out of primaries, and then back whomever wins the primary. Period. Otherwise, they should just rename themselves the National Incumbent Republican Senatoral Committee, the National Incumbent Republican Congressional Committee, and the Incumbent Republican National Committee.

    We, the grassroots, will decide whether or not we wish for the national party to support incumbency. If they support our decisions, they will win. If they continue to fight our decisions, they will see more results like 2006 and 2008.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • IJB

    It skews the entire thinking of the NRSC, because it is primary designed, *by Senate Republicans*, to focus on getting *them* reelected.

    There is little doubt that the NRSC had its thumb on the scales in favor of its incumbents, even in Bennett’s case. The fact that they threw guys like Bennett and Lisa Murk. under the bus *after* they lost their Primaries counts for little in my book.

    The problem is that the current NRSC is not *totally focused* on winning General elections – too much of the time they are worrying about getting their incumbents through Primaries. Basically, the NRSC primary goal is perpetuating the “old boys’ club”.

    Until that changes, I don’t see the NRSC becoming an effective campaign tool (and, worse, they will be shunned by small donors for the foreseeable future as a result).

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • IJB

    I have *zero* problem with the NRSC, NRCC and the RGA *recruiting* for candidates (esp. in ‘open seat’ contests, and doubly esp. when there aren’t people coming out of the woodwork voluntarily to run for these seats…).

    In fact, candidate recruitment is one of the *explicit* duties of the committees.

    That said, one the committees recruit their candidates, *THEN* they must totally stay out of Primaries, and let the chips fall where they may.

    And in the case of the NRCC and the RGA, at least, I feel like the committees have done exactly that.

  • IJB
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I put it above.

    Of the nine key primary fights above, they backed one incumbent and left one out to dry.

    Your position, that the NRSC’s problem is incumbency protection, just is not sustained under the weight of the facts.

    Incumbency doesn’t explain their losses in CA, CO, DE, FL, KY or their positions in IN and NH.

  • chipbennett

    ..and more about who dictates primary strategy.

    I don’t care if the “party-blessed” primary candidate is an incumbent (see: Lisa Murkowski), or simply an establishment insider (see: Mike Castle, Charlie Crist, Dan Coats). Marlin Stutzman would have won the Indiana GOP Primary, if not for NRSC meddling. Charlie Crist would have faded into obscurity FAR sooner, if not for NRSC meddling.

    My point is: any involvement by the RNC, NRSC, or NRCC prior to the primary election is meddling.

    But, as far as I’m concerned, incumbency is not a matter of what elected office is held, but rather is an inside-the-beltway, establishment mindset. It is this mindset of which we need to purge the GOP, and the only way we can do that, effectively, is through primaries.

    The establishment understands this reality, which is why they meddle in the primaries – to their (and our) own long-term detriment.

  • Spotter

    We will be. I’ve already got my sights on persuading Jeb Hensarling to run for this seat in 2014.

  • chipbennett

    If we are to reclaim our party, then candidate recruitment MUST come from the ground, up; not the other way around.

    I realize that this stance means that we must all be more active in local politics, and more involved in the election of our “bench” – state representatives and senators, county council members, etc.

    But it is the only way to ensure that the national GOP reflects local priorities and ideologies. This understanding is the true genius – and the greatest potential – of the TEA party movement.

    (But consider the source: this is coming from someone who supports the idea of going back to the original Constitutional method of State legislatures appointing US Senators.)

  • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679
  • chbroussard

    There are a lot of us in Texas that will be working full time to rid ourselves (and the rest of the country) of John Cornyn. Sorry we all have to put up with him until 2014. Hopefully he’ll be neutered before 2012 elections with someone else heading the NRSC.

  • Dan McLaughlin

    Erick, at least, backed Tarkanian, and in retrospect that looks like a better call than Angle or Lowden.

  • IJB

    …And is not actually part of the “party” apparatus. In addition to the SCF, but aside from the NRSC (or whatever it becomes), I’d rather have a committee that’s actually “officially” a party apparatus, and is dedicated to electing *any* Republican in a General Election.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I don’t actually know if the NRSC backed Lowden or not, and yeah, Erick backed Tark but I don’t think we went all in there.

  • IJB

    I, for one, am not.

    Let the party committees recruit candidates (at least in some cases) – if the locals don’t like ‘em, there’s a simple solution: get somebody to run against them, and then don’t vote for the “recruited” candidate in the Primary.

  • Dan McLaughlin

    Erick largely switched to Angle once it was clear it wasn’t happening for Tark, near the end. Palin stayed out of that race too.

  • Massachusetts_Transplant

    I find it depressing to read RedState these days. Smart, articulate Senators like Cornyn and Corker that you can put on TV and have them spread the conservative gospel are attacked as RINOs that should be primaried.

    Meanwhile, Red State’s ideal nominees for Senate seem to be candidates like Christine O’Donnell (a professional gadlfy with questionable finances and little record of accomplishment) and Sharon Angle (a candidate who fumbled away a chance to defeat the Senate leader in the state with the highest unemployment rate and highest foreclosure rate in the nation).

    Its been almost a week since the election – why no threads on how to defeat Democrat Senators in Virginia, Michigan, Ohio, North Dakota, Missouri, Florida, or Montana. Seems like Red State has so lost focus on the big picture that the only thing to do here is trash the “establishment” and find out which Republicans we should take out.

  • chihank

    We’re hearing the GOP Establishment whine about how the Tea Parties cost the GOP control of the Senate. If it weren’t for the Tea Parties, the GOP would had a net loss of Senate seats and the RINOs would have cut a deal with Obama on healthcare.

    I think the whiny GOP insiders just wanted lobbying jobs with the increased clout that a GOP controlled Senate would bring rather than promoting conservativism.

  • texas214

    O’Donnell, Buck, Angle and Miller were weak candidates with a good message. By that I mean they were unskilled politicians who handled the media very poorly and were probably in hindsite unqualified regardless of their positions on the issues.

  • chipbennett

    I’m just a realist. If the establishment wants to push an establishment candidate, they have, essentially, infinitely more resources than any grassroots, local candidate in the primary.

    See: Dan Coats vs. Marlin Stutzman. Dan Coats would never have been in the primary, if he hadn’t been recruited – from out of state, no less – by the NRSC. The locals already had two candidates vying for that nomination; the NRSC got involved, and used their financial resources – and the establishment candidate’s name recognition – to defeat two much better, much more conservative candidates.

    I’m happy Coats defeated Ellsworth; don’t get me wrong. But at the same time: whomever won the Republican primary was going to win that Senate seat, regardless.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Interesting that you call the CO Primary a win, when the candidate you backed lost in the General.

    Not really sure how you call that a win.

  • Adjoran

    with each cycle. Since it was formed only Thurston Morton (’63-’67) and Phil Gramm (’91-’95) served consecutive terms.

    So it seems likely a new Chairman will be elected in January, along with all the other leadership positions. Remember, the NRSC is not a party organization, or a group of party activists, it is solely the creation of the Senate Republican Caucus, and its job is above all protecting the members of the caucus, including from primary challenges.

    Knowing that is their mission – incumbent protection first, expanding their numbers second – you may feel free to donate or refrain from doing so. But it’s not really reasonable to criticize them for doing what they set out to do, or for seeking the strongest nominees. They made a bad mistake in recruiting Charlie Crist, but their choices in Nevada and Colorado and Delaware could scarcely have done worse than the actual nominees.

    Get used to it, no matter who is Chairman. The NRSC will defend its incumbents.

  • http://www.helpawhiteguy.com livefreenh

    …how we rate the results. If we are saying “who would be a better senator” or such, then that is one thing. If we say “this is who is electable” or even “who is likely to win” then we cross the line and are judging the voters, not the candidates. I’m not saying that voters don’t make mistakes; look at the White House. But you can’t tell voters they are idiots or mal-informed, since they are the stakeholders and the ultimate authority in our form of government. Once you start calling the voters names and judging their intelligence, you stop being conservatives and become liberals, by definition.

  • nativeconservative

    turn it over to Jim DeMint.

    It’s a conservative thing.

  • bryankdonnelly

    Over the years my small contributions to the official Republican National Committee and it’s various subdivistions have totalled some thousands of bucks. No more! Ever since Sen. John Cornyn and his buddies on the GOP senate committee took it upon themselves to endorse Charlie “My principles are determined by my latest poll, focus group.” Crist in our Florida primary over Marco Rubio, when GOP fundraisers have called me I,. I tell that all my contributions are going to local Florida candidates.

    Thus far it has worked well. I contributed to Marco Rubio, our next US Senator andCol. Allen West, the next congressman in my district; both won, no thanks to the RNC nohelp from the Florida Republican Committee. Next election I’ll be backing a genuine conservative to defeat our Democrat-socialist senator, Bill “ultra-liberal in Washington, “moderate” in Florida” Nelson. If the GOP National organization has the good grace to stay out of our primary, I might consider contributing once more.

    I’m a “movement conservative.” That is CONSERVATIVE first and Republican a distant second. Come to think of it, I might well contribute to GOP primary candidates in other states; for whoever is runing against Lindsay Graham in South Carolina, Olympia Snowe of Maine, or Richard Lugar on Indianna. Conservatives can no longer tolerate the politics as usual “go along to get along” type of professional politicians.

    Who knows? Once the GOP gets rid of Michael Steele as chariman and nominates a genuine principled conservative for president (Forget Massachussetts “Romney Care” Romney or tax hungry Huckabee!) I might just start aiding the Republican establishment.

    But in the meantime, I plan to run for Republican precinct committeeman. We have to take over the county, state, AND national committees. THEN the Republican party can return to it’s principles and continue to WIN.

  • davesinsanantonio

    We could hardly be expected to have much influence in Democrat primaries.

  • rivahmitch

    is to give nothing to any Republican Party organ but to send direct contributions (modest though they may be) to candidates I think deserve support and to Jim DeMint (who has earned this conservatives respect). After lengthy letters. which received no response, to the RNC, NRSC and NRCC, I tear up communications from the Republican, I began trashing “Party” mail and email (except for surveys) and will continue to do so until they get it right to my satisfaction.

  • capeconservative

    It was disgusting to have to sit and watch as Cornyn took Murkowski’s side AFTER she lost LEGITIMATELY the primary! Having sent money from out-of-state to many conservative candidates including Stutzman, we believed in them and their message – but, oh no, Cornyn and his cronies decided to keep the old guard in place. And, while not even sworn in yet, Coats is playing games that I know Stutzman would never have thought of.

    Time for ALL NEW leadership in the party…I’m sick of those in power, the ‘do you know who I am’ crowd, believing they can IGNORE the will of We the People!!!!

    One of these days they have to wake up and accept the fact that their grand plans are NOT good for America!!!

    GET BACK TO THE CONSTITUTION!!!! And LISTEN to We The PEOPLE!!!!!!!

  • miroco

    When I turned half of a Century I began returning AARP envelopes empty (postage due) or with a note “I do not support communist organizations”. It didn’t help much, I still get notices weekly or so. Now I am returning NRSC envelopes with the same note, changing only communist for incompetent, lately I suppose I could have left it communist. Cornyn is my sen, I used to like him, still don’t hate him though he and his have ruined my party. Guess the Tea Party needs a catchier name with logos and stuff—shame, I kind of liked being a stern reminder.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I can’t hear you. There’s some baby crying in the background.

  • dwscho

    miroco, I did the same thing, sending everything back to AARP and the NRSC. I took it a step farther with the NRSC. After getting bombarded with calls I told them I was making direct contributions, nothing to the party organizations. As you experienced, that didn’t stop the NRSC and their hired fund raising firm. The week before the election, I was getting calls about every hour ( I swear) and would after seeing their phone number just refuse to answer the call. I finally looked up the one phone number and found out it was another organzation doing calls for the committee. As such, you cou dopt out from receiving future calls which I did. I got another call, this time from the NRSC and I told the guy I opted out and he shouldn’t call anymore. He couldn’t believe I would do such a thing to my party. I politely explained it wasn’t my party and to not call again. After that, I received no more calls.

    When the party regains its sanity and starts sticking to its principles again, I might reconsider making contributions. Until then, I will continue to make contributions directly to conservative candidates. Perhaps, if more Republicans took a similar tact, the party might get the message and start listening to the average Joe again. Sorry, I lost my mind for a moment.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Only one candidate they supported on that list was an incumbent.

    You’re missing the entire point.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister