Why The NRSC Can't Raise Money
And Why Lincoln Chafee is Losing
By Erick Posted in 2006 — Comments (17) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Below is an attack ad paid for by the NRSC attacking Steve Laffey. The NRSC has made very few commercials boosting Lincoln Chafee. In fact, the NRSC has spent more time attacking Steve Laffey and pouring more money into destructive ads against Laffey than they ever spent promoting Lincoln Chafee. No wonder they cannot raise money.
There are several problems with the ad. Steve Laffey addressed those problems in our interview with him here.
I want to just point out again -- they are making the case that Laffey is a tax and spender. Laffey did raise taxes. He became mayor of Cranston, RI, inheriting a massive fiscal disaster. He raised taxes, got the finances in order, and promptly cut all the taxes he had increased. Chafee, when he was mayor, had no fiscal problems, and raised taxes every year -- frequently bullying the city council of his city into raising taxes higher than the council had suggested.
Laffey is fiscally responsible. Chafee is fiscally irresponsible. And the NRSC's conduct is reprehensible. In just two weeks, Laffey will beat Chafee and the NRSC, which has spent a lot of time tearing down Laffey, will flee the state. Shame on Elizabeth Dole.
« When Negative Ads Backfire — Comments (4) | Laffey In A Laugher? — Comments (15) »
Why The NRSC Can't Raise Money 17 Comments (0 topical, 17 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
The NRSC is afraid of conservatives this year. They think it's going to be a liberal swing, and they want candidates in the general election who can pull in liberal undecideds.
And they think LC is their huckleberry.
Fools! When will they learn to unafraid of their own ideas? Run on your own ideas, and life is good; run on the other guy's, and your phony professional life will consist of constant backward glances and awkward stammering.
--
More brilliance such as that can be found at the Academy. And yes, I know how pretentious I sound.
This is why we need to win more seats in Republican states. Senators like Collins, Snowe, Chafee, and Specter drag the center of that caucus way to the left.
Unfortunately, if we rely on the NRSC to make this fix, it'll never happen. These guys will just keep deciding to shift their money to protect themselves, while in states like Florida and Montana we're in trouble.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
...Senate Republicans tend to be proverbial ostriches, sticking their heads in the sand whenever something looks like it might hurt them.
I know Republican party politics typically entails never having the party turn their back on their incumbents, but what do you do when the incumbent turns his back on the party, as Chafee did a long, long time ago? Can't an exception be made then? Unfortunately, it probably won't be, and the aristocratic know-nothings in the Republican Senate Caucus are seemingly doing everything they can to make sure they get blindsided by the November elections. What we need in the Senate are some Republicans who are willing to behave like the Republicans of 1994, not like the Republicans of the 1960s, who, even though they were a token minority in the House, still couldn't give Americans a reason to vote for them...
"I could explain, but that would be very long, very convoluted, and make you look very stupid. Nobody wants that... except maybe me."
"The NRSC is afraid of conservatives this year."
It appears to me all the NRSC cares about is protecting any incumbents.
Today about the GOP's inability to recruit top notch candidates in states like Florida, North Dakota, West Virginia, etc. Meanwhile, the national party is spending resources defending the indefensible Chaffee and protecting endangered GOP incumbents while the Democrats can pour money into these races without worrying about what should be endangered incumbents on their side.
This started with our failure to put up a legit candidate against Harry Reid in '04. A Harry Reid who won be less than a 1,000 votes in '98 and is way too liberal even for a so-called moderate/conservative state like Nevada.
This speaking off the record to "protect" Liddy Dole is the epitome of sticking ones head in the sand. That we are walking away from the table in states like FL, ND & WV where we should have a better than 50/50 shot and putting up second-third tier candidates in NE and WA is a clear sign of Ms. Dole's failure to do her job.
Norm Coleman had gotten one more vote. Senator Coleman strikes me as one of those new Republicans, just in office and still with a grasp on mainstream conservatives, he would have been much similar to George Allen, who was also new to the Senate and not bogged down in its traditions. While Senator Dole is technically new, her long standing marriage to a former senate minority and majority leader, as well as her own work inside the beltway, has I think shaded her views to that of sustaining the majority no matter what the cost of party principles. I mean, I like Senator Dole and I think she is a pretty good conservative (certainly better than Erskine Bowles), but I don't think she has a good grasp of what is going on out in the country.
As SocialCon wrote above, the fact that we could not put a serious candidate out there in Florida, West Virginia, or North Dakota was a disgrace. It would be worse if we had not lucked into situations in Michigan, Washington, and New Jersey where Republicans are doing much better than ever anticipated. Senator Allen missed a few as well in 2004, but he did get strong challengers for strong incumbents. That is the key of a good NRSC chairman, getting good challengers to strong incumbents (Thune v. Daschle). Look at Florida, how many candidates can you tick off a list better than Katherine Harris just off hand? (Jeb Bush, Mark Foley, Porter Goss, Mario Diaz-Behlart, Allen Bense) . So instead of finding a good candidate in Florida, they are attacking Steve Laffey in Rhode Island. Doesn't Dole realize that if Laffey wins, the seat is GONE. I mean, Whitehouse is still favoried of Laffey, but with all the dirt she has thrown at him, Whitehouse will win in a walk.
And lastly, as I droan on, a word about primaries. Wouldn't it be much smarter for Dole and NRSC to just stay out and referee primaries, not get in the middle of them? In that Dole should have come out and said whoever wins the Chafee-Laffey gets the backing of the NRSC. I mean, she could even say "we want Senator Chafee to win," but not put up attack ads, that would be fine with me.
Well liked by the MAJORITY. Not saying that Ms. Dole's goal is to be in the minority, but am saying she or her husband would be/were uncomfortable in that role. The ultimate Washington insiders; "comfortable" and "cordial" with the other party, not daring to make enemies by actually recruiting strong challengers that may make for some uncomfortable moments with their "dear friends" across the other aisle who, of course, are perfectly happy when the Dole's are in the minority.
Man, I wish we had Hoeven or Schaeffer vs. Dorgan, Capito vs. Byrd, any of a number of candidates you mentioned vs. Bill Nelson, Johans v. Ben Nelson. That would keep Democratic money from flowing into Missouri, Ohio, Montana & Pennsylvania and force them to play not just in NJ, but also ND, WV, NE & FL.
Could you please post how much money NRSC has raised through 2nd QTR 2006 versus what George Allen raised in 2nd QTR 2004?
I think you'll be surprised at what you discover.
You mean a NATIONAL campaign PAC has raised more "through 2nd QTR 2006" - which includes the entire cycle - than a single Senator raised "in 2nd QTR 2004" - a single quarter?
That's amazing. That anyone would care, I mean.
Allen has about $6 million in the bank, and about a 10-1 advantage over his opponent. NRSC trails their Democratic counterparts.
The WHY of their poor performance isn't just about Chaffee, of course. It has to do with the performance of Republican Senators collectively, as well. House Republicans still lead their Democratic dopplegangers, but by a small margin instead of the healthy leads of the past.
Still, the RNC has a huge lead on the DNC, putting Republicans in a much better position. Monies which would normally have flowed to the RSCC and RCCC went to the party instead, due mainly to dissatisfaction by the donor base with the recent record of congressional Republicans.
The stem post illustrates a part of the reason.
Compared to what George Allen raised AS NRSC CHAIR in 2004. Before you get overly sarcastic, maybe consider the other person might be right.
And the biggest reason the NRSC trails the DSCC is Schumer is the DSCC chair and that man can raise money better than any other politician in office today. Sure many conservatives are ticked off at the NRSC, but I'm sure Dole isn't doing a terrible job on the whole, merely average, while Schumer is smashing records.
I'm sure Dole isn't doing a terrible job on the whole, merely average, while Schumer is smashing records.
Well with the total lack of judgment the NRSC has shown lately (which has certainly affected fundraising) and the fact that we are taking a bye on red state Senate contests because we couldn't field a real candidate, I don't know how you can be "sure" that she isn't doing a terrible job.
---
"I am a great believer in luck. The harder I work, the more I have of it." -- Thomas Jefferson
is just like supporting Lamont for Dems. Actually it is worse. Lamont can actually win in CT. Laffey cannot win in RI. Certainly not in 2006. It is cutting off the nose to spite the face. Is Chafee an ideal and loyal Republican? No. Is he a better Republican than Sheldon Whitehouse? Yes.
Of all the criticisms I've seen of the attack on Lieberman, I don't recall "Lamont can't win a two way race" being one of them.
If Chafee were to stay in the race after losing the primary, and have polling that shows him to be winning the three way, then yes, backing Laffey would be as stupid as backing Lamont is.
But Chafee isn't as well-loved in that state as Lieberman is in his state. Heck, Chaffee himself is already losing in some polls to Whitehouse, while Lieberman beats Schlesinger without even campaigning.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
chance against Whitehouse. Laffey does not. Everyone knows that. Given that, supporting Laffey is stupid.
the NRSC .... aside from the obvious that Tom Coburn should be running it instead of Libby Dole.