Cruz Could Impact GOP’s House Majority, Some Say

23 Dec 2015 | Author: | No comments yet »

Cruz Could Impact GOP’s House Majority, Some Say.

It can be taken as a sign of both ideological exhaustion and propaganda success that liberals still paint Republicans as the party of the Evil Rich, when it’s patently obvious there are plenty of big-money interests sitting behind the Democrat Party. And we all know that social activists on the left think Hillary Clinton and other establishment Democrats aren’t doing things much differently than establishment Republicans. So my colleague – real estate development writer Ely Portillo – asked this question: What if the moderates in the middle of the Democrat and Republican parties just up and said goodbye to both the hard left and the hard right?

And while losing that 58-seat majority in the 2016 election had been unthinkable, Republicans worry that their control could be in jeopardy if the bombastic Donald Trump wins the GOP presidential nomination. With due allowances made for what isn’t mentioned, the New York piece makes fair points about consultants like Karl Rove blowing the 2012 election, and Jeb Bush’s well-heeled backers spending an awful lot of dough to notch three percent in the polls. Actually, the situation portrayed in the article might be best described not as billionaires failing to buy elections, but consultants failing to deliver them.

Working under the assumption that they can support a campaign better themselves, donors are building their own organizations, staffed by operatives who report to them. “A lot of people who felt betrayed in 2012 set out to build political structures,” says Kellyanne Conway, president of the pro–Sen. Donald Trump’s impact on this election cycle is undeniable, not only from the anecdotally large amount of news coverage he garners, but also the record viewership he has brought to the Republicans debates.

Simon Rosenberg, a former Democratic National Committee official, told me after the last round of debates that he’s concerned Republicans are getting a huge amount of free media early in the cycle, while the anemic Democratic debate schedule squanders this opportunity. While Cruz and Trump are enjoying success in running campaigns that appeal to the GOP base, some political experts and operatives say their messages could prove unpalatable to general election voters in dozens of GOP-held House districts in the Northeast and in some suburbs, where voters are often fiscally conservative but socially liberal. “I think it has to play out, but there is nervousness with Cruz, who is clearly not part of the establishment, that you don’t find with [Marco] Rubio or [Jeb] Bush or [John] Kasich in some of those districts,” said former U.S. Moderate Democrats and Republicans share an interest in safe, incremental social change, protecting business and the economy, a strong defense and pragmatism in foreign affairs. The Trump effect might also be translating over to Democrats, who are more interested at this point in the election than at the same point in 2007, when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were still in a tight race for the nomination.

A computer scientist by training, Mercer is also part owner of a political data firm called Cambridge Analytica, which boasts on its website that it employs “psychographic profiling” to recruit voters. Still, a poll this November found that Democrat-aligned groups — minorities, millennials, and single women — are less engaged in this election than GOP-aligned ones. In addition, the Democrats won’t get too many more opportunities to control news cycles with debates; they only have four more remaining, including one this Saturday, and they’ve been scheduled on days people don’t traditionally watch debates: But this poll also suggests that the future might be better for the Democrats.

And why establishment GOPers grind their teeth at night over rebellious Freedom Caucus backbenchers and the angry band of Trump-lovers who seem determined to burn the party to the ground. The concern among Republicans over Cruz does not appear to be on par with that related to Trump, whose rhetoric on Mexico and Muslims earned him critics across the political spectrum. If Trump really is the core reason that all partisans are more engaged with this election, then Trump winning the nomination could also increase Democratic interest, as we’re already seeing in these polls — especially if Democrats begin casting Trump as the villain, versus one of many. But both Republicans and Democrats say that Cruz on the ballot could still have far-reaching effects on the House map in a presidential election year, which traditionally sees stronger turnout from Democratic voters than midterm elections. Cruz is running a sharply conservative campaign based on the theory that he will energize evangelical voters to turn out and overwhelm the margins that President Obama racked up in 2008 and 2012.

Some House Republican campaign operatives worry that such a strategy would alienate voters in suburban Philadelphia, Chicago and Detroit and in upstate New York. “If you have someone like Sen. Cruz contributors can specify how they want their money spent, much in the way universities allow benefactors to earmark their donations for a new science wing or aquatics center. “If you’re a donor, you can say, ‘I want to see this money used for Iowa,’ ” one strategist told me. “It’s a way to entice donors.

Just think about it: If you’re at dinner with 10 people, seven of them could talk to you about a debate in some engaged manner, versus just four of them in 2008. For example, oppo-research firm America Rising is “narrowly focused on digging up dirt on Democrats, for example by sending video trackers to events in order to build a library of unflattering material.” That’s exactly how Democrat trackers helped pull of Obama’s “Kill Romney” campaign, isn’t it? “Forty-Seven Percent” video, anyone?

House and Senate staffer, would not subscribe to the House-is-in-play theory, arguing that even with substantial GOP losses, his party’s majority is too large for Democrats to threaten. “Given where the maps are, Cruz would make the House interestingly competitive and worth pulling the calculator out of the drawer to count seat by seat,” said Stu Rothenberg, a political analyst with the Rothenberg/Gonzales Political Report. A vulnerable Republican incumbent might aim to differentiate oneself from such a nominee, but “doing that has a downside, too — you’re going to alienate some Republicans if you are distancing yourself from the nominee,” he said. How can anyone take that argument with a straight face when Cash Clinton is in the race, swinging around bags of influence-peddling loot and using a sham “charity” to keep her gigantic political machine lubricated for the big race? The Republican fear — and Democratic hope – is that Cruz falls short of 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s performance and throws those seats into contention. “When Congressional leadership had the chance to actually stand on principle and fight for something — defunding Obamacare, stopping amnesty, reigning in spending — they instead ran for the hills,” Catherine Frazier wrote in an email. “Meanwhile, Ted Cruz made the election a referendum on these issues, and it’s what every GOP candidate ran on when it came time to campaign.” “And because of that, Republicans won,” she added. “The way Cruz wins the election is by energizing Republicans and then making the argument to independents and even Democrats for how his conservative principles are what will provide real opportunity and improve their lives.” But while the Cruz campaign rejects the idea, Democrats are actively making plans around a would-be Cruz or Trump nomination as they enter the final stretch of 2016 candidate recruitment.

Several House Democratic sources said the party pitch to recruits shifted this fall: If there is any time to run for Congress, it’s the year when Republicans are postured to run a controversial nominee. Of course, when Democrats cozy up to Big Business, the media portrays them as razor-sharp technocrats forging useful business alliances for the betterment of the nation. Reuters found a thousand White House appointments for Fortune 100 CEOs, with Barack Obama himself present for about half of them… and his adviser Valerie Jarrett boasted that number is just “the tip of the iceberg.” Jarrett went on to portray business titans as grateful to Obama for saving them from a crisis that would have been caused by Republican resistance to raising the debt ceiling.

Rothenberg called Democratic recruitment “mixed,” but said that a polarizing Republican nominee “could possibly make underwhelming Democratic recruits look more impressive and threatening.” U.S. One doubts this would be collaboration would be portrayed in a positive light at all, if we were talking about a Republican president holding hundreds of meetings with big CEOs while the economy languished, the workforce declined, wages stagnated, and income inequality got worse.

Lois Frankel, D-Fla., who is active with the House’s Democratic campaign arm, said that having any one of Cruz, Trump or retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson being the GOP nominee would be a boon to her party’s recruitment. “The significant holes in House Democrats’ recruiting efforts not only proves that their confidence in riding Hillary’s coattails is misplaced, but also that they have no hope of recapturing the House majority in 2016,” she said. There are high rollers who are very interested in tax breaks, subsidies, and regulatory favors from the kind of Leviathan State favored by the Left… and also interested in using the State’s compulsive power against their competitors. The margin is just too large, and they expect the election to be about national security, a traditional struggle for the Democratic Party. “People have looked at Cruz’s record and say it isn’t mainstream in some areas. … There’s always that fear in the swing districts that determine which party controls the House,” he said. “But Hillary Clinton is not that popular either.” U.S. Tom Cole, R-Okla. who ran the House GOP campaign arm in 2008, didn’t give voice to concerns about losing the House during an interview with The Texas Tribune.

But he said presidential nominees clearly matter down-ballot. “The most important single factor next year if you’re a House member is going to be who’s running at the top of the ticket, because the correlation between presidential and House votes today versus twenty, thirty years ago is just astronomically different,” he said. “Our fate is very much tied to whoever our nominee is.”

Twitter-news
Our partners
Follow us
Contact us
Our contacts

About this site