Mitch McConnell wins in landslide, but November could be different story
Sen. Mitch McConnell easily vanquished his tea party challenger in Tuesday's primary, but the general election in November promises a sterner test. The big question: Who is Alison Grimes?
His napkin tucked under his chin, Sen. Mitch McConnell just ate his tea party challenger for breakfast – beating Matt Bevin in the Kentucky GOP primary race for Senate by a wide margin.
Related stories
Subscribe Today to the Monitor Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of
The Christian Science Monitor
Weekly Digital Edition
That will be much harder to do come dinnertime in November, when Senator McConnell faces his Democratic opponent, Alison Lundergan Grimes. The two are statistically tied in opinion polls, portending a messy race in which Republican control of the Senate will be at stake, along with Senator McConnell’s chance to become majority leader.
With 90 percent of precincts reporting, McConnell had 60 percent of the vote to Mr. Bevin's 36 percent, according to Politico.
RECOMMENDED: Who could be the next Ted Cruz? Top 10 tea party primaries of 2014.
The McConnell-Grimes contest “is going to be expensive; it is going to be intense,” says Jennifer Duffy, of the independent Cook Political Report. “I think this is going to end up being one of the closest, if not the closest, race in the country.”
The tactically talented McConnell, who has nearly 30 years in Washington under his belt, will approach the Grimes campaign much as he did with underdog Bevin – define his opponent by her flaws (in this case, as an Obama clone), keep his bulging campaign war chest well stocked, and work his ground game to unite Republicans and conservative Democrats who have traditionally voted for him.
“The big battle will be to define Grimes,” says Stephen Voss, associate professor of political science at the University of Kentucky in Lexington.
The young Ms. Grimes is a bit of a blank slate, and her political inexperience, like Bevin’s, could make her vulnerable to mistakes that “Team Mitch” will be quick to exploit. Indeed, some Democrats already criticize her for spending more time on fundraising than defining herself. She launched her first television ad less than two weeks ago, yet she announced her candidacy last July.
Her current job as Kentucky’s elected secretary of state responsible for elections is not exactly a high-profile post. She also doesn’t have a voting record to run on. These can be political pluses, in that she can more easily shape her own persona and doesn’t have a voting history that opponents can hang around her neck. Last week’s Bluegrass Poll, commissioned by Kentucky media, shows that – in contrast to McConnell – more voters approve than disapprove of the job she’s doing, but that nearly 40 percent of voters view her either neutrally or have no opinion of her at all.
That’s a prime opportunity for McConnell to paint her negatively, which he has already begun to do. In a state where only President Obama has a lower job approval rating than McConnell, McConnell's campaign is trying to glue her to the president – who lost Kentucky by wide margins, twice.
Recently, Allison Moore, McConnell's campaign spokesperson, blasted Grimes for benefiting from the "ultra rich liberal elite who bankrolled Barack Obama into the White House."
An ad by a "super political action committee" supporting McConnell, Kentuckians for Strong Leadership, plans to launch a TV ad Wednesday that ties Grimes to liberals, Hollywood, and the president.
Grimes, on the other hand, is trying to make November a referendum on the unpopular McConnell, who she blames for Washington’s dysfunction as the nation’s “guardian of gridlock.” True, McConnell is despised by liberals, by the right wing of his party, and by some in the middle. No love lost here. But blaming him for blocking Obama is a risky strategy in a conservative state where 57 percent of voters hold an unfavorable opinion of the president – indeed, McConnell is selling himself to voters as chief blocker to Obama.
Grimes has another sales pitch, a positive message that mirrors the Democrats’ national appeal to the middle class – more jobs, a higher minimum wage, and pay equity for women. It could catch on in a state with some of the poorest counties in the country. Like McConnell, she opposes Obama’s coal policy, a wise move in a coal state, and she’s also highlighting her Kentucky creds and values: born and raised in the state and a supporter of gun rights.
One factor that sunk Bevin was McConnell’s superior campaign fundraising. He outspent his opponent, who had considerable backing from outside tea party organizations, by a factor of about 4 to 1. Grimes has proven herself to be a capable fundraiser, actually outraising McConnell since she got in the race. (It helps to have friends like Bill Clinton to rake in $600,000 at a single event.) But McConnell still has twice the funds on hand that she has: about $10.4 million vs. her nearly $5 million.
Lastly, McConnell will try to grind down Grimes with his ground game using social media, data, and a loyal network of Republicans that he has been tending for years. In a state with a half million more registered Democrats than Republicans, he has won the votes of conservative Democrats for nearly 30 years.
But Grimes comes with her own strategic strengths. Her father, Jerry Lundergan, was the former head of Kentucky’s Democratic Party and has connections all over the state. Democrats have been investing in women candidates at the local level and in networking among women seniors.
“Our state is poised for the impact of women at the polls,” says state Rep. Kelly Flood (D) from Lexington, a Democratic stronghold. To help drive home the women’s message, Grimes’s grandmother features in her campaign.
And even though conservative Democrats are used to voting Republican in national elections, Grimes may benefit from their registration numbers if she can match their values, says Al Cross, director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community at the University of Kentucky in Lexington. A big question is what Bevin’s voters will do – stay home (a benefit to Grimes) or hold their nose and vote for McConnell.
Speaking of Grimes, Mr. Cross says: “She has an uphill climb … but she has a chance.”
That’s exactly why this race will be so expensive, and so intense.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Mitch McConnell addressed supporters Tuesday night, but it wasn't a eulogy for the tea party insurgency. Photograph: John Sommers II / Reuters
Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell's primary victory on Tuesday night in Kentucky will undoubtedly tempt many a pundit to write the Tea Party's eulogy. But the Tea Party will achieve in electoral death what it could never achieve in life: lasting control of the GOP agenda.
McConnell won because he's got a familiar name, a lot of money and the kind of political clout that makes up for occasional lapses from orthodoxy. That might not be enough next time – as a local Kentucky Republican leader told the National Journal last week, the state party is "still McConnell's Republican Party, but it's edging toward being Rand [Paul]'s Republican Party". But, it was enough to keep it from being challenger Matt Bevin's Republican party – especially after his unforcederrors and willingness to prize ideological purity over more pragmatic concerns (like the $2bn in pork McConnell brought home for agreeing to end the government shutdown).
McConnell didn't win because he became a Tea Party member – he's so conservative, he didn't have to. (A vote analysis casts him as one of the top 25 conservative members of the Senate, and Tea Party darling and intrastate rival Paul is at number 19.) Instead, McConnell's win just shows how easily the GOP grows over its fringes.
What's happening in the Republican party is the worst of both the Tea Party and more traditional "free-market" (but never really as free as advertised) economics: an aggressive "pro-business" agenda combined with radically retrogressive social policies.
You could even say at this point that the GOP isn't a big tent or even a coalition – it's a torus, an ever-expanding donut-shaped object that's empty in the middle.
The hole is where principles used to be, because flexibility comes at the price of purity. McConnell successfully neutralized challenger Bevin by being unafraid to grovel: he not only took junior Senator Rand Paul's endorsement and staff, for example, but he also put up with their eye-rolling (and nose-holding) in exchange for that support.
There's a history to the GOP establishment simply absorbing insurgent movements and moving right. The GOP has co-opted individual leaders (like Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater) and even entire voting blocs (fundamentalist Christians). Each of those assimilations marched the party rightward to the point that, according to political scientists Keith Poole and Howard Rosenthal, the party today is the most conservative it's been in one hundred years.
When the Tea Party complains that the Republican party has become too moderate, it can't be measuring against the party of the last century, much less the last administration. Yet the anti-establishment drumbeat that has echoed through the culture has created a situation in which a majority of GOP voters – 54% – think the party should move even further to the right.
Yale political scientist Jacob Hacker put this in more quantitative terms: since 1975, Senate Republicans have moved twice as far to the right as Democrats have to the left – and McConnell has been a part of the leading edge. A statistical analysis of his votes since he came to the senate in 1984 shows that he's voted more conservatively every year since.
At each level of governance below the Senate, the conservative undertow grows stronger. The House Republican caucus has shifted to the right six times further than the Democrats have left. And when you get closer to home – state-level offices and local races – you can see policies rolling backwards years of progress, most notably in reproductive health, gay rights and, most alarmingly, voting rights.
The media has meanwhile abetted this fiction of Tea Party radicalism versus establishment centrism. It takes precious little for be labelled a "moderate conservative" these days (and to reap the benefits of having even one area of ideological overlap with the great majority of political reporters who map moderate in their own views). Therefore we get a "moderate Pete King" (despite his history of anti-Muslim speech and advocacy of a greater surveillance state) and the "moderate" Jeb Bush lauded as a pragmatic voice of reason in the GOP. (People seem to have forgotten the radicalism of Bush's governorship, from his direct intervention on the Terri Schaivo case to a fiscal record with the Cato Institute seal of approval.)
This all may have happened with or without the Tea Party – it's just as attributable to the disintegration of campaign finance laws as it is to a grassroots movement. But the Tea Party gave the GOP the illusion of resurgence that's turned out to be something more like a sugar high.
This rightward drift of the movement would probably be more alarming to liberals if it wasn't so objectively risky for GOP. Though a combination of socially libertarian policies and moderately conservative financial ones has the potential to attract young voters (and women and minorities), that's not what's apparently on the agenda.
Rand Paul, who is both beloved by the Tea Party and a magnet for libertarian youth, nonetheless still echoes the worst of the GOP's talking points on race and gender. Polling after the 2012 elections showed that the GOP had failed to significantly improve its appeal to any demographic outside already partisan voters. And, as other polling – including internal Republican analysis – has shown, without demographic expansion, the GOP is doomed anyway.
McConnell's win fits nicely into a narrative of declining Tea Party influence. Yet the reality is that the Tea Party has won, even if their candidate didn't. And, in more ways than one, both the GOP and "the establishment" are losing more every time.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
What boggles my mind is that poll after poll talks about how public dislike of incumbents is at all time highs yet, time after time the electorate re-elects trash like McConnell.
What boggles my mind is that poll after poll talks about how public dislike of incumbents is at all time highs yet, time after time the electorate re-elects trash like McConnell.
That's because of the direct election of US Senators since the 17th Amendment. From Wikipedia;
"Critics of the Seventeenth Amendment claim that by altering the way senators are elected, the states lost any representation they had in the federal government and that, in addition to violating the unamendable state suffrage clause of Article V, this led to the gradual "slide into ignominy" of state legislatures, as well as an overextension of federal power and the rise of special interest groups to fill the power vacuum previously occupied by state legislatures.[1] In addition, concerns have been raised about the power of governors to appoint temporary replacements to fill vacant senate seats, both in terms of how this provision should be interpreted and whether it should be permitted at all. Accordingly, noted public figures have expressed a desire to reform or even repeal the Seventeenth Amendment."
Last edited by Avvakum; May 21st, 2014 at 22:55.
"God's an old hand at miracles, he brings us from nonexistence to life. And surely he will resurrect all human flesh on the last day in the twinkling of an eye. But who can comprehend this? For God is this: he creates the new and renews the old. Glory be to him in all things!" Archpriest Avvakum
The REASON is that locals like THEIR Senator. They don't like "all those other people".
It's a common problem. I've been yelled at (Free Republic comes to mind, bunch of asswipes) when I suggested a couple of years back to "Fire Them ALL" campaign. All of them had good "reasons" for keeping their OWN senators but getting rid of all the others.
I rest my case.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Good thing the only Rep of mine I give a crap about is my Congressman and that's only because he's a Tea Party guy we recently worked to vote in to replace an establishment Republican. My senators are garbage, Rob Portman and Sherrod Brown, and need replaced.
This election year, Democrat and longtime Congressman John Conyers did not satisfy Michigan election law by getting enough valid signatures on his nomination petitions, so the state ruled he did not qualify for the ballot. Now a federal judge has vacated the state's decision and put Conyers back on the ballot.
The Congressman's 49-year career was threatened with a sudden ending if he did not make the primary ballot, but Conyers can now breathe a sigh of relief as a federal judge has stepped in to challenge state authorities.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Leitman, an Obama nominee who has only been on the bench for two months, is now insisting that some of the state's findings are incorrect.
Citing Conyers's "good intentions," Judge Leitman said in his Friday afternoon ruling, "There is evidence that their failure to comply with the Registration Statute was the result of good faith mistakes and that they believed they were in compliance with the statute."
On May 9, Wayne County, Michigan, officials determined that Conyers was just over 500 signatures short of having enough to qualify for the ballot and suggested to the state election board that his name should be removed.
County and state officials determined that several of Conyers's signature-gatherers did not legally qualify for the role, meaning that all the signatures they gathered were invalid. It was discovered that several of these campaign workers were not registered to vote in Michigan or did not live at the addresses that they gave to authorities, both violations of rules governing petition circulators.
Due to the violations of state election laws, by Friday morning, May 23, Michigan's Secretary of State formally determined that Conyers's name would not appear on the 2014 Democratic primary ballot.
In denying Conyers his spot on the ballot, the Secretary of State said that it found "clear examples of the failure to follow the basics, something that thousands of campaigns have routinely done since 1966."
"The Michigan Election Law is designed to protect the purity of the ballot access process," the Secretary of State's review said. "The laws governing this activity place affirmative duties on petition circulators. As evidenced over the past two election cycles, when campaigns fail to comply with the law by executing basic principles of petition circulation, they create their own 'ballot access crisis' when their failures are discovered by or brought to the attention of election officials. In this instance, consultant Steve Hood freely admitted that he failed to ensure that the petition circulators he hired to work on Conyers' campaign were registered to vote."
Despite the state's legal findings on the very same day that state election authorities determined that Conyers did not belong on the ballot, the Obama-appointed federal judge reversed that decision and insisted he be placed there anyway.
Now, now... We can't have a liberal stalwart like John Conyers being denied his rightful place in office over a minor technicality like that little ol' thing called "the law". It's such a quaint and outdated concept after all. After all, John Conyers deserves his office because.
Befuddlement hit and lingered within the House GOP leadership ranks as Majority Leader Eric Cantor's election fate was unwinding on Tuesday. Cantor lost in a major upset to primary challenger Dave Brat.
Speaker John Boehner, in a statement from his office late Tuesday night, said, "Eric Cantor and I have gone through a lot together."
"He's a good friend and a great leader, and somone I've come to rely upon on a daily basis as we make the touch choices that come with governing," added Boehner, who said his thoughts Tuesday night were with Cantor, his wife Diana, and their kids.
A senior Republican leadership aide described the mood as "chaos for the leadership ranks."
"We're absolutely stunned. Honestly, we really can't believe it," said the aide, who likened it to the 2004 election defeat of Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who was Senate minority leader at the time.
"Given the speculation Boehner himself may decide not to run again for speaker, the idea had been out there that Cantor would simply walk into the speakership," said the aide. "But now, who the hell would be the next speaker?"—particularly, the aide added, if Paul Ryan doesn't want it, or Rep. Tom Price of Georgia isn't interested.
And there are more immediate questions—including whether Cantor would step down as majority leader right away, given the no-confidence vote of his own constituents.
"Everyone knows it was a tough race out there. But when you have all the money in the world, spend those resources—in the long run, money usually wins out," said the aide.
By Paul Steinhauser and Deirdre Walsh, CNN
updated 8:25 AM EDT, Wed June 11, 2014
Your video will begin momentarily.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Cantor's loss shakes up GOP leadership, kills hope for immigration reform in House
Challenger's win also gives jolt of energy to tea party movement
Cantor's problem was that base grew distrustful of him, analyst says
Washington (CNN) -- It's the earthquake that rocked the GOP.
In a year when mainstream Republicans have mostly bested tea party-backed challengers, a little-known and little-funded tea party challenger in Virginia's 7th Congressional District pulled the upset of the year, defeating House Majority Leader Eric Cantor by 10 percentage points.
The victory by economics professor Dave Brat gives the tea party an instant jolt of energy, sends shock waves through Capitol Hill, shakes up the GOP House hierarchy -- as Cantor was seen by many as the next Speaker -- and effectively kills any chance of immigration reform passing through the House any time soon.
"I think this is a scale eight earthquake. I think it will shock the Washington establishment; it will shock the House Republicans," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said. Cantor failed to 'pay attention at home' Dave Brat: 'This is a miracle' Eric Cantor: It's disappointing Immigration reform protests at Cantor HQ
"It certainly upsets the balance of power inside the Republican conference. And combined with the results last week in Mississippi, it sends a pretty strong signal that while money matters, voters may matter more, and people have to have a little respect for the right of the voter to have attention paid to them, and the right of the voter to throw people out if they're not happy with them," added Gingrich, a 2012 Republican presidential candidate and co-host of CNN's "Crossfire."
Cantor becomes only the second member of Congress running for re-election this year to go down in defeat in the primaries, following 91-year-old Republican Rep. Ralph Hall of Texas. Longtime Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi may soon become the third. He's fighting for his political life as he faces a primary runoff election in two weeks against a tea party-backed state senator who narrowly edged him in last week's primary but not by enough to win outright.
"This victory is the 'Pulp Fiction' equivalent of the adrenaline needle plunged into the chest of the tea party," said GOP consultant Ron Bonjean, who served as a top strategist and adviser to House and Senate Republican leaders. "They had largely conceded most of the Republican primaries to the establishment."
Brent Bozell, an anti-establishment leader and "ForAmerica" chairman, proclaimed that "Eric Cantor's loss tonight is an apocalyptic moment for the GOP establishment. The grassroots is in revolt and marching." Eric Cantor loses primary in big upset; Lindsey Graham avoids runoff How Cantor lost
In the primary's closing days, aides close to Cantor said they expected the majority leader to win around 60% of the vote in his primary. He didn't come close.
"Obviously, we came up short," the seven-term congressman told supporters as he conceded the race.
Cantor apparently didn't read the pulse of conservatives in his Republican-dominated district, which is anchored in the Richmond area but stretches some 100 miles from the Tidewater to the outer reaches of the Washington exurbs.
"Eric Cantor lost this race as much as Dave Brat won it. Two years ago, Eric Cantor got 37,000 votes in his primary. Nine thousand fewer votes this time. He simply violated rule number one of politics: go home," said CNN chief national correspondent John King. "This is Eric Cantor's fault. He was in Washington on primary day. Not back in his district."
Cantor also turned down last-minute help from political allies.
"His confidence, his arrogance, his smugness cost him his seat," King added.
"My sense from talking to people in the 7th is that he had lost touch with the base of the Republican Party there, and by the time he realized it and tried to make amends, it was too late," Virginia political analyst Quentin Kidd said.
"The real problem that the (tea party) base had with Cantor is that they got to where they didn't trust him," added Kidd, director of the Wason Center for Public Policy at Christopher Newport University. "The issue that broke the bank for him was immigration. They saw him say one thing in Washington, then say something else to them, and it caused deep distrust in the district."
Cantor's campaign shelled out a couple of million dollars in television and radio ads to send its message that Cantor was "a strong conservative." It outspent Brat's by more than 10 to 1. To put it another way, Cantor spent well over $100 for each vote that he won. Brat spent around $5 per vote.
In his victory speech, Brat told supporters, "Dollars do not vote -- you do."
Brat framed his challenge as another case of a grassroots conservative taking on the GOP establishment, a major theme in Republican contests this year. And Brat made immigration reform the central issue and said Cantor's position would hurt the economy.
"The amnesty issue is the symbolic powerful expression about the difference between Eric and I on jobs," Brat said.
Cantor has publicly supported proposals allowing children of those who enter the country illegally -- so-called "Dreamers" -- the ability to obtain some type of legal status. But Cantor opposed the bill passed by the Senate last year that included a pathway to citizenship for most of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country.
Cantor's team pushed back, calling Brat, a "liberal college professor."
That worked against him, Kidd said.
"His negative turn played into this narrative that Cantor couldn't be trusted...that he was out of touch with the conservative principles of the district, and was using Washington-style campaign tactics to beat his opponent down."
Brat's victory may have also been fueled by popular conservative talk radio host Laura Ingraham, who was an early supporter.
"The seeds for Brat's upset were sown on right-wing radio talk shows, particularly Laura Ingraham's," CNN Senior Media Correspondent Brian Stelter said. "This time last week Ingraham was busy headlining a giant rally for Brat. On Tuesday her website implored fans to vote for him."
Two pieces of irony: Cantor's defeat comes just three days after Virginia Republicans, meeting at their state party convention, nominated Ed Gillespie -- the poster boy for "inside the beltway" Republicans -- as the party's U.S. Senate nominee. And Cantor's loss also came on the same night that GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a frequent target of conservatives, easily bested six primary challengers from the right. Aftershocks on Capitol Hill
In his 13 years in Congress, Cantor has rocketed up the ranks, all the way to majority leader, the No. 2 spot in the House Republican leadership. And Cantor was seen by many as biding his time until the eventual retirement of House Speaker John Boehner.
Now that succession is upended, and Cantor's defeat will only embolden the powerful tea party wing in the House. Conservatives will most likely demand that Cantor be replaced with someone on the right.
"It's going to speed up the process of tea party members positioning themselves for a leadership run. This stunning news could be the first shot in an all-out war between the establishment and tea party over leadership control," Bonjean said.
The No. 3 House Republican, Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, is popular among members and has chits from many of the freshman and sophomores he helped elect. But because he's part of the current GOP leadership lineup, many tea party groups and members on the right of the conference don't trust him as a solid conservative. He is likely to want to move up to Cantor's post, but could draw a challenge.
Some are floating House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's name, but a source close to the 2012 GOP vice presidential nominee calls those rumors "baseless and unfounded" and notes Ryan batted down questions about his interest in any run for the top spot.
But because the news of Cantor's defeat is still sinking in, members are still calling around and testing the temperature for what should happen next.
Cantor's defeat also effectively kills any hopes that the House will pass an immigration reform bill.
"It's going to be a tough case to make that immigration is going to be brought to the House floor anytime soon," Bonjean said.
CNN Senior Political Analyst David Gergen agreed.
"For Cantor to be knocked off by a tea party conservative over his efforts to push for immigration reform and his earlier efforts to lift the debt ceiling, I think it will send shock waves through Republican ranks."
Look at the price he paid for doing things the majority of Americans support," said Gergen, a senior adviser to both Democratic and Republican presidents. Cantor challenger, Dave Brat, 'shocked' as results rolled in Graham defeats conservative challengers, avoids runoff
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It's a shame VA wasn't able to elect Ken Cuccinelli and KY didn't get rid of Mitch McConnell but this was a great win that sent a strong message.
Also a real shame SC didn't get rid of Lindsey Graham yesterday. Would have really liked to have seen him get the boot as much as Cantor. There were 6 "Tea Party" candidates that split the vote though.
Just goes to show though what a tough fight there is ahead, for what difference it will make if any.
The Tea Party is being blamed for a lot of things. Including that school shooting yesterday apparently.
But, the message is clear... if the Tea Party is going to make it, they need to get their shit together too and they need to find ONE person to carry the water, not six.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
WASHINGTON — House Majority Leader Eric Cantor will step down from his leadership post at the end of July, according to a senior House staffer who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to pre-empt Cantor's announcement.
House Republicans will meet Tuesday afternoon where Cantor will announce his decision. It will trigger a round of mid-year leadership elections in a divided and still reeling GOP.
Cantor's decision follows his historic defeat Tuesday in the Virginia Republican primary against a little-known opponent, Tea Party-inspired economics professor David Brat. Democrats are unlikely to seriously contest the race in his heavily Republican Richmond-area district.
Cantor is the second highest-ranking member of GOP leadership and was on track to become the next speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. He is the only Jewish Republican serving in Congress, and he is the only majority leader in congressional history to lose in a primary fight. His defeat scrambles the leadership team and the House's agenda ahead of the 2014 elections.
Late Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, issued a short statement praising Cantor as "a good friend and a great leader."
"Few have fought harder or have accomplished more in the pursuit of solutions-based polices to better the lives of Americans than Eric Cantor," added Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. "Every single member of this conference is indebted to Eric's graciousness and leadership."
McCarthy is expected to make a play for the majority leader's job. Speculation has also focused on Rules Chairman Pete Sessions, R-Texas, and Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, as potential contenders.
McCarthy's play would open up his post, the third-ranking job in the House. His chief deputy, Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., is likely to seek the job, and Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., is also viewed as a potential candidate.
Reuters reported Wednesday that House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., said he would not be a candidate for the job, which has "just not been my interest." WHO'S NEXT: A look at the contenders for GOP leader
Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., said he believed McCarthy has the support to become the next majority leader, but that he would like to see a "red state conservative" take over as whip in that scenario.
Stutzman praised Cantor's leadership but said he was likely defeated by voters who were frustrated that he focused too much on Washington. "I'm afraid he worked too hard for us and not making sure he was taking care of things back in his district," he said.
Cantor's loss has already reignited the debate over the intraparty GOP war over the direction of the party. While Cantor worked constantly to try and bridge the divide between the traditional establishment forces and the Tea Party grass-roots, his defeat invigorated Tea Party groups, and in particular conservative opposition to an overhaul of immigration laws.
"This victory is a referendum on the establishment that has gone along with policies that have completely left out the voice of the people," said Jenny Beth Martin, chairman of the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund.
Tom Donahue, the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, told Bloomberg TV that the Tea Party's role in the race was exaggerated. "The Tea Party had nothing to do with this," he said. "They didn't put any money in. They didn't have any people there. It was sort of an attractive professor in a very, very conservative district in Virginia. And everybody was surprised."
Lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol were stunned by Cantor's loss. "I thought he was an excellent leader," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. "But you have to respect the vote of the people."
Rep. Mario Diaz Balart, R-Fla., said Cantor's loss is a "huge tsunami" for House Republicans, and it will not be easy to fill the void. "He's been one of the guys with the big ideas," he said, "I think he's going to be gravely missed."
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ByRebecca KaplanCBS NewsJune 12, 2014, 10:44 AM Who do Nevada Democrats want for governor? None of the above
An electronic voting card and "I Voted" stickers are seen at a polling place November 6, 2012 in Sparks, Nevada. Max Whittaker, Getty Images
Nearly 30 percent of Democratic voters in the Nevada primary chose the option "none of these candidates" instead of the eight candidates running in the gubernatorial primary.
The next highest vote-getter was Las Vegas resident Bob Goodman, who received about 25 percent of the vote, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Despite coming in second to "none," he will face Gov. Brian Sandoval - who received 90 percent of the GOP vote - in the general election this November.
University of Nevada, Reno political science professor Eric Herzik told the Review-Journal that it happened because most candidates spent no money to raise their name recognition, meaning many voters didn't know them.
According to the Review-Journal, this is not the first victory for the "none" option: it beat two Republicans running for the state's only congressional seat in the 1976 GOP primary, and also prevailed in the 1978 Republican congressional and secretary of state primary elections, and the 1986 Democratic treasurer's primary.
Nevadans were given the option to choose none of the candidates on the ballot beginning in 1975.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: 2014 Election
Originally Posted by Ryan Ruck
Cantor failed to 'pay attention at home'
Dave Brat: 'This is a miracle'
Eric Cantor: It's disappointing
Immigration reform protests at Cantor HQ
Susan Davis, USA TODAY 2:42 p.m. EDT June 11, 2014
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Email
Bookmarks