Florida fratricide
The GOP civil war moves to the Sunshine State
Florida fratricide
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Way back on May 13, I predicted that Florida would be the setting for "the next Republican civil war." Perhaps that was an understatement. A more updated assessment has been offered by David Frum, the conservative commentator and former George W. Bush speechwriter. He writes on his blog that "Republican fratricide" in Florida will result in a "spectacular bloodbath."
Just as in the recent New York congressional race - where conservative-versus-moderate fratricide screwed things up so badly that a Democrat wound up winning a House seat that hadn't gone Democratic since around 1870 - the escalating Florida feud between conservative purists and moderate pragmatists in the GOP Senate race threatens to imperil the party unity that Republicans will need in order to recoup at the ballot box in 2010.
Just as in the New York race, where national movement conservatives fatally undercut the GOP establishment's preferred House candidate, the same conservative forces (talk radio, prominent right-wing magazines, Washington interest groups) are ratcheting up their attacks on Charlie Crist, the lame duck Florida governor who is seeking the '10 Senate nomination with backing from the party establishment. From the purists' perspective, Crist deserves to be taken down because he committed the ultimate sin: He not only took President Obama's economic stimulus money last winter, he even hugged Obama at a public rally.
The chosen vehicle for conservative ire, Senate primary challenger Mario Rubio (a former Florida House Speaker who is reputedly close to 100 percent pure), has now posted a web advertisement featuring footage of Crist and Obama at that rally. What better way to inflame Florida's conservative Republican electorate - which will dominate the voting in next August's GOP primary?
Club for Growth, the Washington conservative group that's flexing muscle in GOP races, has now endorsed Rubio, produced a TV ad, and appears poised to raise money for the underdog; at this point, more than one-third of Rubio's money is coming from conservatives out of state (far higher than Crist's out-of-state ratio). The prominent conservative blogs have signed up for Rubio; Erick Erickson, who runs redstate.com, reportedly said the other day that, for conservatives, "Florida is a hill to die on." The Weekly Standard and National Review magazines have fawned over Rubio in cover stories. Back in May, Crist was leading Rubio in the polls by 35 percentage points; today, even though a lot of Floridians still don't know much about Rubio, Crist's lead has been whittled to 14.
Crist is caught in a classic dilemma. On the one hand, he needs to win over the conservative purists in order to beat Rubio in the '10 party primary; he can achieve that goal only by serving up the requisite right-wing rhetoric about "big government" and "reckless spending." On the other hand, Crist is trapped by his recent actions as governor. Right-wing rhetoric is fine on the stump, where nobody has to take any responsibility for actual governance, but in the real world, where real people are really suffering, governors sometimes have to take practical steps to alleviate the hurt.
Crist did that. Florida was one the states hit hardest by the near-Depression economic meltdown of 2008, which wreaked havoc with his state budget. And like virtually all other governors, Crist was constitutionally required to balance that budget. He couldn't come close to that goal merely by raising various state fees and the cigarette tax. So with virtuaally no other options, and with his back to the wall, he (like virtually every other governor, in both parties) agreed to take Obama's federal stimulus aid - thereby averting deep cuts in school budgets, deep cuts in state health aid to poor people, the furloughing of state workers, and further hikes in state taxes. He was also able to extend jobless benefits to Floridians thrown out of work.
That's how it works in the real world. By contrast, Rubio insists that if he had been governing, he would have refused the stimulus money. When asked by the press to specify how he would have pulled the state out of the economic emergency, Rubio reportedly replied, "I don't have the budget in front of me."
The purists don't seem upset by that kind of answer; what matters is that Rubio's ideology is correct. By contrast, Crist these days seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth - which is hardly attractive behavior in a Senate primary contest.
Crist is making it easy for party conservatives to attack him as a typical pol with credibility baggage. He obviously can't deny that he took the federal stimulus money, so instead he has been trying to distance himself from Obama's economic agenda - an empirically impossible task. His attempts are not very artful.
The other day on CNN, Crist was talking about the stimulus bill. He stated, "I didn't endorse it." Well, actually, he did. On MSNBC last February, he listed the practical benefits of the stimulus money and said, "That's why I support it." That same month, he told Time magazine, "I see this package as a pragmatic, commonsense opportunity to move forward." Also that same month, he told the St. Petersburg Times, "We know that it's important that we pass a stimulus package." He also lobbied Florida congressmen, urging them to vote for the bill. He also joined other governors in sending a letter to Obama, urging the president "to sign the bill when it reaches your desk." (Crist's pro-stimulus track record is arguably an asset in the eyes of many Florida Democrats and independents, but those folks are barred from voting in the closed Republican primary.)
Worse yet, for Crist, are his recent attempts to distance himself from Obama personally. Late last month, Crist publicly claimed he had no idea that Obama was visiting his state on Oct. 26. Then the St. Pete Times, via a public records request, obtained emails which proved that the White House had sent Crist an itinerary of Obama's visit three days in advance. As a result of all these PR embarrassments, Crist's communications director felt compelled last week to fall on his sword and quit his job.
Rubio's national conservative backers are delighted with Crist's gyrations. In a guest newspaper column this morning, the president of Club for Growth chuckled that Crist's campaign "now consists of telling Floridians that he did not do things they watched him do only a few months ago. If you're not sure about what Governor Crist really believes, it's okay – Governor Crist doesn't seem to know, either."
Crist is not without weapons in a Senate primary, however. He's a prodigious fundraiser; saturation TV ads in the Florida media market are expensive, perhaps too pricey for a conservative challenger backed by national conservative money (by comparison, the conservative tab in that upstate New York congressional race was a pittance). And two can play the simplistic purity game; Crist is targeting an old Rubio proposal to hike the state sales tax. Rubio can rightfully cry foul - back when he was Florida House speaker, he suggested hiking that sales tax only in conjunction with erasing the property tax on primary residences - but this is hardball, and Crist has the advertising bucks to sow doubts about the purist's purity.
Who knows, maybe the movement conservatives will wake up in time and show some respect for the complexities of actual governance - instead of forcing the GOP to nominate ideologues. But that won't happen for the foreseeable future. David Frum, the ex-Bush speechwriter and aforementioned commentator, tells a story of how he was speaking the other day "to a roomful of young conservatives," all of whom were trashing the economic stimulus plan. Frum then said, OK fine, what would you have done to alleviate the worst of the crisis?
Somebody laughed and replied, "I guess it's lucky that we weren't in power."
That says it all.
Comment removed.
Still Independent- I voted Ron Paul, not Ralph Nadar. McCain was very liberal and had bought into the hoax of global warming. I didn't see the point in voting for McCain.- still, she posed for that picture for a different magazine about running. Seriiously, Newsweek is disingenuous for putting that picture on their cover like she posed for them. And what about the headline, no comment on that? I wonder if they would put Hillary on the cover in her running outfit? Just sayin'.— NEPhilly
- Newsweek's circulation has been declining for years. In a quest to find some loyal audience they have lurched to the left and are trying to be catnip for angry liberals. Putting Palin on the cover in that outfit is a shameless ploy to sell some magazines. Most print matter is rather pointless as one can find it on the internet for free. I cannot help but wonder how many inncocent trees have to die so they can print Newsweek. One would think a liberal rag like Newsweek would care a little more about their carbon footprint. LMAO !
- Had the government of New York state grown at the rate of population and inflation over the past 10 years, it would have a $14 billion surplus today. Instead, spending grew at twice the rate of inflation. So New York has a $3 billion deficit. If our federal government would just do the same we would be running surpluses. My hope is that the President and the congress just take the next few years off. don't meet, don't travel, don't pass any legislation. We'll still pay them I just don't need he show up for work or do anything.
- The start of healthcare rationing? A government panel is now recommending changing the guidelines on mammograms. Currently, the American Cancer Federation recommends mammograms annually starting at age 40 with self exams starting earlier. Now, a government panel is recommending changing the guidelines to every two years beginning at age 50, and no need to do self exams since they do not work. Is this what we have to look forward to under government approved health plans?— tom - wilmington, de
- I wondered when the 'rationing conspiracy' regarding mammograms would start here. Tom, consider both sides of that issue. The need to detect cancer ASAP is always first, but my understanding (reading and family experience) is that there is a relatively high level of false positives which lead to treatments that cause more harm than good. Let women and physicians work together on this and keep insurance actuaries out of the medical arena.— JimR
- smike, I love the 'don't show up at all' idea. Pass the spending bills for the next 3 years at 0% growth and go home. Brilliant. tom, and so it begins.— NEPhilly
- If the $787 Billion stimulus bill was to go to shovel ready projects, provide up to 3.5 million jobs in two years, and get the economy moving again, then why do we need a jobs summit and a jobs bill? Also, if as Obama promised the stimulus would provide jobs, of which 90% would be in the private sector, why are more than 50% of the current jobs being "created/saved" in the public sector?— tom - wilmington, de
- JimR..isn't this what the Comparative Effectiveness Research part of healthcare reform would be doing? Setting guidelines on what would be needed, when it would be needed, and when it would be a covered expense?— tom - wilmington, de
- Tom, that's what insurance companies do now. I'm just as afraid of what the government would do as I am of what Cigna and Aetna does now. This 'conspiracy by the govt' idea regarding mammograms is a smokescreen to hide what we are living with. 85% of consumers like what they have now, me too. I'd like what I had 20 years ago even more but my source (employer) doesn't offer it and it will get worse. I'd propose a radical idea. Be honest and tell everyone that it's costly to have good medical coverage and it MUST be paid for. The nonsense that comes out of DC is stupid. Yea, we'll all be covered and no one will have to pay the bill. Pelosi is the only one who really thinks that.— JimR
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
