Will the GOP Fall Into Civil War?

Pundits are being dramatic. The reaction of the Tea Party groups to Karl Rove’s newest project has been less than warm. Will 2014 be a civil war within the party or the year it takes the Senate back?

Reason gave this take.

The Conservative Victory Project, which is backed by Karl Rove and his allies who built American Crossroads into the largest Republican super PAC of the 2012 election cycle, will start by intensely vetting prospective contenders for Congressional races to try to weed out candidates who are seen as too flawed to win general elections.

Shots fired, as the Twitter kids say. Politico gets reaction from Rove’s targets:

Matt Hoskins, executive director of the Senate Conservatives Fund, branded it the “Conservative Defeat Project.”

“The Conservative Defeat Project is yet another example of the Republican establishment’s hostility toward its conservative base. Rather than listening to the grassroots and working to advance their principles, the establishment has chosen to declare war on the party’s most loyal supporters,” Hoskins said. “If they keep this up, the party will remain in the wilderness for decades to come.”

45 thoughts on “Will the GOP Fall Into Civil War?”

  1. The Senate Conservatives Fund has given us Akin, Mourdock, O’Donnell, Angle, Buck, etc., costing the GOP no fewer than five Senate seats. It’s quite rich that they would refer to someone else using the word ‘defeat.’

    The Tea Party started the Civil War. Is this the cycle that mainstream Republicans decide to fight back against the 8% (and shrinking) who identify with groups like the SCF and the Tea Party? That’s the better question.

  2. Before the Republican Party can be a viable alternative to the Democratic controlled Senate it must unite itself. The worst thing that can happen is to continue to visibly feud over party philosphy. Either we come together or face the reality that we will be a minority party for years to come. We must offer a united alternative to the liberal government we are now stuck with.

  3. Anon, the insiders started the civil war as early as 1994 when they ran moderate Republican Marshall Coleman against Ollie North for the Virginia US Senate race. North lost to the Democrat by less than 3%, while the moderate spoiler took 14.5% of the vote.

    The GOP elite has been at war against the conservative for longer than you’ve been eligible to vote, in fact.

    Conservatives fnally got tired of it and decided to fight back — after decades.

    But to Colonial Republican, yes. Why would voters trust the Republican party to solve problems and govern if we cannot just sit down quietly and discuss things calmly face to face? if people have to play for advantage and throw firebombs for leverage, instead of just talking, why would you trust htem to lead the country?

  4. By “insiders” you mean Nancy Reagan, who came out the night before the election and said that North lied to Ronald Reagan about Iran Contra?

    North raised $20 million for that race, outspent the Democrat by 4-1, and blew it because of his muddy past, it wasn’t the “insiders” who took out North, it was his Iran Contra background that made him untrustworthy to 57% of the Virginia electorate.

  5. Rove calling his group ‘The Conservative Victory Project’ is like calling a Marxist group (which it is) the ‘People for the American Way.’ Rove is a buffoon, and needs to get the hell out of the way, with the rest of the moderate, cross-the-aisle losers.

    Either we come together or face the reality that we will be a minority party for years to come. We must offer a united alternative to the liberal government we are now stuck with.…Colonial….what?

    What are you talking about? The GOP holds thirty governorships. The GOP controls twenty-seven state legislatures, and in twenty-four of those, the governorship. The GOP holds the House of Reps.

    The only reason BO- perhaps the most inept, unqualified man in the history of the presidency- is still in office is because the GOP ‘united’ under a liberal, New England appeaser. BO was down twelve-million votes in ’12, but won anyway because people like me will not vote for a candy-ass appeaser like Romney.

    Conservatives win, middle-of-the-road ‘moderates’ get run-over. See Ford, Bush I, Dole, McCain…and of course, Massachusetts Mitt.

  6. anon
    “Republicans decide to fight back against the 8% (and shrinking) who identify with groups like the SCF and the Tea Party? That’s the better question.”

    I wouldn’t count on that statement as being correct. I know you are hoping the percentage is actually that low. We all live in the real world, not the world of “hoping so, makes it so.”

  7. “Conservatives win, middle-of-the-road ‘moderates’ get run-over. See Ford, Bush I, Dole, McCain…and of course, Massachusetts Mitt.”

    I love Rick. He includes the wasteful spending, entitlement creating, Ted Kennedy appeasing, big government loving GWB and the deficit exploding, amnesty giving, gun control freak RWR in his list of “real conservatives,” but only because they won. Anything to fit a narrative, right Rick?

  8. 4anon

    By “insiders” you mean Nancy Reagan, who came out the night before the election and said that North lied to Ronald Reagan about Iran Contra?

    Yes, the same Nancy Reagan who consulted astrologers and psychics — not to please a boyfriend for a couple of weeks as a teenager, but while the First Lady living in the White House during the Cold War.

    Nancy Reagan was never a conservative and was always a liberal influence in the Reagan Administration, as conservatives fretted during the entire 8 years of the Reagan Administration.

    Nancy Reagan apparently worried that her husband’s reputation would be harmed by giving prominence to Oliver North…. the same foolishness practiced today by Matt Moran.

    Anon writes: “North raised $20 million for that race, outspent the Democrat by 4-1, and blew it because of his muddy past, ”

    No, North lost by under 3% while Marshall Coleman diverted 14.5% of the vote.

    Same scenario as Christine O”Donnell.

    The GOP insiders viciously attacked North for years before his campaign, and all during the 1994 campaign.

    Had the GOP insiders gotten behind North instead of smearing him the entire time, he would have won.

  9. And, Anon, let’s see if you can pass a political IQ Test:

    Anon, was the Iran-Contra scheme:

    a) Ronald Reagan’s idea?
    or
    b) Oliver North’s idea — a lowly and obscure Colonel?

  10. Rick, I have written an article on this topic, Karl Rove vs. Christine O’Donnell, including things that most people don’t know, although Russ Murphy and many Delaware conservatives do.

    Since it is pending editorial decision, I shouldn’t publish it all here.

    But I should call the article:

    Karl Rove vs. H&R Block.

    Did you know that Karl Rove was lying about Christine O’Donnell’s taxes, even though Christine O”Donnell did not do her own taxes? H&R Block prepared her taxes.

    Karl Rove knew he was lying, because he was told.

    SO SHOULD WE LISTEN TO HIM NOW?

    The entire Delaware 2010 war was engineered personally by Karl Rove, starting in December 2009 when he met with tea party leaders before the fund-raiser at Baywood Country Club.

    This is the patern: GOP elites savagely attack the conervative candidate, like Oliver North. Then when the conservative is wounded and bloody, those holding the bloody knife declare “Oliver North can’t win! Look at all the knife wounds from me stabbing him!”

  11. anon
    “Don — Unlike you, I deal in facts, and I back them up.”

    Polls are not real facts because no matter who is conducting the polls, the facts are usually skewed by the way the questions are worded. I think you’re intelligent enough to know that.
    Anybody that calls polls, “a fact,” really doesn’t know what facts are.

  12. To Salty Independent in #12: A story on what COULD happen is not really on or off the mark nor is it part of any track record. The sun could turn blue tomorrow. Barack Obama could repent of his sins. Joe Biden could get through a speech without fumbling. Anything “could” happen. So articles or reports about what could happen may be interesting but are not really factual.

    However, once again, we see the mental disease in political thought demonstrated by this analysis.

    Where is leadership? Where is persuasion? Where is offering the voters a choice?

    The silliness of trying to measure a State’s ideology is that that ideology is a RESULT of various factors. People do not come out of the womb with an ideology.

    A Republican nominee who simply accepts the status quo and does not attempt to present his or her arguments for what is right does not deserve to be elected to any office.

    A candidate who simply tries to echo what some misguided consultants think a district or state believes is a fool. The opinions of the voters are a reflection of what they have learned in the past. If they have been lied to in the past, the time is ripe to tell them the truth.

  13. don

    rassmussen is a conservative leaning poll (fact). i would post the link to back that up, but you won’t read it or you will dismiss it.

    jon

    you talk about the silliness of trying to measure this and that. nate silver does a pretty good job of it.

    so….. i look forward to watching the civil war.

  14. The Republican Party will not win over the majority until they bring a cure for the liberal policies of the democrats. Also, they will never win with a far right ultra conservative candidate. The Obama adminstration will self destruct and the Repubican Party will need to present a viable unified alternative. Casting dispersions on the Republican Party will not make it happen. Calling names withn the Republican Party just insults the intelligence of those of us who seek Party reform from within. For those who think they can insult away the members of our Party, they need to get a life! You all know who you are.

  15. Personally, I think it is time the Conservatives split from the Republican party. In races you could have a Conservative, a Republican and a Democrat running and if you have a good candidate who can keep the Conservatives with him and capture a number of independents, it might put a lot more conservatives into Congress. They might not have a majority, but they could swing to either party on certain issues and become the balance of power that has to be taken seriously.

    Delaware should try it out first. Sussex County should withdraw from the Republican Party and begin a Conservative party that is independent from the blue bloods up north. If they want to dictate policy to Sussex County, they will have to run against your candidates. I think John Atkins would have no qualms leaving the Democrats and joining the Conservatives as long as you were independent from the Republicans tentacles that come from up North, especially those of Greg Lavelle.

    The conservative party would certainly have more power within the General Assembly if they were to break from the Republicans….

    Just think about it… One last thought is that as in a marriage that is going downhill, sometimes a split is best so both sides of a party get rid of the negative hanging around their neck, and focus on what is really important. The people in their district….

    As for the name…. The one name of the new party that is clean and makes sense… is Conservative Party.

  16. Kavips
    I like your comment and it does make some sort of sense, but the Sussex County GOP has no direction and is floundering like a rowboat in the ocean, without any oars.
    I get a couple of calls a week from people that are heavily involved, stating they don’t want to stay in the GOP but have no place to go.
    I was going to restart Conservative Caucus Meetings but I don’t feel that the time is right. People are not satisfied with the Candidates for Chairman and Vice Chairman in the upcoming GOP elections in March and I fear that many will bolt and run.
    Jerry Wood was able to pull warring factions together enough to accomplish the elections in a positive manner but I don’t think anybody with enough leadership ability has stepped forward to lead the Sussex GOP, and it bothers me.
    I will not throw my hat in the ring for the seat of Chairman because I have other fish to fry at the moment and the timing is wrong.

  17. a) Ronald Reagan’s idea?
    or
    b) Oliver North’s idea — a lowly and obscure Colonel?”

    I don’t think it was either man’s idea.

    No more than hopium and change is Obama’s idea…

    With respect to Reagan though, it’s probably a good sign when a crazy “lone gunman” emerges from the void… randomly, as usual.

    Hinckley’s father was a financial supporter of George H.W. Bush’s 1980 presidential primary campaign, where Bush was Reagan’s closest rival for the Republican nomination prior to becoming his vice president. Hinckley’s older brother, Scott, had a dinner date scheduled at the home of Neil Bush the day after the Reagan assassination attempt. Neil’s wife, Sharon… described the Hinckleys as “a very nice family” and that they had “given a lot of money to the Bush campaign.” –Wikipedia

    But fortunately Neil Bush* was too busy with hookers that evening. What’s with the Bush family and dinner dates with their “associates”? Remember how the Bin Laden’s were flown out of the country after 9/11… The only people allowed to fly that day, it would seem: Bin Ladens Flown from US, While Victim’s Families Were Grounded

    But anyway, that’s the Bush family for you. They’re members of the club fighting global terrism to protect you and keep you safe, etc. *

    Bush’s divorce deposition gained public attention when he admitted to several sexual encounters with high-priced escorts/prostitutes in Thailand and Hong Kong in which he admitted to catching the STD herpes. Among other divorce testimony aired in the press, Bush’s friend John Spalding announced that Sharon had extracted hair samples from her estranged husband in order to place a voodoo curse on him. Sharon Bush later confirmed the forcible hair removal, but she stated that she took the hair to be tested for evidence of drug use. At various times, she publicly spoke of her fear of retribution by Bush, or by the Bush family. –Wikipedia

    I guess you could say that Neil Bush almost had a bad case of “voodoo economics”?

  18. Ironically… Ross’s identity was stolen and marketed to lemmings by the military industrial media: Rapper Rick Ross Exposed as a Fake Freemason and Identity Thief

    I guess as long as there’s a market for “top secret” Illuminati crap, people will keep entertaining themselves with the idea that they’re not just another lemming.

    The only problem is that when people entertain themselves by playing pretend about things to drive up the prices, a lot of other people wind up paying in reality. It’s sort of like the way Obama marketed himself as “doing a little blow” but hasn’t done anything significant to make sure that other young black men won’t wind up in prison and have their lives destroyed for following his lead.

    Maybe the main problem is that he’s just a manipulator and entertainer but not really much of leader. May as well have Jay-Z for president…

  19. Geezer
    “And that, Don, is how you use data. They probably covered this in journalism school.”

    I’ve never trusted polls and I know what I hear in the GOP about the Tea Party Movement. Rumor is: there is a revitalization movement that is taking place in America of the Tea Party Movement and people are very dissatisfied with the Obama Administration.
    I would remind you Geezer that I don’t believe much of what you say or believe, because you were part of the liberally biased media system, for such a long time and still are a very socialistic influence in NCCo

  20. Actually the Bin Laden’s may have been busy with “top secret” activities with the Bu$h family in Iran Contra too:

    Salem bin Laden, Osama’s oldest brother, described by a French secret intelligence report as one of two closest friends of Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd who often performs important missions for Saudi Arabia, is involved in secret Paris meetings between US and Iranian emissaries this month, according to a French report. Frontline, which published the French report, notes that such meetings have never been confirmed. Rumors of these meetings have been called the “October Surprise” and some have speculated that in these meetings, George H. W. Bush negotiated a delay to the release of the US hostages in Iran, thus helping Ronald Reagan and Bush win the 1980 Presidential election. All of this is highly speculative, but if the French report is correct, it points to a long-standing connection of highly improper behavior between the Bush and bin Laden families. [PBS Frontline, 2001]
    ….
    After winning a sweeping election victory against President Jimmy Carter in November 1980, Ronald Reagan is sworn in as US president. The same day that Reagan is sworn in, Iran releases the remaining 52 hostages it has held captive at the US Embassy in Tehran for 444 days (see November 4, 1979-January 20, 1981). [PBS, 2000] History Commons, Iran Contra

    It’s amazing to me that the Bush’s control or manipulation of Red Team lasted as long as it did. But everything under the sun has to go the way of the Dodo eventually, it would seem.

  21. Rumor is: there is a revitalization movement that is taking place in America of the Tea Party Movement and people are very dissatisfied with the Obama Administration.

    I would call it the Liberty Movement generally rooted in the decentralized media that’s not under the control of the current “mainstream” or military industrial media.

  22. “I’ve never trusted polls and I know what I hear in the GOP about the Tea Party Movement. Rumor is: there is a revitalization movement that is taking place in America of the Tea Party Movement and people are very dissatisfied with the Obama Administration.”

    Have fun inside the bubble. Believe only the things that agree with your personal narrative. Whatever you do, don’t let any facts, science or research get in the way. Ignore all election results, too. It’s worked sooooooooo well to this point. Why change?

  23. No, North lost by under 3% while Marshall Coleman diverted 14.5% of the vote.

    Same scenario as Christine O”Donnell.

    No, not even close to the “same scenario”. North lost by 3%, O’Donnell lost by 17%. North had to campaign against an incumbent Democrat and a Republican. O’Donnell had to campaign against only a Democratic opponent who wasn’t well liked, even by Democrats.

    The only thing that qualifies the races as the “same scenario” is that both North and O’Donnell were untrustworthy candidates and they both had you helping them. Again, Coleman got 11% of the vote, not 14%.

    I also doubt your girl gave up her Satan worshipping when she was a teen because she lies so easily today (“I won 2 counties against Joe Biden in 2008″). Those “blood stained Satanic altars” she was partying on leave a lasting impression.

  24. “I don’t believe much of what you say or believe, because you were part of the liberally biased media system, for such a long time and still are a very socialistic influence in NCCo”

    Sticking your fingers in your ears is not research. Your failure to believe reality does not reduce its reality. It just makes you look like a fool.

    Polls are tools. You scorn them because you don’t know how to use them, which makes you a sorry excuse for a journalist.

  25. Geezer
    Polls are tools, yes but they are not reliable facts.
    When O’Donnell beat Castle, most of, if not all of the polls had Castle in a large lead. I don’t trust polls and you do, so what!

  26. “When O’Donnell beat Castle, most of, if not all of the polls had Castle in a large lead. I don’t trust polls and you do, so what!”

    That’s inaccurate…

  27. “When O’Donnell beat Castle, most of, if not all of the polls had Castle in a large lead.”

    And this shows what happens when someone doesn’t bother doing any research. Here, let me show you what a simple Google search finds:

    “Sept. 13: Mike Castle might lose the Delaware Republican Senate primary Tuesday night. That’s what a new poll suggests, anyway. The Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey shows “tea party” choice Christine O’Donnell holding a three-point lead over Castle, 47 to 44 percent.”

    From a news source reporting on the results, same date:

    “A Public Policy Survey poll taken over the weekend — apparently the only survey taken thus far — has eccentric Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell leading Mike Castle 47-43 in the race for the Republican nomination for Delaware Senate contest that will be decided Tuesday. PPP’s Tom Jensen titles his analysis “Too Close to Call in Delaware.”

    So you’re wrong about “most polls,” and that’s a fact.

  28. anon
    “Have fun inside the bubble. Believe only the things that agree with your personal narrative”

    Have fun inside your moderate bubble and by all means, keep siding with left of center republicans and democrats, You might even decide to agree with Obamacare, if they can talk you into that too.
    Most moderate to liberal republicans think they are conservative and I’m sure you do too.

  29. There is no such thing as a “moderate bubble.” Or are you now claiming media outlets have a “moderate” bias?

  30. By the way, Don: Does the cat have your tongue on the O’Donnell polling issue? Is it that hard to write that you were wrong?

  31. Awesome, Don! The Pee Wee Herman retort! “I know you are, but what am I?” My grandkids used that on me just last week.

    Just for kicks, let’s point out that the Conservative Information Bubble is a defined thing which has been covered by media of all stripes and has led to things like Sean Hannity’s ratings tanking and Dick Morris being fired by FOX. There is no moderate bubble. And I’m not interested in your conservative measuring contest. I don’t want to be the most “conservative” person in the room, especially as defined by new-age phony modern “conservatism.”

    I want to be right, and to be able to prove it. And if I’m wrong, and there is concrete science or academic study to prove I’m wrong, then I want to absorb that new information into my thinking and maybe even -GASP- change my mind. That’s how I roll, and when the hard right of the GOP dropped that as an option, they started to lose.

  32. Geezer
    “By the way, Don: Does the cat have your tongue on the O’Donnell polling issue? Is it that hard to write that you were wrong?”

    BTW Geezer, people have lives and my isn’t glued to this blog 24-7, and you must have a little patience. But knowing you, you’re just out to sling crap, as always.
    What your little polls show is that they are over the place. They were up and they were down, depending on the poll you were reading, proving my point.

  33. “What your little polls show is that they are over the place. They were up and they were down, depending on the poll you were reading, proving my point.”

    This is blatantly false, and what’s more your smarter than this Don. Your refusal to admit that you were wrong reeks of arrogance.

    The polls before the election reflected what actually happened. Just like the Polls that said she’d get stomped by Coons turned out to be a pretty good reflection of what wound up happening there.

  34. Falcor
    I don’t trust polls and Geezer accepts them as facts when they are often wrong. No arrogance at all.

  35. Because you don’t seem to understand them. Polls are a snapshot in time of the current political mood. They are going to change as campaigns ebb and flow. Polls aren’t wrong, they just change. It’s a thermometer for a campaign, just because it changes doesn’t mean it is wrong. It just means that the temperature changed.

  36. “When O’Donnell beat Castle, most of, if not all of the polls had Castle in a large lead. I don’t trust polls and you do, so what!”

    And again, please feel free to back up this statement with some substance.

  37. Falcor
    “They are going to change as campaigns ebb and flow. Polls aren’t wrong, they just change.”

    Yes, they ebb and flow and are not reliable. I really don’t think they give just a snapshot of the moment but instead, they even can change hourly, based on the way a candidate is dressed or speaks at certain events. A couple of days later, the snapshot can change substantially.
    Although Geezer’s not wrong on the issue of O’Donnell, I believe that he is wrong about polls in general.

  38. “Yes, they ebb and flow and are not reliable.”

    Those are two entirely separate arguments…

    “A couple of days later, the snapshot can change substantially.”

    What does that have to do with reliability of polls? Has anyone involved in political polling ever denied this?

    “I really don’t think they give just a snapshot of the moment but instead, they even can change hourly, based on the way a candidate is dressed or speaks at certain events.”

    What in the name of misused commas does this even mean? They reflect the time they were taken and over the course of time give a broad picture of the general mood swings that can occur during a campaign.

  39. That’s it for me tonight Falcor. I won’t even comment on polls any longer. I know exactly where you are coming from and I’ve had a rotten day.

  40. “What your little polls show is that they are over the place. They were up and they were down, depending on the poll you were reading, proving my point.”

    No, what my comment pointed out was that there was only one poll. When you have a single poll, it can’t be “all over the place.” It was taken late in the week before the primary, and it showed O’Donnell with a 3-4 point lead. She won by 6, within the margin of error.

    You. Are. Wrong.

    Can’t admit it, can you? Your kind never can.

  41. “Falcor: Here is where you are wrong about polls:”

    That’s got nothing to do with what my argument.

Comments are closed.