Will "Insurgent" Candidates Help or Hurt the GOP?

By: Jeff Greenfield
Topics: Campaign 2010

Ken Buck accepts the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in a speech on Tuesday Aug. 10, 2010 in Loveland, Colo.

(Credit: AP)

You don't usually think of a Bob Dylan line when you think of trends in the Republican Party, but a fragment from "Subterranean Homesick Blues" sure seems to sum up the behavior of the rank-and-file this primary season: "don't follow leaders..."

GOP voters in Colorado this week joined in a trend that has rolled from one end of the country to the other this cycle: rejecting the candidate of state and national party leaders in favor of "outsiders."

Collectively, these party stalwarts have made a wager that will determine whether Republicans gain control of the Senate this November; a wager that is premised on the idea that these insurgent nominees will draw enough disaffected, "angry" voters to make up for the potential loss of centrists.

When Colorado Republicans chose District Attorney Ken Buck over former Lt. Governor Jane Norton, they chose a "movement conservative" whose views on issues such as Social Security (he seems at times to favor its radical restructuring, if not abolition) are far removed from those of more moderate Republicans. For these voters, however, Jane Norton's past experience made her part of the problem -- the problem being an out-of-touch overbearing government. In this sense, Colorado Republicans were following in the footsteps of five other states.

Back in 2009, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter was so sure he would lose the primary to ex-Rep Pete Toomey -- who almost beat him in 2004 --that he switched to the Democrats in a vain attempt to save his career (the ploy failed; he lost the Democratic primary to Rep. Joe Sestak).
Earlier his year, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist -- presumed to be the sure winner of an open Senate seat -- fled the GOP after it became clear he would lose in a landslide to Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio. Crist is now running as an independent, and is receiving the unofficial backing of many Democrats.
In Kentucky, the influence of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was not enough to keep Rand Paul (son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul) from winning the Republican primary, thus giving Democrats the hope that his views on the federal government (he expressed skepticism about the 1964 Civil Right Act) would make the race competitive.
In Utah, three-term Senator Bob Bennett, a staunch conservative, was denied re-nomination at the state Republican convention for the sin of voting for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. (Utah is so solidly Republican that Democrats have virtually no chance of mounting a challenge).
In Nevada, Republican voters shunned the establishment choice of former state senator Sue Lowden in favor of former state legislator Sharron Angle, who won with strong Tea Party support. Democrats in Nevada believe her nomination may enable Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a highly endangered incumbent, to survive. They take heart from the refusal of some prominent Nevada Republicans to endorse Angle.

So: have these Republican voters, in their enthusiasm for candidates who embody a strong sense of disaffection with "business as usual," made it harder for their party to win enough seats to take over the Senate?

The evidence is murky, as it well might be considering that the election is two and a half months away. Each of these "insurgent" candidates is either leading or tied with their chief opponents. And if the mid-term election turns into a "wave" -- where strong national trends overwhelm local concerns -- then these "outsiders" may well sweep into office.

Apart from November, however, the success of these campaigns has clearly had one significant impact on politics. It has made clear even to the most moderate of Republican Senators the high cost of crossing party lines and cooperating with President Obama -- who is viewed by the more militant wing of the Republican Party not as an adversary, or opponent, but as an enemy. If prospects of anything approaching "bipartisan cooperation" were bleak a year ago, they are just about non-existent now.

Obama, Tea Party Take Victory from Colo. Primary
Interactive Map: CBS News Election 2010 Race Ratings

Jeff Greenfield is CBS News' senior political correspondent. You can read more of his posts in Hotsheet here

25 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 25 Comments

by peggy97478 August 13, 2010 4:44 PM EDT

The "insurgent" candidates can't be any worse than the "good old boy's club" or the corrupt antics of this administration. Bring 'em on!! Go Tea Party!!!!!!!!!

If they screw up, we'll replace them when their term is up, OR Impeach them and throw them out. Term Limits Now!!!

Reply to this comment


by robbyr2 August 23, 2010 11:48 AM EDT: Please read the Constitution again. Impeachment doesn't happen to members of Congress. Impeachment can get rid of presidents but only if convicted of high crimes and misdemeanors.


by bassinapple August 13, 2010 3:22 PM EDT: I see CBS has picked up the JournoLists talking points. This article is bogus. It is straight out of the Democratic/ JournoLists playbook. It also explains why there is not outrage from CBS over the NH Democrats that have wished death threats on Sarah Palin. There would have been media outrage if it had been any other politician. Nice try, CBS but we see this article for what it is.; Reply to this comment

by larainemh August 13, 2010 2:09 PM EDT

The more insane the tea baggers and the Republicans become, the more they energize Democrats and Independents to get to the polls and vote against the fringe nut cases. The media say that Republicans are more likely to vote. God help America if they vote for the Angles, the Puals, and the Gohmers. Republicans--rethink your strategy before it's too late. If it's not already. And sane, sober Americans--vote. America needs you.

Reply to this comment


by peggy97478 August 13, 2010 4:47 PM EDT: lol! What a joke. The DemocRATS are about as "energized" as a sloth. Another one, Brian Baird, has decided to drop out and NOT run for re-election. Yeah, they are energized allright!


by tsigili August 13, 2010 9:45 AM EDT: The formation of new political parties in the US, has to happen. The lesser of 2 evils, is no longer good enough, to run the country.; Reply to this comment

by stn_sage August 13, 2010 9:14 AM EDT

First, there seems to be a misconception on the part of so-called mainstream media AND politicians that the Tea Party is synonymous with the Republican Party! It is not! If, that was the case, it would be called the Republican Party...

Second, whereas Republican politicians would like to kidnap and usurp it and make it their own; they need to face the reality that, that is not likely to happen!

Third, any Tea Party candidates will be pursing their agenda, NOT the agenda of the Republican Party!

Fourth, if the Republican Party wants to neutralize or absorb the Tea Party, then the solution is very simple; all they have to do is MODERATE their views and positions, failing that, the Tea Party will remain a viable alternative to the Republican Party for people 'right' of the Democrat Party!

Reply to this comment


by jimbom121 August 13, 2010 9:54 AM EDT: Its not a true misconception. Look at the faces of the Tea Party movement...Dick Army, Rick Scott, Sarah Palin..all Republicans. Michelle Bachman started a Tea Party caucus in the house.


by robbyr2 August 23, 2010 11:39 AM EDT: The Tea Party is so far to the right, I expect to see brownshirts and skinheads joining up before long.

Buck is a nut job. End SS? End Medicare? Abolish a federal role in giving a fair shot to kids to live the American dream? Abolish the Energy Dept and let pollution kill us all? Pretty mainstream. I'm glad I get the chance to vote for anyone but him.


by bpai99 August 12, 2010 11:37 PM EDT: It's quite striking to see how much anger, hate and a sense of grievance characterize American conservatism today. The degree to which conservatives hold only contempt for those who disagree, view non-Christians and non-conservatives as inferior, and threaten violence or secession to achieve their ends increases daily. People can murder doctors, defend racism, torture prisoners, advocate treason, ignore orders of the Commander in Chief, and disobey the law of the land while be hailed as heroes and attracting legions of supporters - as long as they claim to support conservative beliefs.; Reply to this comment


by bradkt1 August 12, 2010 10:24 PM EDT: It depends on who the candidates are and whether they have been properly vetted. If they have been successful in their prior careers and are of good character, they have a decent shot at getting elected. This time around, lack of political experience probably won't be a significant handicap and in many races will be a plus.

If a candidate has taken a number of extreme positions in the past, it's going to be a lot harder to attract the support of voters in the middle. They are the ones who are going to provide the margin of victory. Finally, whichever candidate is more successful at getting his or her supporters to the polls usually wins.

Voter turnout will be the key.; Reply to this comment


by Willyum40 August 12, 2010 9:28 PM EDT: I am sure that quite a few of the Tea Bag folks are honorable and decent Americans. However they remind me of those poor souls who followed Jim Jones. God help us if a few of these candidates enter the halls of Congress.; Reply to this comment


by thanksgreed August 12, 2010 9:16 PM EDT: The Tea Party will not be taken seriously until they produce candidates that are not caricatures.; Reply to this comment


by velma179 August 12, 2010 8:06 PM EDT: I have a feeling the Democrats will fare far better in November than the current "pundit predictions card" states.

Congressional elections are local in nature ... and a lot of people turn away from extreme candidates, whether left extreme or right extreme. They just don't want these people representing them. And after all, elections per the US Constitution ... are all about representative government, not democracy.

We'll see, but in my little neck of the woods... I have found a lot of "old order, truly fiscally conservative - but not crazy big government in personal lives socially conservative" Republicans are totally aghast at what the party has become.; Reply to this comment