Sore Losers

This year, it seems, has really been the year for sore losers on the Republican side of aisle. Back in May, Charlie Crist, the sitting governor of Florida, was badly trailing his more conservative rival for the GOP Senate nomination, Marco Rubio. So what did Charlie do? He left the Republican Party and decided to run for the Senate as an independent. When asked which party he would caucus with if elected, he said he would caucus "with the people of Florida." (That statement appears to be in English but that's about all I can decipher about it.) More recently, Tea Party candidate Joe Miller upset the heavily favored GOP incumbent Lisa Murkowski in the Alaska Republican Senate primary. Murkowski's response was to announce that she would continue to run as a write-in candidate. (I won't let the voters' decision stand in my way!)

The reason Crist and Murkowski lost (or were sure to lose) their GOP primaries is because they did not have their finger on the pulse of rank-and-file GOP voters. Republican voters are in no mood for compromise this year. They are angry. Angry about record deficits, record spending, health care reform, cap-and-trade, bailouts, stimulus bills, government takeover of industry, etc. They want dramatic change in Washington, and they are looking for people who share their anger and who will represent their interests and concerns. Murkowski and Crist, as well as other GOP frontrunner candidates such as Rick Lazio, Mike Castle, and Trey Grayson, were rejected by Republican voters because they were establishment candidates who were comfortable with the status quo.

However, for people like Crist and Murkowski, neither party loyalty nor voters' decisions matter much. Their egos have fooled them into believing they are indispensable to the Senate and to the country, and their thirst for power has led them to disregard both primary results and prior promises (in Crist's case, at least). What matters to them is not advancing the cause of the Republican Party or of conservative principles. What matters is their personal career. And it is especially ironic because for years the media has been lecturing us on how conservatives in the party are threatening the "big tent." Yet it is the moderates and liberals in the party, not the conservatives, that are demonstrating real disloyalty to the party. And in fact, there is a long tradition of liberal Republican disloyalty stretching from Jim Jeffords to Arlen Specter.

Now, I admit that my perspective on party loyalty is colored somewhat by my political beliefs. For example, I was happy about Joe Lieberman running as an independent in Connecticut in 2006 when he lost the Democratic primary. Inconsistent? Perhaps. But Lieberman's decision did not put the seat in jeopardy of Republican takeover, as the token GOP candidate in the race was extremely weak and underfunded and never broke out of single digits in the polls. Also, Lieberman did not change his views, either during the campaign or after getting re-elected, and he continued to caucus with his party. Crist, on the other hand, has changed his views dramatically, flip-flopping on everything from gay rights and abortion to health care reform and taxes. He is really trying to run as a de facto Democrat. This demonstrates what an unprincipled and opportunistic person he truly is. Finally, Lieberman never promised not to run as an independent. Crist, on the other hand, looked right into the TV cameras and solemnly promised to remain in the Republican Party just TWO WEEKS before leaving the party and running as an independent.

While Crist's independent bid appears to be purely self-interested and opportunistic, Murkowski's write-in bid looks to be more of a grudge match. Her speech last week launching her write-in candidacy betrayed a great deal of anger against Joe Miller, whom she called an "extremist," and against Sarah Palin, a long-time political adversary whom she also mentioned by name. Essentially, Murkowski is bitter about Palin's defeat of her father in the 2006 gubernatorial primary and furious about Miller's gall in challenging and defeating her, and so she is purposely running to try to destroy Miller's candidacy and embarrass Palin. After all, does she really have a chance of winning as a write-in candidate? Only once in American history has a write-in candidate ever won election to the U.S. Senate (and that one time was nearly a century ago, if memory serves me right). Murkowski is very unlikely to win, and she knows that. But she is hoping to damage Joe Miller and be a spoiler in the race.

One other point. Readers who remember my strong support for independent Tea Party affiliated candidate Doug Hoffman in the special election for the New York 23rd district congressional race last November may see an inconsistency here as well. However, I consider that race very different from the Murkowski and Crist races for a couple of reasons. First, the Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava, was not chosen by the voters. Instead of winning a primary, she was chosen by a small group of (apparently very out-of-touch) party leaders. Second, Scozzafava was an extreme liberal. She supported most of the Democratic Party's agenda -- everything from card check to cap-and-trade to unfettered abortion, and expressed openness to the Democrat's health care reform bill as well. She even had ties to ACORN! She gave conservatives absolutely no reason to support her. Most Republicans and conservatives rallied around Hoffman, dropping Scozzafava to a distant third. She then dropped out of the race altogether a few days before the election and endorsed the Democrat, further demonstrating her true colors.

I am optimistic that both Joe Miller and Marco Rubio will win their Senate races comfortably, despite their sore loser third-party opponents. However, there is still potential that Crist and Murkowski could end up costing Republicans these seats. Hopefully, these cases will serve as an important reminder to voters to avoid politicians with an "R" after their name who seem to lack real principle and conviction. And hopefully, the losses of these two turncoats (and of Arlen Specter earlier this year) will serve as a warning to future would-be political opportunists.