Electing Moderate Dems Could Benefit Conservatives

Supporters of moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava in the race for New York's 23rd congressional seat are concerned that conservatives backing challenger Doug Hoffman will split the right vote and cede the seat to the Democrats. While this would be a bad result for the Republican party, voters should ask themselves if a Democratic win might not be better for conservatives.

NM contributor Dennis Sanders discussed the controversy over the NY-23 congressional race. As Dennis noted, there are three candidates running, Republican Dede Scozzafava, Democrat Bill Owens, and Conservative Doug Hoffman. Dede Scozzafava by all accounts is a more liberal Republican by national standards across the board, and Doug Hoffman is more, well, conservative.  That much is true.  However, as the Albany Project has also illustrated, Bill Owens is generally considered a more moderate Democrat, and that is what is giving many conservatives pause about the race, in a way that Mark Kirk in Illinois and Michael Castle in Delaware have not in their respective Senate races.

Keep in mind what Texas GOP Rep. Jeb Hensarling said, or implied in his defense of Scozzafava: Bill Owens is the sort of Democrat who can hold a seat in a Republican district for a long time, and I think that's because of the more moderate tack that he has taken.  Bad for Republicans, yes.  But is it bad for conservatives? Particularly if he wins with less than 50% of the vote in his first race?  As the healthcare debate has shown, moderate Democrats can do a lot to gum up the works even when the Democrats have the majority.  And they will most likely have the majority even after 2010.

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who lives by the the motto, "I'm a Conservative, not a Republican!"  Assume further that you don't seriously believe Doug Hoffman will make it to the magic 34% needed to win.  What would you rather have, then? A Republican who will give "us" trouble, or a Democrat who might give "them" trouble?

Because that's the question that the Party of Scozzafava needs to answer in NY-23 if they really need the votes and money from the Party of Hoffman.  Saying that "we need to win seats outside of the South" won't cut it; the main guy pushing the "Republicans are nothin' but a white, southern, regional party" line across every comments box on the Internet, Markos Moulitsas, endorsed Scozzafava.  Saying 'this is a must-win race' won't cut it because, regionalism aside, it's one seat out of 435, a super-miniscule majority in the House of Representatives would be about as stable as it was for the New York State Senate, and is not very likely anyhow.  Saying Scozzafava has the money and institutional support to run the race is fair enough, but isn't exactly an election slogan, and contradicts the fact that if you're the NRCC, you're asking people to pour even more money in.

All that aside, the Republican Party of New York seems to be answering the question well enough, for now.  Scozzafava is, in fact, leading.  For now.  Conservatives outside the district may be making noise, but it hasn't taken Doug Hoffman past 20% (or, as I call it, "Daggett Range").  For now.

Still, it's certainly a race to keep an eye on.  As you can tell from the above, I'm pretty neutral. I don't live in the district, so it's my right.

But what if I did live in the district?  What would I do?

That's easy.  I'd move.

I mean, do you realize how high the taxes are in New York state?