GOP Should Pick its Fights
This election cycle is proving such a target-rich environment for Republicans that they are now at risk of missing the long-term requirements for creating a lasting Senate majority.
Even before Scott Brown won in Massachusetts, Republicans were looking at Senate pickups in true-blue Delaware, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Connecticut. Now Barbara Boxer appears vulnerable in California.
Republicans need to recognize that these opportunities are a mixed blessing. A win is a win – but some wins are better than others.
Consider the example of Connecticut. Several weeks ago, when Chris Dodd announced his retirement, the conventional wisdom was that Democrats had dodged a bullet. By substituting the popular Democratic attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, for the walking-dead Dodd, Democrats had foiled what was practically a sure pickup for the Republicans in 2010.
However, had Republicans "won" in Connecticut, the NRSC and RNC would have then been duty-bound in 2016 to defend the seat at great expense and with very little hope of victory. Like Peter Fitzgerald who defeated the inept Carol Moseley Braun in Illinois in 1998, this Republican win would likely be a one-off event. Democrats themselves will face this problem in 2012 and 2014, defending seats in Alaska, Montana, and North Carolina.
By contrast, consider what now looks like a sure-fire win in North Dakota. The likely pick-up of Byron Dorgan's seat demonstrates the cascading potential of pickups in Republican territory. Baring a wave election or scandal, his seat is now effectively a permanent Republican one for the foreseeable future. Just as importantly, that seat will not be costly to defend, both because red state media markets tend to be smaller and because the Democratic candidate will be the one making a difficult sell to a generally conservative electorate. Over time, wins in Republican territory will free up money for the financing of campaigns in purple and blue territory.
The situation in North Dakota should remind Republicans of the remarkable long-term vulnerability of Senate Democrats in red states. There are currently 12 seats held by Democrats in states where Republicans now routinely win in presidential elections: Louisiana (1); Arkansas (2); Alaska (1); West Virginia (2); Montana (2); North Dakota (2); South Dakota (1); Nebraska (1). Add in states that have swung toward the Democrats in recent years, and have the potential to swing away absent the incompetence of the Bush presidency and the resuscitation of Obama euphoria, and Democrats face another 8 vulnerable seats: Florida (1); North Carolina (1); Virginia (2); Colorado (2); Indiana (1); Nevada (1).
By comparison, Republicans occupy exactly three seats in obviously Democratic territory: Maine (2); and Iowa (1). The Democrats' march to 60 did not begin with wins in Virginia and Colorado – it began by locking down the Northeast and Pacific coast where the electorate identified more naturally with the aims and philosophy of the Democratic Party.
The last year was one of soul-searching for conservative writers, if not conservative politicians. After the blowouts of 2006 and 2008, was Reaganite conservatism spent? With the GOP crushed in the Northeast and Great Lakes states, did the party of southerners and evangelicals need to minimize moral issues in order to appeal to educated exurban voters? Or did the GOP need to focus on the promotion of social equality, including through the continued promotion of social issues, to appeal to a post-industrial workforce that was underemployed and economically pinched?
Republicans who reject these inquiries and instead propose doubling down on 30-year old policies with little examination of the obvious difficulties in securing governing majorities are foolish. At the same time, while it might be important to shift the party's direction in some respects, it is important to remember that the existing message is probably good enough as-is to take and hold the dozen seats in Republican states that are currently occupied by Democrats.
What is missing is the institutional apparatus to make these victories happen. Yesterday's announcement by Congressman Pence that he would not run against Evan Bayh in Indiana was extremely disappointing for the GOP. But Republicans should not be in a position where they have to wait for a perfect cycle and a perfect candidate to win that seat. The party should be engaged in the longer term planning necessary to defeat established Democratic incumbents in states with a generally conservative electorate. The NRSC, with complete leadership and staff turnover every cycle, is not the one to do it. The RNC, too, tends to be overly focused on the immediate election cycle. The movement of these red state Senate seats into the GOP column is a longer-term project that will require significant angel financing to create independent institutions with consistent leadership and a single-minded dedication to winning seats for the GOP in traditionally Republican territory.
And though the lesson of 2004 and 2008 is apparently that there are no permanent majorities, the creation of these institutions would stabilize the GOP's footing in the Senate significantly enough to liberate the party to responsibly finance excursions into Democratic regions.