Crazy Republicans Can Be A Godsend For Democrats

It really wasn’t all that long ago when, in order to win a party’s nomination for pretty much any office in US politics, you had to be approved by the party’s powerbrokers.

by Michael John Scott

You can picture a bunch of guys, Republicans or Democrats, but always guys, never gals, sitting around a table in a smoke-filled room, playing cards and ‘jawboning.’  It was here they’d decide which guy they liked and how much he could do for them.

When it was all said and done, this was the guy who would be on the ballot. The process filtered out those who hadn’t paid their dues or might embarrass the party come election day.

But that was then, and this is now. These days, as evidenced by the results of the 2016 election, any idiot can run, and given the right circumstances, might even win. You can probably think of one important example.

By all accounts it appears Democrats are looking at a wave election, perhaps even a tsunami, in 2018 to ride them right back into power.  As these events start to unfold should they be flag waving for Republicans to nominate the craziest, most extreme candidates they can, or might that pose too great a risk if one of them should win?

Senator Jeff Flake, no fan of Donald Trump, is retiring and his seat is pretty much up for grabs.  One of those looking to grab it is Joe Arpaio, the guy who was convicted and later pardoned by Trump for defying a court order on racial profiling.

That, however, might have been the least-bad thing Arpaio did in his years as Maricopa County sheriff.

If you want to take a look at the real Joe Arpaio,  there’s a good roundup here of his reign of terror.  This includes over the top racial discrimination, horrific mistreatment of prisoners, and targeting his political enemies for harassment. In one particularly bizarre case, staging a fake assassination attempt and framing an innocent man for the fictional crime. That’s the real Joe Arpaio

Now make no mistake, Joe is popular, at least on Fox News, however, it’s fair to say that the Republican Party would rather he not be their nominee. From the Democrats’ perspective, however, there are a couple of ways to look at the race.

On one hand, Arpaio’s extremism might make him the easiest candidate to beat, particularly in a state that is closely divided but still leans slightly to the right (Trump won there in 2016 by 3.5 points). On the other hand, what if he actually won? Think about that.

I submit Arpaio getting the nomination might well be the best outcome for Democrats, for the same reasons that can be applied to races elsewhere.

First, what is the real downside? For all the prestige of the office, senators don’t have a lot of independent power. Unlike mayors, governors, or presidents, they don’t have a bureaucracy and a budget at their disposal to indulge their nefarious impulses.  As a result what damage would an Arpaio be able to do?

Well, he’d certainly give a lot of red-faced, passionate, half literate speeches about nonsense, but when it came time to cast votes, he’d be pretty much like any other Republican. One way or another, however, his candidacy will bring national attention, making the Republican party seem even more irresponsible and extreme than it already is, particularly to young voters and minorities.

Think about Roy Moore in Alabama, before his interest in teenage girls came to light. In that particular case, Republicans nominated not only their most extreme candidate, but the one who had a scandal in the wings just waiting to be revealed. That revelation is what led to the Democrats now holding a Senate seat from Alabama.

While Moore’s case is certainly unique, we’ve seen this pattern many times in recent years: Republican primary voters gripped in a Tea Party fervor nominate the nuttiest candidate in the race, who then proceeds to lose what would have been a winnable election.

Let’s take a look at them as listed byTheWeek:

There was Todd Akin, who in the red state of Missouri torpedoed his 2012 bid by telling an interviewer that rape and incest exceptions for abortion bans weren’t all that important because “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try and shut that whole thing down.”

There was Richard Mourdock of Indiana, who blew his own Senate candidacy two months later on the same subject, saying that if a woman is raped and gets pregnant “it is something that God intended to happen.”

There was Sharron Angle, who lost a 2010 race to Harry Reid in Nevada after saying all kinds of controversial things, including that “if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies.”

And then there’s my favorite, Christine O’Donnell of Delaware, who not only inflated her resume but was forced to air an ad that began with the words, “I’m not a witch.” For Democrats, these candidates’ missteps were like deus ex machinas that appeared out of nowhere to rescue them from electoral defeat.

Now, simply because those candidates never made it to the Senate is no guarantee that other extremists won’t in the future.  Just take a look at 2016.  In 2018, however, Republicans could find themselves saddled with even more nutbars than they have in the past and here’s why:

This year is looking so dire for the GOP that any sensible Republican contemplating a run for higher office would decide to sit the election out and wait for a more favorable environment.

As Politico recently noted, not only have none of the many Senate Democrats up for re-election in 2018 who are also contemplating a presidential run gained a serious Republican challenger,

“Republican leaders have failed to secure their top-choice candidate in eight of the 10 Senate races in states that Trump won in 2016.”

According to TheWeek:

“those willing to take the risk are more likely to be the ideologues, the crusaders, and the unhinged. The more controversy they generate, the more an already excited Democratic electorate will become eager to turn out on election day, making the party’s goal of taking back the Senate that much easier to achieve.”

Fact is if you’re a Democrat looking with horror and disgust at the candidacy of someone like a Joe Arpaio, worry not. He’s probably the best thing for your party.

About Post Author

Professor Mike

Professor Mike is a left-leaning, dog loving, political junkie. He has written dozens of articles for Substack, Medium, Simily, and Tribel. Professor Mike has been published at Smerconish.com, among others. He is a strong proponent of the environment, and a passionate protector of animals. In addition he is a fierce anti-Trumper. Take a moment and share his work.

professormike05@gmail.com

Happy

0 0 %

Sad

0 0 %

Excited

0 0 %

Sleepy

0 0 %

Angry

0 0 %

Surprise

0 0 %