A view from a conservative perch

Sometimes as a moderate or realist, it is tricky to comprehend how certain liberal or conservatives politicians or commentators think. They offer opinions that reflect their ideologies, but are they just the best perspectives for their side? During this chaotic primary season, we have seen base voters especially and most prominently conservative voters choosing candidates that might not be the strongest in a general election. Winning base voters is only half the battle as to win competitive elections, you need to appeal to Independents and even some opposing party voters. House races allow more conservative or more liberal candidates to thrive. But, some House districts do provide a tense matchup and one must monitor how extreme they get with their believes. That is taken further in Senate races, where you definitely have to campaign for votes outside of your base in the majority of races.

So, to allow a little perspective into the conservative mind; I turned to Marc Thiessen and a pair of articles written by Thiessen. Both of Thiessen's articles point to staying true to your ideology despite better party prospects if conservatism is not the only option. Thiessens's opinion has been shared by other conservatives as they will almost certainly the U.S. House back, but their pure ideology stance might cost the Republicans the U.S. Senate; something they are okay with.

The first article by Thiessen spoke of true conservatives in the U.S. Congress. One of the last surprises of the primary season was Christine O'Donnell's victory over Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE-AL) in the Republican primary in Delaware. Her victory was made possible due to much outside support including Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC). Members of the "establishment" were not exactly happy with DeMint's move. However, for those like Thiessen; he was embracing a "true conservative". Someone who does not fall under that label for many like Thiessen is Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). Murkowski lost the Republican primary in Alaska to Joe Miller, the Tea Party candidate; but is going to run as an Independent. That decision does not sit well with conservatives who fall more in line with DeMint's thinking and actions. Murkowski lost and that should be reason enough for her to fade into the background.

For conservatives like Thiessen, Murkowski should be attacked the same way DeMint was. She should be viewed as an Independent and not a member of the Republican minority in the U.S. Senate. He points to others like Charlie Crist in Florida doing the same thing and betraying the party for their own personal interests. Thiessen's analysis is part of the hazed view on that perch because Republican primary voters are not the only voters voting in states like Alaska or Florida this November. That is why Murkowski is running: she represents a comprehensive group of the voting electorate while Miller only truly appeals to the conservative base voters that paved the way to his victory. Plus, one must always consider complacency as several Murkowski voters stayed home not giving Miller a chance; the opening he needed to close the gap so fast.

For true conservatives, it is candidates like Murkowski who are dividing the party as opposed to the Tea Party candidates. It has been the Tea Party and their energy at the base of the Republican Party that is giving Republicans the opportunity to regain the U.S. House and/or the U.S. Senate this fall. Thus, when comments regarding Tea Party candidates costing more victories; Thiessen and others find that hard to believe.

It is best to stick to ideologies and principles. That is what leads to Thiessen's second piece. Having a majority without true conservatives is not the desired result for those supporting the conservative movement this year. It would be better to still be the minority with a growing number of conservatives in Congress. Conservatives dedicated to cutting spending and not conducting business as usual. That is what candidates like Castle in Delaware represented. Or what Murkowski represents in Alaska.

As Thiessen sees it, the Tea Party and conservatives around the country are reshaping not only the country in their minds, but reforming the Republican Party. The Republican Party has committed some faults over time that bring about outsider candidates in so many primaries. It is where the energy is driven and at the core of more conservative candidates winning primaries. So are more viable than others, but a few losses are worth it if over the next couple election cycles a conservative majority is elected to the U.S. Congress.

Being in the minority in the Senate is not terrible if there is close to 50/50 membership from both parties. Having more than 40 seats associated with the minority party allows it to filibuster and prevent legislation from being "rammed through". That is why minimal gains is an accepted outcome because more conservatives like a Rand Paul in Kentucky or Marco Rubio in Florida would rein in the Democratic control.

The Olympia Snowes or Susan Collinses are viewed negatively amongst conservatives because they have voted with Democrats in the past. Potentially new senators like Paul or Rubio would be much less likely inclined to flip as easily on matters important to conservatives.

Thiessen views the results of 2010 with primary challengers will force more moderate Republicans to gauge what they do because they could end up like Castle and others falling short in party primaries due to more challenges from the far right.

Ultimately as Thiessen sees it from his perspective:

Bottom line: Positive change in the Senate does not depend on the GOP taking the majority in November. Besides, even if Republicans were to win the House and Senate, President Obama is not likely to respond by declaring "the era of big government is over." The only way to end the era of big government is to elect a majority of fiscal conservatives. If that requires a few election cycles, so be it.

That seems to be what the view from the conservative perch is becoming and is. Democrats tend to bend on their ideologies when necessary while Republicans are only becoming more and more tied to their ideology. It is an all or nothing strategy that Thiessen and others like DeMint are willing to stick to. It might reap some successes or some failures, but it is staying true to their base. That seems to be the ultimate takeaway as the Republican Party is being reformed too much by their far right and conservative base.