Report Overstates Impact of Pa. Election Results on Tea Party Trends

Anyone who is registered Republican long enough knows that their party if fully capable of missing opportunities, sending the wrong message and losing where it should be winning. However, a front page report in the NYT about election results in Pa greatly overstates the local implications for the Tea Party movement and overall national trends…

Forget everything that has been written and said about the possibility of Republicans retaking the House this coming November in light of a “decisive victory” for Democrats in a special election held Tuesday, according to what passes for reporting in The New York Times.

Despite President Obama’s political difficulties, the Democratic message still has traction in competitive districts that will help decide control of the lower chamber, a front page report declares. Mark Critz, who served as the director of economic development for the late Rep. John Murtha, prevailed over Republican businessman Tim Burns.

Although the race was widely viewed as a possible pickup for Republicans, Critz made a strong appeal on the basis of local concerns that washed out attempts from the opposing side to nationalize the election, the report suggests. This was definitely a setback for Republicans and it should be reported as such. But to spin this as part of a larger trend that could negate the growing appeal of libertarian ideas is a stretch.

“Chastened Republicans conceded that they had made some missteps in the race and said they would make course corrections as they tried to capture Democratic swing districts, many of which have close parallels to the one retained by Democrats on Tuesday,” the report says.

Democratic operatives who spoke with the NYT claim that their candidate did an effective job of highlighting an improved economic climate and this outweighed any voter antipathy toward the Obama Administration. Looking ahead to the midterm elections, Republicans would be wise to conclude that public opposition toward Obama’s spending initiatives will not automatically translate into elections victories for them.

But, at the same time, the public’s growing appetite for a return to constitutionalism creates an opportunity for candidates who position themselves on the side of fiscal restraint to capitalize against big spenders. Unfortunately, the report places too much a premium on the Democratic spin to properly inform readers of some of the more important political lessons to be drawn from Tuesday.

And of course, no report from the NYT would be complete without the obligatory swipe at Tea Party activists. The following paragraph makes it clear that the pipeline between the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Gray Lady remains intact.

“Democrats said they believed the Republican victory in Kentucky of Rand Paul, a Tea Party favorite, had given them an opening to pick up a Republican-held Senate seat. They said Mr. Paul would face a strong challenge from Jack Conway, a Democrat who is the state’s attorney general, as well as a concerted effort by Democrats to define him as outside the mainstream. Democrats also pointed to the fact that Kentuckians voted in greater numbers in the Democratic primary than in the Republican contest.”

A more detached and dispassionate approach to the news might help The Times to see that the incumbents who went to defeat, including Sen. Arlen Specter, the Republican turned Democrat, all held influential positions on appropriation committees. Not so long ago, politicians could sell themselves on their ability to bring home the bacon. But this no longer seems in vogue.

Moreover, the election results also show that one man’s extremist is another man’s taxpayer champion. Rand Paul won almost 60 percent of the vote in Kentucky and is likely to be a formidable candidate with strong ties to the Tea Party movement.

While the public may not be in love with the Republican Party, any candidate who runs against intrusive federal measures retains a natural advantage in the 2010 races, contrary to what The Times has reported here.

Just ask Pennsylvania’s new Democratic Congressman Mr. Critz who staked out right of center positions in step with his district. Critz opposed ObamaCare and global warming legislation. He’s also an advocate of second amendment rights and opposes abortion.

These are not the sort of stances that normally win accolades from The New York Times.

Popularity: 6% [?]