The Tears of a PAC

I have one question for The National Republican Trust PAC.  Just what did you think you were spending your money on when you backed Scott Brown as a moderate republican challenger for a senate seat in liberal Massachusetts?

The National Republican Trust spent nearly $100,000 last year to help Scott Brown win the U.S. Senate seat of the late Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, but now the conservative political group wishes it had that money back to help kick Mr. Brown out of office.

Saying the Republican senator is no different from a Democrat, the head of the group is calling for Mr. Brown to donate to charity or disgorge campaign money equal to how much the trust spent supporting him during the 2010 campaign.

The National Republican Trust, which also supported Christine O’Donnell’s disastrous Senate bid, is feeling betrayed these days. Apparently $100,000 did not buy them the amount of influence they had hoped for when they ran ads for Brown last January.  Claiming that Brown’s vote was the vote needed to defeat the health care bill, the PAC went all in to try to connect Scott Brown’s victory with the up and coming Tea Party “movement.”

One problem:  Brown never ran as a Tea Party republican.

How quickly one year and a republican surge in Congress changes things.  Now that Brown’s vote is no longer the crucial supermajority breaker that it was in 2010, the PAC is looking to defeat their one-time golden boy.

…The National Republican Trust PAC, raised and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to help Scott Brown win the Massachusetts special election to fill the seat vacated upon the death of Ted Kennedy. That organization will now do everything possible to see that Brown is defeated by a primary opponent when he faces reelection in 2012. Why? Because there is no difference between him and a Democrat.

In a scene reminiscent of last fall’s Delaware senate race, it seems that the PAC is willing to jeopardize a winnable seat in the name of purity.  From the Washington Times piece:

But if conservatives who helped boost Mr. Brown’s profile now feel betrayed by his votes in the Senate, more liberal Massachusetts voters may not agree. A recent poll by Public Policy Polling in December found that Mr. Brown was leading potential Democratic challengers by 7 percent or more.

At some point even the purity republicans are going to have to understand that the reason a moderate/liberal republican won in Massachusetts is because that is the only kind of republican that can win there at this time.  The same goes for Maine and the same was proven to be true in Delaware.  Run Christine O’Donnell or Sharron Angle in Massachusetts.  See how they do.

The National Republican Trust’s actions appear to be a mixture of publicity seeking (had you ever heard of them before this story) and sour grapes brought on by lost influence over a candidate that they thought they could mold into the Tea Party candidate that they wanted all along.  Scott Brown is not my favorite senator.  But I am pleased to see a true moderate that is not beholden to the far right.

This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Tears of a PAC

  1. Drae says:

    It’s the same reason Bachmann is no longer considering a run for Senate. Minnesota is still too liberal to moderate to elect her in a statewide race. Perhaps the National Republican Trust PAC would like to convince Michele to run anyways and see what it gets them. Here’s a hint – think Delaware.

    It’s like they don’t learn.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s