On National Review Jim Geraghty suggests that there might be corruption – grifters, to use his lovely word – in the fund-raising arm of the conservative movement:
Why is the conservative movement not as effective as its supporters want it to be? Because day after day, year after year, little old ladies get called on the phone or emailed or sent letters in the mail telling them that the future of the country is at stake and that if they don’t make a donation to groups that might as well be named Make Telemarketers Wealthy Again right now, the country will go to hell in a handbasket. Those little old ladies get out their checkbooks and give what they can spare, convinced that they’re making a difference and helping make the world a better place. What they’re doing is ensuring that the guys running these PACs can enjoy a more luxurious lifestyle. Meanwhile, conservative candidates lose, kicking the dirt after primary day or the general election, convinced that if they had just had another $100,000 for get-out-the-vote operations, they might have come out on top.
What’s more, most of these PACs thrive on telling conservative grassroots things that aren’t true. Clarke didn’t want to run for Senate in Wisconsin, Laura Ingraham wasn’t interested in running for Senate in Virginia, and Allen West wasn’t running for Senate in Florida. The PACs propagate a narrative in which they’re the heroic crusaders for conservative values, secure borders and freedom, up against corrupt establishment elites . . . when they’re in fact run by those coastal political operatives and keeping most of the money for their own operations.
Perhaps you’re thinking, “Oh, every PAC does this.” Nope. In that RightWingNews study, Club for Growth Action PAC had 88 percent actually went into independent expenditures and direct contributions. Republican Main Street Partnership had 78 percent, and American Crossroads was at 72 percent. That allegedly corrupt “establishment” is way more efficient at using donors’ money than all of these self-proclaimed grassroots conservative groups. Over on the liberal or Democratic side, ActBlue charges a 3.95 percent processing fee when passing along donations to campaigns.
Does Geraghty manage to carry this through to the entire conservative movement as currently constituted?
Imagine if instead of disappearing down rat holes and being spent on more fundraising, just $10 million of that $127 million to $177 million sum had been better spent. Imagine if that $10 million had gone to the campaigns of the GOP candidates in the 20 House districts that they lost by five percentage points or less in 2018. That’s $500,000 per campaign. If Mia Love had 625 more votes in Utah, she would have held her seat. Think she and her campaign could have identified and mobilized another 700 Love-supporting voters in her district if they had another half-million?
In California’s 21st District, David Valadao lost by about 900 votes. In Maine’s 2nd, Bruce Poliquin needed about 3,500 more votes. In Georgia’s 6th, Karen Handel needed 8,000 more votes.
If Leonard Lance had about 16,000 more votes, he would have kept his seat. Maybe not every one of these close races would be reversed if each one of those GOP candidates had another half million for GOTV. But right now, Republicans need to flip 19 seats to regain control of the House. Doing just 2.25 percentage points better in 2018 would have saved 13 seats!
It doesn’t occur to him that the rot may have spread, does it?
Look, it’s not impossible that the GOP elected officials have remained pristine while the conservative PACs have become infected with grifters, but the antics we’ve seen from elected GOP officials since the turn of the century have to make one dubious, don’t they? Sure, there seems to be a few, such as Senator Paul Rand (R-KY), Governors Hogan and Kasich, and a few others who seem to be operating on some sort of honor system, even if Rand is a flake; but so many of the rest, from Gingrich to McConnell to Nunes to, well, how far do I have to go? Hunter? Collins? Gianforte? Everyone who votes for second-class conservative judges? Throw in the legislation such as faux tax reform of 2017, the failed ACA-replacement, the utterly exotic behavior of the NRA, and it’s just a little hard not to think that Geraghty is indulging in wishful thinking, rather than sober assessment of the conservatives.
Conservative folks come in two brands. There are those who think it’s me and me only, taking offence at the very thought that society contributes to their success.
And then there’s the social conservatives who are part of that social web that shows up at the houses of the physically afflicted, help drive them to medical appointments, that sort of thing. The backbone of the community, as it were.
The first brand preys on the second, while the second prays for the first.
Kevin Drum has his opinion as well, which just may be mine in different words.
