GOP's response if Trump is nominee: At least we're not socialists

Republicans looking to retain the Senate are confident they can do so, no matter who the GOP presidential nominee is. 

|
Michael Bonfigli/The Christian Science Monitor
Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and Ward Baker (l.), the NRSC's executive director, speak to reporters at a Monitor Breakfast in Washington Thursday.

While the nation wonders whether New Hampshire means a President Trump or President Sanders, another consequential race is at hand – for control of the United States Senate. 

This year, Republicans, who won control of the Senate in 2014, have 24 seats to defend. Democrats need only five – or four, if they win the White House – to take back the majority. 

In an election of “stark consequences,” where four new Supreme Court justices may face Senate confirmation, Republicans plan to keep their majority by touting their accomplishments, warning against “socialist” Democrats, and focusing on the unique characteristics of each race, said two guests at a Monitor breakfast Thursday.

“We think we can run on our record,” said Sen. Roger Wicker (R) of Mississippi, who chairs the committee tasked with winning Senate seats for the GOP. 

Under the leadership of Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky, the Senate last year passed a bipartisan highway bill, education bill, a fix to a perennial Medicare problem, and permanent tax cuts – all of which became law. It was one of the most productive Congresses in recent years.

But right along with that positive message came a message of fear, delivered with precision by Ward Baker, executive director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. 

When asked about the potential negative affect that Donald Trump or Texas Sen. Ted Cruz might have on GOP Senate races if either were the nominee, Mr. Baker turned the tables to warn against the Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders, the self-declared democratic socialist from Vermont, or Hillary Clinton.

“Any one of our candidates would be much better than the declared socialist or the undeclared socialist,” Mr. Baker said. “The last thing that [Americans] need, for their safety, and for their future, and for their children” is either Senator Sanders or Ms. Clinton, he said. 

In a forceful tone, Baker – a former Marine – said the Democratic candidates “want to cut back on the military … make this country less safe, and … bring prisoners, terrorists from Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to Colorado.”

A leaked September 2015 memo by Baker – “Observations on Donald Trump and 2016” – warned committee staff that “Trump is a misguided missile” who says what’s on his mind. That’s “a problem,” the memo said, because candidates will “have to spend full time defending him or condemning him if that continues.”

At the breakfast, Baker said it would be “malpractice” not to be prepared for whoever the nominee is, and that the committee staff has looked at the down-ballot implications of each of the presidential candidates. 

He then repeated his talking point, “no matter who the nominee is from our party, they will be better than the undeclared socialist or the socialist of the Democratic Communist Party” – to which, in an apparently calming gesture, the gentler Wicker briefly touched the arm of his colleague.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to GOP's response if Trump is nominee: At least we're not socialists
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/monitor_breakfast/2016/0211/GOP-s-response-if-Trump-is-nominee-At-least-we-re-not-socialists
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe