Are Republicans sabotaging Allen?

George Allen, the incumbent Republican senator, finds himself locked in a close race with Democratic challenger Jim Webb. When this race started, it was supposed to be a cakewalk for Allen, who was high on the list of contenders for the nomination for President in 2008. But since August 11, the day of the fateful Breaks incident, Allen has been kept on the defensive, as one thing after another has rocked the campaign. Rather than spending time in primary states and coasting to victory with his huge warchest against an underfunded challenger, Allen has found that himself scrambling to answer multiple charges of racism, admitting that he has a Jewish background, and waiting for the next bombshell. What happened here? Could it be a case of Republicans eating one of their own?

Allen is no stranger to Virginia politics, having served in the state legislature, as a Congressional representative, as governor, and in his current role, as senator. When he first ran for the Senate in 2000, Charles “Chuck” Robb, the Democratic incumbent, tried to make an issue of Allen’s racial history:

Allen has been blasted by Robb for being “racially insensitive.” The Robb campaign cites his record of voting against the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday while Allen was a Virginia State delegate, and of establishing Virginia’s Confederate History Month as governor and of publicly opposing the Civil Rights Act of 1991 just prior to taking his congressional seat in 1992.

The Confederate Flag and the noose were also featured as a part of the 2000 campaign:

The campaign exchange was striking by any measure, but especially in a Virginia political culture that rarely discusses race so openly. Robb appeared at the state Capitol in Richmond with black leaders of a state Democratic Party that is widely circulating fliers lambasting Allen as a racial “extremist” who once “hung a Confederate flag in his home and hung a noose in his law office.”

Criticism of the Confederate History Month issue was news back in 1997. The book written by his sister, Fifth Quarter: The Scrimmage of a Football Coach’s Daughter, was published in 2000. None of this stuff stuck in 2000. What is different now?

I think the difference is his presidential ambitions. Had the Breaks incident not occurred, what we are seeing now would have come out next year, as Allen’s nomination opponents attempted to knock him out of contention. Witness the way that John McCain was attacked in 2000, with claims that he was mentally unstable, that his wife was a drug addict, and that he had fathered an illegitimate black child. Breaks allowed the other Republican presidential nomination contenders to release the dogs a year earlier. And Allen is getting it from both sides. In 2000, I could find no conservative publications commenting on Allen’s possible racism; this year, The Weekly Standard and National Review weighed in. The National Review also criticizing him for “race pandering” while the Sons of Confederate Veterans attacked him for degrading them, their flag and their heritage.

The effect here is an undercutting of support for Allen, with moderate voters, with black voters (who the Allen camp claims support him at a higher rate than other Republican candidates) and with the so-called “bubba” vote. Throughout all of this, the Webb campaign has been mostly silent, the netroots notwithstanding. I first suspected the Republicans were behind this when that CCC photo appeared. That kind of digging is the result of opposition research.

Would Republicans with presidential ambitions risk losing a Senate seat by pulling the trigger on this stuff now? I think so, mainly because of Maryland and Michael Steele. Maryland has long been Democratic stronghold, but with Steele in the race, it is in play for a Republican win. (More on this in a later post.) Besides, I don’t think they believe Allen will lose, especially because of the fundraising edge that Allen has. If Allen falls into the danger category and Steele looks like he may lose, expect to see the Republicans jump into this race at the last minute and do whatever they think is necessary to pull off the win.

18 thoughts on “Are Republicans sabotaging Allen?

  1. What about the dozens of videos on YouTube showing Allen saying macaca or Colbert making entire skits over it, and then Jon Stewart doing Allen spoofs night after night (all of which seem to be posted). And check out this independent anti-Allen ad that looks like something from MTV:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DGPbLl4V6g

    It seems like these will have a huge effect this November, and I have heard that YouTube has changed the playing field quite a bit. I’m not sure, but it does seem pretty likely Allen sabotaged himself and he did it on August 11.

  2. I think that George Allen never had any chance of getting the Republican nomination. I think that the republicans are angry with the tactics os portraying Webb as a machist. That´s a liberal, not a conservative tactic.

  3. For the record, I don’t believe Allen was ever going to be the nominee. Fear of a Hillary presidency was always going to drive the GOP to support McCain or Giuliani. HOWEVER, Allen was an ideal VP candidate to balance out that ticket. Romney is the biggest beneficiary of macaca now as he has to be considered the most likely no. 2 to run with McCain.

  4. I’m not so sure that Allen was not going to be the nominee. I’ve seen some stuff that said that he was the perfect blend of RR and GWB. Besides, although McCain has been at the top of the list, I’m not sure he’s going to win the nomination, either.

    Rice says she’s not running. I believe her. I don’t think she can win, even against Hillary.

  5. Guliani will never get the nomination. He’s had 4 wives, numerous affairs, he’s pro gay marriage and pro abortion. As much as I personally like him, I can’t see how he’ll win a republican primary in any state, with the possible exception of New York.

    McCain has the problem that republicans don’t like him. He’s a show horse. But I could envision him turning that around and winning a primary or two.

    Allen was, and is, my first choice. But after all that has happened in the last two months, I don’t see him winning the nomination, not in 2008. Perhaps in 2016.

    Romney is a good choice, has done some great things with health insurance in MA, but he’s got the Mormon thing going against him. There are just too many religious bigots in this country to elect him.

    Frist is awful, weird guy, weird manner, and done nothing as Senate leader. Forget Frist, he won’t win any primaries.

    Having said all of that, I firmly believe that any republican candidate will beat Hillary. No one fires up the republican base like Hillary!

  6. Phriendly – I had missed that post.
    The rest of y’all – I think we can agree that Allen won’t be the nominee. But does it bother you that it appears that Republicans are behind all of this?

Comments are closed.