Redstate

than to vote to surrender our country to terrorists.

are for the most part angry about pocketbook issues. IF they feel their money is threatened by the Dems, then they'll put the GOP back in power.

Signature disclaimer: I'm not currently paid by any campaign, but I am available. Current preferences for President: 1) F.Thompson; 2) Romney; 3) McCain; 4) Gingrich; Guiliani removed 04/03/07

I think his defeat is largely attributed to the fact that he didn't know he had a race on his hands until it was too late. He beat Boyda by 15 points in 2004 and probably just assumed he would do so again without much effort. He obviously knows he has to campaign hard to win the seat back, so I don't think a lack of effort and planning will be a problem this time through.

The west side of the state is conservative. The eastern side and urban areas are moderate. It is not nearly as conservative as people who don't live here think it is.

The eastern part of the state is mostly socially moderate. This part of the state (plus Wichita) is responsible for electing socially moderate Democrats as governor, Lt Governor, and Attorney General. The Republicans would do better here to run a moderate. But I also have to say that the Republican party here has yet to get that message - in spite of the recent defection of leading moderate Republicans to the Democrats. For example, one of the leaders of the party defected to run for Lt. Governor as a Democrat (and was elected) and the Johnson County DA left the party to run for Attorney General as a Democrat (and beat Phil Kline, the former Republican AG). The moderate Republicans are leaving the party because they feel like the Republican party in Kansas has veered too far to the right - that all they care about is the abortion issue - which is not a winning issue on this side of the state.

I think Mr. Ryan could probably win easily in the western part of the state, but I think his time has come and gone in the eastern, more populated, part of the state. The Republican party in Kansas right now is deeply split, which doesn't bode well for their future here. Kansans in this part of the state (from my perspective) are more libertarian social moderates than social conservatives. It may be a red state overall, but the closer you get to the cities, the more purple it becomes. The eastern part of the state is not nearly as conservative as the western agriculture-oriented part of the state. And since the population growth in Kansas is primarily in the urban areas (I know - we count anyplace with more than a 2:1 ratio of people to cows as urban), the state is shifting steadily toward a centrist, moderate position. If the Republican party out here doesn't move toward the center, they will continue to lose.

The Republicans out here are closely identified with the religious conservatives who occasionally get control of the state school board and change the science standards (they've done it twice now). This is not welcome in the area I live in. It's another reason the Republican brand is becoming an increasingly hard sell here.

Phil Kline is the current AG, correct? Did Jim Morrison switch parties to run against Phil Kline? There's nothing wrong with being a conservative. Republicans don't have to act like Democrats to win elections. I do agree, however, that Republicans should emphasize small government, lower taxes, liberty, privacy, and less spending over all else. Those issues, when articulated properly, win every time.

Jim Morrison, who previously was the Johnson County DA (and a Republican) switched parties to go against Phil Kline and won the election as a Democrat. Since Morrison was a Republican when elected, the Republicans got to appoint someone to fill out his term as county DA. So the Republicans gave us Phil Kline, who didn't live here, used an address of an apartment owned by a hard-right supporter so that he could qualify for the job, and has proceeded to make us all unhappy because he's more show than substance and already has the DA office in turmoil.

The thing here is that most Democrats are moderates, like Dennis Moore, our congressional rep. People here will vote for moderates of either party - people considered too far left or too far right have difficulty getting elected. Party affilliation is secondary to being sort of in the middle. That will be Jim Ryun's problem if he wins the primary. His advantage is that he's sort of an icon in state history - great name recognition.

Democrats may talk the centrist position to get elected, but once in office, they are so beholden to labor unions, teacher's unions, far left blogs, anti-war activists, and environmentalists that it is impossible to vote like a moderate. It will be virtually impossible for Nancy Boyda to vote in favor of bills that lower taxes, reform entitlements, cut spending, etc. What happens is that these candidates cut deals with the party leadership that will give them the ability to vote the "conservative" position on a bill if it makes no difference in the outcome (i.e. if it is expected to pass or fail by a wide margin), but they will never support positions I listed above, especially if it is a close vote. As I said before, people and activists in Boyda's district need to make sure voters are aware of each and every vote that she casts. I think it will end up being a quite liberal record, certainly too liberal for KS-02. She will no longer be able to hold claim to that "moderate" label.

Where would these "moderate" and "centrist" find out that the supposedly "moderate" Democrat they voted for is anything but? Not in the Press, definitely ... and most don't go any further than the headlines and ledes.

Democrats really do not need to do anything other than talk "moderate" and avoid any major gaffes in purple districts for them to have the "moderate"/"centrist" label permanently affixed to their names in the Press.

Republicans are expected to back it up by swearing to go against their Party's supposed "extreme" positions on a myriad of issues during the campaign and when they go to the capital/Capitol they are carefully watched to make sure they follow through.

"Moderate" Democrats don't have this problem - so they can comfortably talk "moderate" and walk "liberal" - their friends in the Press would basically keep it under wraps. The only people who would know would be the junkies on both sides.

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

what her record will untimately be. But she has stated that she is dead-set against Mr. Bush's immigration plan because the people in her district are against it. And from watching Dennis Moore(D) for several years, I believe he fairly represents our interests. I would categorize him as a moderate who has maintained that position after he was elected. That's why he keeps getting re-elected.

The reason I am posting in this thread is that I agreed with an earlier post that Jim Ryan may be too conservative for this area. My point is merely that this area tends to vote middle-of-the-road without much attention to the party label. People are free to question that, deride that, or react to it how they will. I'm just trying to provide the observation of an interested political observer who has lived here for 53 years.

that because we tend to steer away from the extremes that we are ill-informed or easily led. I suggest you visit Kansas before you state that moderates don't have any idea what's going on. We know when our school board has been taken over by fools and we know what to do about it. We know when our AG is an incompetent showboat and we know what to do about it.

I think you vastly under-rate the people here in the heartland.

and I firmly believe that midwesterners hold relatively conservative values. If someone is a pompous a*shole with a holier-than-thou attitude, that's one thing...but the vast majority of conservatives are not like that. Jim Ryun lost a close election in an extremely difficult year. He held the seat for more than a decade and KS-02 is pretty solid red district (say what you want about it being "moderate" but Bush creamed Kerry there). We will have to wait and see ultimately what Boyda's record will be, but she has already voted for an anti-democratic union card check bill and for a surrender and retreat in Iraq. In the end, if her record resembles Barney Frank's or Maxine Waters' in the least, Kansas voters will reject her.

Note that I did say that I'm not familiar with those particular races so I'm perfectly willing to concede that Phil Kline was just sooooooo far to the Right that "moderates" reacted to him like a vampire to garlic.

That said, I was making a larger point, that "moderates", and not just those in Kansas, tend to be mostly only marginally informed about the issues and political events.

I'm on record about this so ...

... Partisans, particularly those who bother to vote in Primaries tend to be the most knowledgable of all voters. The "middle", on the other hand, is actually the most politically ignorant segment of the electorate, which reflects in their perennial low turnout numbers in election after election. It's not that they're any less intelligent or educated, but simply that they're uninterested in politics, and yet a significant number consider it a duty to vote.

The fact is that most Independents/"moderates" (including soft Republicans and Democrats) who bother to vote base their votes on impressions of the candidates/propositions created by a collage of the scraps of information they pick up from casually watching TV and skimming through the headlines on the newstand at the check out counter.

Where the Press has it right regarding the "middle" though is that they don't like "extremist", "divisive", "partisan", "controversial", "out-of-the-mainstream" politicians. But they do like politicians who are "bipartisan", "moderate", "centrist", "independent", who "work with both sides to get things done."

The problem with this, of course, is that these phrases are essentially meaningless feel-good pabulum. The reality is that what is "moderate" and "extreme" depends on where one stands. What is the centrist position on abortion? A typical New York Times reporter would say the position that it should be legal up until the moment of birth for whatever reason whatsoever is "moderate." National Review? Illegal or let the states decide. What's the "centrist" position on taxes, immigration, racial preferences, education, the judiciary, etc?

The reality is that the key to winning "moderate" votes on a wider scale is public perception, not the issues. Basically, the successful candidate is not the one who adopts "moderate" positions as defined by someone else, but one comes to have his positions publicly perceived as occupying the center ground.

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

but I'm not sure I agree with it completely, at least where I live. Almost everyone I know here is an independent. And as someone that grew up in Missouri and moved across the state line after college, I can tell you that Kansas is a little more libertarian than Missouri is. When I was a kid, if you were 18 and wanted a beer, you went to Kansas. If you needed an abortion, you went to Kansas. If you wanted to drive fast, you went to Kansas. There are differences here that date back to the civil war and before, so though the states share a relatively conservative outlook, I think they are pretty distinct politically.

Kansas used to vote reliably Democratic. Then they switched, probably because the Dems moved too far to the left. I'm just saying that it could switch again if the Republican party in Kansas moves too far to the right. I'm just reporting as a close-by observer (I'm in District 3, which is surrounded by District 2). Maybe my sense of where the middle is has been determined by the fact that I've lived here all my life, so the middle is what feels right to me - and I consider myself a pretty normal Kansan (at least normal for the eastern side of the state).

I do appreciate the comments you from you, Martin and from the gentleman in STL (no disrespect, but that is TOO BIG a city for me - and I absolutely hate driving between KC and STL - Missouri should really fix I-70). I was just posting because I live out here. Maybe others who live here would see the world a little differently, maybe not. I just wanted to let people know that the Republican party out here has problems and they aren't getting better. Far-right doesn't sell out here any better than far-left does. Again, I know that each region has to find it's own center of gravity, but I don't think the political party a candidate is from makes much difference here. We elect both kinds.

You say that Kansas used to be reliably Democratic, but that's not the case. See here, for instance. I imagine you're thinking of Thomas Frank's book about how curious it is that, while Kansans used to vote for Republicans back when Republicans were the good guys, they still vote for Republicans now that Republicans are the bad guys. It seems to me that this conundrum can be more easily explained another way.

But you're absolutely right that the Kansas GOP is in trouble. I'm not sure I understand why, though. I find it hard to believe that the school board nonsense has had that much of an effect: However ridiculous things got, it's still just a school board. And though Phill Kline rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, he was elected in the first place (as state AG), and in a state that has sent Sam Brownback to Washington by pretty wide margins and sends plenty of social conservatives to the state legislature. So I don't think it can be a simple matter of conservatism or social conservatism being out of touch with the Kansas electorate. But how, then, to explain the success of Boyda, Moore, Sebelius, and Morrison? I don't know.

I grew up in Johnson County, by the way, and live in KCMO now. Hey, neighbor.

How much more prevalent is the referring of Republicans as "far Right", "extremists", etc. in the Kansas Fourth Estate? How much more often are Democrats referred to as "moderate?"

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

I confess I've pretty much given up on reading the Kansas City Star, but I've heard some people complain that it's particularly biased, even amongst comparable monopolistic metropolitan dailies, and particularly on life issues like Missouri's recent Amendment 2 on stem cells. Their readership would cover the second and third districts pretty well, about half of the state.

However, if the bias of the Star and the rest of the media have done in Ryun and so many other conservatives, then how has Brownback survived and even thrived in an identical media environment? There is his legendary charisma and sex appeal, of course. But beyond that, I mean.

And I admit I am riding a bloggyhorse.

But that said, I think it's a bit of a different environment (in both media and politics) now. I doubt Brownback would have as easy a time of it getting re-elected as last time (2004).

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

I was not very informed about Kansas' voting record. I don't know where I got that, but I was wrong.

BTW, I grew up in Raytown and moved over here. I have to say I like it pretty well. The kids love their schools so I could never think of moving till they're done.

I think the thing that really galled the Johnson County people is when the Republicans put Phil Kline in as our DA. He really isn't very well liked over here. And he doesn't live here.

Also, the school board thing just made Kansas a national joke again - and we didn't like that at all.

As for the success of Boyda, Moore, Sebelius, and Morrison - I would just say that they seem pretty moderate. And once you're in, if you're competent, you're likely to stay. This is Sebelius' second term and it wasn't much of a race. Morrison won big in the more populated areas like Johnson County. And with moderate Republican leaders like Morrison finding more in common with the Democrats than with the Republicans, I'd just say the Republicans have a problem. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think it matters in Johnson County whether you are a Republican or Democrat. It just matters that we don't consider you whacko one way or the other.

Thanks for correcting me on the voting record. I was way wrong.

As far as the Kansas Democrats putting on a more convincing semblance of moderation than others. I say this because, while I find myself offended for some reason when most Democrats claim to be moderates, the four in question don't get a rise out of me at all. Maybe it's just that their careers have been pretty boring. However, I've only been back in the area for a couple of years, so perhaps I missed some controversy that might have gotten my juices flowing.

But then again (again), if it's a matter of the Democrats being boring, or seeming moderate, or being moderate, or just not being whackos, there's one of those in almost every race in Kansas, and they have shown the capacity to lose rather convincingly both to moderate Republicans and to the Sam Brownback-types.

I guess I just have the sense that there's something weird going on in Kansas politics, but I can't put my finger on it.

is the same problem with moderate Republicans, no matter what they might believe, or how nice they are. The end result is that taxes and regulations always go up, corporate welfare always increases, and the size and power of the central government always increases.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

"Moderate" Democrats are just the same as normal Democrats except that they don't bash Republican quite as often - sometimes they even say nice things about them.

"Moderate" Republicans are just the same - sometimes they even say nice things about them - other Republicans, that is.

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

... Even when FDR was in the White House.

But I'm curious; define "moderate." What exactly is it that Boyda, Moore, Morrison and Sebelius have advocated or done that is "moderate?"

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think it matters in Johnson County whether you are a Republican or Democrat.

Perhaps so. I'd defer to you who lives there.

But I think that outside of the community of political junkies, most people (especially "moderates" who pay less attention than most) don't really know who is, or is not, a "whacko" (and this is a subjective issue) outside of what they ingest from what they see in their newspapers and on television.

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

Here's a link to an article about what was going on in Kansas prior to the last election:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/18/AR2006101801679.html

Where I live, I guess we consider the moderates the ones who just want the government to run without making too much of a mess of it. Gov. Sebelius is generally believed to be business-like and a good manager. Jim Morrison was considered a good manager.

A couple of years ago we went through a stage where the state supreme court decided that the state was not funding the schools adequately and equitably. Places like Johnson County (where I live) were prosperous and had great schools, but rural areas and Wyandotte County (Kansas City, KS) were definitely not on a level playing field. The original suit was brought by a coalition of rural school districts and the KCK school district (it's been a while, but I think I'm correct on this). The mainly Republican state legislature fell all over themselves on this issue and looked very foolish. Rural areas of the state (which primarily elect Republicans) were having trouble keeping their schools running with the meager resources provided by the state (you have to understand that most of Kansas' tax base is in the wealthy suburban areas like Johnson County). They made a lot of noise and refused to deal with it, the court said to either do it themselves or the court would do it for them, they made a lot of noise, but eventually she helped orchestrate a plan.

Phil Kline was pretty much a one-issue AG, and he was considered here to be an ineffective showboat. He reminded me of an AG we had many years ago who tried to get airlines to stop serving liquor while flying over Kansas.

Add to that the state school board fiasco where some hard-right conservatives got a narrow majority on the board for the second time and held hearings on evolution and changed our science standards again (against the will of most of the people in Kansas, I might add) and the Republicans have spent a lot of time, money, and energy doing things that just have to be undone once we kick them out of office. That certainly doesn't help.

If I had to come up with the difference between a moderate and a conservative in Kansas, I guess I would personally define it this way - a moderate in Kansas (of either party) is interested in the government running well with the least amount of intrusion on the citizens. They want to fund the schools, the highways, and little else. They generally have libertarian instincts which extend to some kind of limited right to abortion, which has existed here for at least 30+ years. They want the schools to teach science and the churches to teach religion. They don't think we should get confused about the appropriate place to teach each of these subjects.

A conservative in Kansas cares deeply about one or both of two issues - eliminating abortion in Kansas (which isn't going to happen) and forcing the schools to teach creation science (which also isn't going to happen). They seem to care little about the issues that most people really care about here (schools and good roads) and focus almost exclusively on those other two issues which are generally considered settled. They keep fighting those two battles ad nauseum even though everyone is tired of them doing it. They have won tentative control of the Republican party and just don't understand why we don't like them any more.

Once again, I need to point out that there is a world of difference between the eastern part of the state and the rural western parts of the state. That is part of the problem. The more rural, the more conservative. The more populated, the more moderate. But as the population of the state evolves, that means that the moderates are gaining voters but the conservatives are losing them or are at best holding even.

I guess my take on the particular area I live in (Johnson County) is that we pretty much want the government to take care of the few things we want them to take care of and otherwise just leave us alone. I guess that's why I like it here.