The Right Thinks Anti-Gay, Anti-Choice Cuccinelli Wasn’t Conservative Enough

The Right Thinks Anti-Gay, Anti-Choice Cuccinelli Wasn’t Conservative Enough

The Right Thinks Anti-Gay, Anti-Choice Cuccinelli Wasn’t Conservative Enough

The GOP’s loss in Virginia is causing the Tea Party to double down on the conservative crazy.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Republicans just lost the Virginia gubernatorial race to Terry McAuliffe, a smarmy, unlikeable Clinton hack with negligible governing experience. They did it by putting up Ken Cuccinelli, an anti-abortion absolutist who also wants to ban sodomy, and whose running mate, E.W. Jackson, thinks yoga leads to Satanism. This, clearly, is going to lead conservatives to rethink the value of ideological maximalism, and to seek more pragmatic candidates in future elections.

Just kidding! On the right, Cuccinelli’s loss is being interpreted the way such losses are always interpreted: as a result of insufficient conservatism. Towards the end of the campaign, when it became clear that defeat was inevitable, right-wingers started floating the idea that the Republican was suffering because he was too squishy. Writing in The Washington Post, Maggie Gallagher argued that Cuccinelli was losing because he wasn’t aggressive enough in his anti-abortion rhetoric: “Democratic charges of a Republican ‘war on women’ are predicated on the GOP’s self-imposed truce on social issues…When social subjects arise, GOP candidates go mute, retreat and change the subject.”

Similarly, the executive director of the Richmond Tea Party told Breitbart, “[C]onservatives are highly concerned about Obamacare, immigration, and moral decline, and are looking for reassurance and leadership in those areas. Attorney General Cuccinelli has not taken a hard stand on those issues. The net effect is that he’s not exciting his base, which dampens campaign volunteer activism.”

In the wake of Cuccinelli’s loss, a slightly new version of this argument has arisen. Rather than blaming Cuccinelli’s ideological timidity, conservatives are faulting the GOP establishment for failing to champion truly conservative candidates. “REPORT: GOP Abandoned Republican Candidate,” Drudge tweeted Wednesday morning, referring to a complaint from a Cuccinelli strategist that the national party hadn’t come through with enough money.

One the front page of National Review Online was a piece by Jonah Goldberg subtitled, “The establishment failed Cuccinelli.” The candidate, Goldberg wrote, “could have pulled this thing out if he’d had more help at the end.… The RNC treated him like a write-off.”

All Cuccinelli’s defeat has done, then, is convince the Tea Party that it needs to redouble its efforts to wipe out impurity in the Republican ranks. Indeed, last night, Tea Party Nation tweeted, “Tomorrow the war against the #GOP establishment is on, no matter what happens tonight.”

Every so often, pundits will start wondering whether this or that defeat will lance the boil of Republican extremism. The answer is pretty much always no. If you want to know why, check out the social psychology classic When Prophecy Fails, by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schacter:

Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is prevented evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong; what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truths of his beliefs than ever before.

The authors, of course, were discussing millenarian cults, not the modern conservative movement. That, however, is no longer a particularly meaningful distinction.

Jessica Valenti discusses a new law in Texas that restricts women’s access to abortions with Merritt Tierce of the Texas Equal Access Fund.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x