Why do conservatives keep electing RINOs?

“You have to vote for who can win in the general election.”

Author’s note: With primary season upon us, I thought this piece I wrote a few years ago worthwhile to bring back for a second run. Conservatives need to alter their way of thinking regarding elections, to stop voting for establishment hacks just because of name recognition or tenure, and educate themselves on the candidates available so the best of the can, hopefully, get elected.

Have you ever wondered how people like Mitch McConnell manage to maintain their office for decades? Perhaps you question why Republicans seem endlessly to vote for incumbents who regularly betray them? I know these are queries that have plagued me for many election cycles. This past primary election brought to light two concerning trends that may provide the answers to these quandaries.

Many watched during the most recent primaries as solid conservative candidates were beaten by lackluster incumbents or smooth-talking but clearly deceptive newcomers. I was particularly disappointed this go around as my home state of Texas had solid potential to replace Governor Abbott, who completely failed in his handling of Covid as well as to pass laws protecting children from hormone treatment and mutilation to rectify a psychological issue, and Dan Crenshaw who has been such a complete embarrassment in Congress that even special ops soldiers call him a traitor. How could this have happened? Why wouldn’t people select better options when given the chance?

One thing I have learned, not just now, but from elections past, is that the beast is self-preserving. Once a person makes it onto the party ticket and manages to get into office, if that elected official toes the party line, the party will do what it can to protect that person’s political future. I have seen this several times over with the RNC. The Republican party will spare no one in the battle to keep its selected officials in office. Many times the party itself has launched personal attacks against non-preferred candidates and will stop nothing short of destroying the life of a true threat. A local attorney running for a seat as family court judge was sued to keep her off the ballot, as well as having another Republican candidate encouraged to run in the primary against her for that particular seat rather than selecting another opponent. All of this was done in order to protect the party’s preferred candidate, giving no thought to what the people want. Anyone with eyes open should be able to see what this reveals - the party is no longer serving the people - it is self-serving, and self-preserving. This happened on a large scale with the advent of the Tea Party. The Tea Party was a viable, mainly conservative third party with a real chance of changing the face of politics, but the Republican party could not tolerate competition. The RNC worked hard to not just sideline but actually crush the Tea Party; they did this not because the Tea Party would be harmful for the people, but rather, because they were a threat to the system.

Conservatives need to work to take back the party so that the party will once again fill the ballot with true conservatives rather than RINOs. This is huge and a major hurdle for us to overcome. Unfortunately, this issue is only exacerbated by the other dilemma we conservatives face.

This other complication is actually two-pronged: conservative voters tend to be lazy, and conservative voters have a mistaken perception of how to win, which also could be characterized as a fear of losing. First let me address calling conservative voters “lazy.” I know it seems somewhat cruel, but there is little else that explains the voting habits of conservatives who ride under the Republican banner. It explains people walking into the primaries and simply selecting those who are already in office. It is easier to vote for a recognized name than to actually do any research about a candidate’s voting records or a candidate’s actual background. I know sometimes people will vote for a candidate because that candidate is a military veteran. I have news for those people - simply serving in the armed forces does not qualify someone for political office. While it is common to refer to those on the left as low-information voters (they are, but mainly in understanding the true ramifications of leftist policy - not in lack of knowledge of their candidates), in this sense, the right are the real low-information voters. But I digress. There is a more pernicious piece to this puzzle, the second prong to this predicament. Conservatives are afraid to vote for the candidate who would actually do the best job and represent their values. I was enlightened to this by a conversation I had at my local Republican precinct convention shortly after the primaries.

As we sat at the table awaiting the beginning of the session, those present from my precinct were discussing our dismay with the status quo. As the parley progressed, I expressed my disappointment in fellow conservatives having once again put Abbott and Crenshaw on the ticket to represent us. No one at the table was in disagreement with me, so I was astonished when one woman spoke up: “We couldn’t vote for Huffines; if we did, Beto would be our next governor. Huffines is too conservative, and there is no way he would have moved far enough left to win in the general election.” I was stunned by this assertion. After taking a moment to gather my senses, I calmly asked, “then how do you ever expect to change anything?” Her response was again staggering: “You can’t just vote for who you like or think would be best; you have to vote for who can win in the general election.” At this point, I realized further dialogue on the matter would be unproductive. I could not, at the time, wrap my mind around such a misguided musing.

It was only later that it occurred to me that this line of thinking is likely prevalent among many who claim conservatism. It’s a comfortable consolation to know that the person you vote for will likely win simply because that person has a perceived likelihood of winning. Unfortunately, such speculation does nothing to further conservatism nor to help reclaim our country from the left and the RINOs currently running it into the ground. If you too believe that this is the best way to make your vote count, consider the left. Does the left just vote for candidates who have the best chance of winning? Do you suppose the left elects people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, or anyone on “the Squad” because, during their primaries, they had the best chance of winning? Do Democrats vote for Bernie Sanders time and again because he is willing to move from far-left socialism toward the middle (or right) to be more appealing to conservatives and gain a better chance of sweeping a general election? The left votes for the candidates who most closely reflect their values and will enact the policies they would like to see in place. It is unfortunate that the policies that reflect those values typically end up destroying whatever municipality that employs them. Take a look at any city that has been run by Democrats for the past two decades and you will see. Regardless, Democrats vote their values, and though they sometimes lose, they often win, no matter how extreme the candidate. Conservatives need to do the same.  If we don’t, we will continue to see the same traitorous “Republicans” get into office on platitudes that never come to fruition. Instead, when they gain a majority, they sit contented on their laurels simply happy to keep the left from advancing their progressive agenda; and when in the minority, these same reeking RINOs impotently simper and whine about how the left is destroying the country, making further promises to execute on plans like McCarthy’s recent “Commitment to America” which in very many words says nothing.

Conservative cowardice accomplishes nothing. We must all, as we expect of our representatives in government, grow a spine and vote for those who will valiantly take up our values and work to make America the country of its founding. If we do not, we have no one to blame but ourselves for the dismal decline of “our democracy.”