I’ve mentioned previously that JD Hayworth is considering a run against McCain. Someone else who is reported to be considering the race is Len Munsil. The Republican base has a high level of distrust for McCain and since his name recognition is at 100% among this group, it’s unlikely that any amount of money will raise his standing among hard core conservatives, so turnout will be the key to the race. With an August 31st Primary, conservative candidates are assuming that the turnout will be at a record low and that the anti-McCain crowd will turnout in droves.
Munsil is in an awkward situation because McCain endorsed him in his Quixotic, long-shot challenge to Napolitano in 2006. Munsil also has a disadvantage in that he defeated anti-McCain poster child Don Goldwater in that race.
But Munsil has great advantages as well: Local and national fundraising potential from social conservatives who have never trusted McCain; Thousands of enthusiastic grassroots volunteers from his campaign three years ago and a proven ability to attract Republican voters.
In a typical Arizona Republican primary, about 300,000 people vote. Munsil got 51 percent of those voters in 2006, and Goldwater got 40 percent--mostly from the anti-illegal immigration crowd. The only way McCain wins is to get a majority of Munsil voters – many of whom are evangelical, social conservatives – or Goldwater voters, who mostly despise McCain, to pick him. That’s a tall order, even for someone who has been in federal office since 1982 – which, incidentally, is the last time McCain had a serious primary battle.
If conservatives want to beat McCain, Munsil may be the guy who can do it. Munsil can check the box for every issue of importance to GOP Primary voters. (And McCain can’t say that Munsil isn’t qualified to be a U.S. Senator--after all, McCain already declared Munsil ready to be a Governor.)
That leaves McCain with two arguments: Electability and Seniority. The first is valid... If McCain wins the primary, the general is in the bag. That said, if Munsil wins the primary, the Democrats have no one lined up for the general. Pederson and Goddard are running for Governor, Napolitano is in Washington, and Democrats don’t want to give up Congressional seats in Republican districts on the chance McCain loses a primary.
The second argument "Seniority" is code talk for pork and isn't going to to be an effective argument in a Republican Primary. Besides, McCain has been an anti pork crusader, so he can't complain that Munsil won't be able to bring home the bacon.
Three questions will determine the sequence of events. Would the Goldwater core--Rob Haney et al--back Munsil against McCain? Will JD Hayworth ditch a lucrative radio gig and put his money where his mouth is…so to speak? Will Chris Simcox flame out and let one of the big boys run, or will he stay in the race and possibly play the role of spoiler?
Post Script
Lightning Doesn't Strike Until, you know, it Strikes.
So can a relative newcomer take out an political giant like McCain? Absolutely. In fact, this is actually one of those potential upsets that looks impossible before the election, but seems obvious in retrospect.
Local political junkies will point to the similarities in the 1980 race between Barry Goldwater and Bill Schultz. Goldwater was a Republican icon and Ronald Reagan carried 44 states against the hapless Jimmy Carter, but newcomer Bill Schultz came within 10,000 votes of an historic upset.
If you want a better example, recall that in 1952, Arizona Senator Ernest McFarland was serving as Senate Majority leader and a 43 year old Phoenix City Councilman named Barry Goldwater got the crazy idea that he could challenge the incumbent. The rest as they say is history...
(Not that his defeat at the hands of Goldwater ended his career...McFarland was no slouch; in 1954 he was elected Governor and in 1964, he was elected to the state Supreme Court.)
It's about time you broke this story!
Posted by: DSW | June 12, 2009 at 07:19 PM
Sen. McCain would clean his clock and you know it Greg. Nice try!
Posted by: Tony GOPrano | June 12, 2009 at 07:31 PM
Greg,
It is too early for an election year April fool's joke.
And if it were meant for last April, well then you are many days late and many more dollars short.
But thanks for a good laugh anyway, I needed it.
Horst Kraus
Posted by: Horst Kraus | June 12, 2009 at 07:58 PM
In addition to pork barrel projects, seniority in the U.S. Senate also determines your choice of committee assignments and essentially all opportunities for legislative leadership. Sen. McCain is currently the ranking member on Armed Services and a former chairman of Commerce. These and other committees Sen. McCain serves on have a significant influence on Arizona (military bases, reservations, etc.) and really should be weighed in looking at Arizona Republican primary voters.
Posted by: Ryan Williams | June 12, 2009 at 08:13 PM
I'd love to see Munsil take on McCain. He is solid on the issues where McCain is solid, and he is solid on the rest of the issues (life, judges, guns, Gitmo, border, stimulus bill) where McCain is weak. I see a few of the McCainiacs are already commenting with "no way!" statements rather than arguments for why not, and the only one making a reasoned argument is using the Seniority argument you've already addressed. I agree with your assessment. Kyl is better positioned to protect Arizona's assets. What we need is far more reliable conservative representation. Only questions that I can see are can Munsil raise the money and is he willing to do it?
Posted by: John | June 12, 2009 at 09:00 PM
I voted for Munsil in 2006.....DESPITE the McCain Endorsement.
We need someone like him who will stand strong for Conservative values for the 6 years in office. Not like McCain who panders to us around election time and then sells us out to the likes of Kennedy and Reid.
Posted by: Red | June 12, 2009 at 09:00 PM
A case in point, the just completed vote that Drudge referred to as the "Fed War on Cigarettes". More taxes, regulations, etc designed to stifle an industry. I'm not a smoker and I think that folks who smoke these days are really not very bright. But massive new regulations and a government takeover of another industry sounds like a bad idea to me too. Kyl voted No, McCain voted Yes, Obama can't wait to sign it.
Just another day at the office for our two Senators.
Posted by: John | June 12, 2009 at 09:02 PM
It's about time someone serious challenge McCain, all of the conservatives already know who McCain is. The majority of conservatives I know do not want to vote for John McCain I believe it will be a tough race, but from looking at the previous blog posts I can see already that McCain supporters aren't taking the race seriously. Which only helps conservatives, who are willing to work hard whether it's holding fundraisers, e-mailing their friends or walking door-to-door.I did not vote for Len Munsil, in 2006 but I sure would in 2010. All I can say is run Len run.
Posted by: Allen | June 12, 2009 at 09:45 PM
Why hasn't McCain already retired, my prediction is that McCain plan on occupying the Senate seat until he dies. Len Munsil is going to run, because he is going to defeat McCain by a margin that will surprise the establishment.
Posted by: WiseGuy | June 12, 2009 at 09:57 PM
Len Munsil? lol. The only thing he has ever done is get his clock cleaned by Napolitano. Do you guys want a Democrat to win the seat?
Posted by: NMA | June 13, 2009 at 12:54 AM
I thought McCain WAS a Democrat. Oh, now I remember, he's a Maverick. Sorry!
Posted by: The Other Doug | June 13, 2009 at 01:08 AM
Seniority may be code for pork, but its also a reminder that McCain has been there a long time. A very long time. If re-elected, he'll end up something like 80 years old. That might only be middle-aged for a U.S. Senator, but I'm not sure 2010 is the year for folks to running on the basis of "Vote for me. I've been here forever!"
Posted by: Tim S. | June 13, 2009 at 01:19 AM
There is such a huge ANTI-INCUMBENT/Establishment movement growing in this country. If the trend continues, every incumbent runs the risk of being rolled in the 2010 cycle. I have a feeling that there will be a political shockwave to the degree we have never seen.
The biggest question here is when does Len get in the race such that he does not provoke a credible Democrat opponent to jump in? Len will have to weigh that timing question against the critical time he needs to raise serious money. My only suggestion is that he stays away from the same people who consulted and managed his 2006 gubernatorial bid.
Posted by: DSW | June 13, 2009 at 03:24 AM
If McCain has strengths, it is national security and fiscal issues (earmarks, spending, deficits, etc.). But the intense dislike for him that was evident at the recent Tea Parties amazed me. Even the folks who are fired up on tax and spending issues want him gone. Other than folks who are impressed by McCain's celebrity, who/what is his base anymore?
Posted by: Tim S. | June 13, 2009 at 05:24 AM
If Munsil decides to run, his arrogance will be his undoing.
Posted by: Joe | June 13, 2009 at 11:19 AM
NMA - You can throw 2006 out. That was the year Democrats, in a national
landslide, took back Congress from the Republicans. Not a single Democrat
incumbent in 2006 lost a Governor's race, a Senate race, or even a
Congressional race. JD Hayworth had a 17 point registration advantage, the
power of incumbency and twice as much money in his district as Munsil had
for the whole state -- and managed to lose a heavily Republican district.
Munsil took on an impossible task and ran an impressive grassroots campaign
to come out of nowhere and win the primary by double digits against
Arizona's must famous political name. Then he had three weeks before early
voting in the general, polls showing him down by 43, and no money because of
Clean Elections -- less than a million dollars to reach the same number of
voters as Jon Kyl and Jim Pedersen spent $12 million each to reach.
Napolitano ignored the race and backed out of a debate, and the Republic and
MSM let her get away with it because she was their candidate. Anyone who
discounts Munsil for losing to a Democratic incumbent in a year of
Democratic landslides does not understand politics. I guarantee you the
McCain camp won't take him lightly.
Posted by: Stephanie | June 13, 2009 at 11:38 AM
When I first read the headline I was shocked! Will Munsil is running for the Senate! Will Munsil being the oldest son in the Munsil clan...then I noticed 2 l's. PHEW! Not that he wouldn't be a great Senator, he is just a little young yet.
Len Munsil is one of the most humble men you will ever meet; you may be mistaking a principled perspective for arrogance.
There is no doubt Len is called to public service and would be wonderful in any office. With that said, I have been a strong supporter of Sen. McCain and until I hear from Len himself that he is seriously considering this, I'm going with this as just an idea that is much more speculation than anything else.
Posted by: Ann | June 13, 2009 at 11:56 AM
How many times do we allow McCain to stab us in our collective backs. How many times do we allow egocentric legislators like McCain to do what he damn well pleases at our expense. I wouldn't vote for McCain for dog catcher of Levine, there are to many good people there.
Posted by: jainphx | June 13, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Napolitano won because she was backed by most of Phoenix's business men for a plethora of reason. Conservatives held tough, but the rest, well look where it got them, enough said.
Posted by: jainphx | June 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM
You want McCain to retire when he retires and Shadegg (if not burnt out) or Flake to move into his seat. Being fractious and cannibalizing isn't going to help the GOP come back.
Posted by: JaneAZ | June 13, 2009 at 01:09 PM
JaneAZ writes, apparently on all of our behalfs, "You want McCain to retire when he retires and Shadegg (if not burnt out) or Flake to move into his seat. Being fractious and cannibalizing isn't going to help the GOP come back."
Please be certain Jane, I most certainly do NOT want that. Nor is having a primary election the same as being "fractious" or cannibals. I would love to have McCain replaced, in 2010, by a solid, reliable conservative. And I'll never support Flake for statewide office (or any other office for that matter). He has been a disappointment on the border, on Cuba, on gay issues, on party politics here in Arizona, and now even on taxes. Shadegg I used to like more, but I take him at his word when he says that the problem with Congress is the Congressmen and he includes himself in that statement. Then he urged us to vote out all Congressmen, himself included. He has lost the fire in his belly and that's too bad. Still, maybe he'll get it back someday.
Posted by: Tim S. | June 13, 2009 at 03:01 PM
Tim brings up a good point in that we must start looking for the next generation of conservative leadership. I have great respect for Sen. McCain. I wish he were President. But he isn't. This isn't about the past, it is about the future direction of the Republican Party, and whether it will boldly stand for conservative
principles during the Obama years, or just be "Democrat light". Munsil is
the kind of charismatic, articulate and likeable conservative we need right
now.
Posted by: Mark | June 13, 2009 at 03:25 PM
Len Munster? PUH-LEASE, Greg.
Posted by: Dennis K. | June 13, 2009 at 04:50 PM
Ann, I don't mistake Munsil's principled perspective for arrogance. I happen to be in agreement with him on the vast majority of issues. However, on the few occasions I have spoken with him, he comes across as an arrogant know it all.
I'll take McCain over Munsil any day.
Posted by: Joe | June 13, 2009 at 05:43 PM
Interesting how the pro-McCain comments are very short, generally limp-wristed shots at Munsil. I think one of the more intellectual ones was "PUH-LEASE". Is it me, or will McCain need a little more than that for his commercials?
On the issues, Munsil is freakin' bulletproof. The comments section here seems to confirm that.
Posted by: John | June 13, 2009 at 06:35 PM
Joe, I'm sorry that was your experience. Hopefully you will have an opportunity to spend time on more than a few occasions to get to know him. He is a humble, considerate, kind and unassuming fellow. Firm in his beliefs for sure and committed to service before self.
One does not have to be bad and the other good...can't it be that they are both good in their own way and each of us may have to decide what way best serves Arizona and our nation?
Posted by: Ann | June 13, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Uh, Greg? Barry Goldwater had runa high profile department store chain for over two decades, was constantly in the news as a dashing aviator and was serving in one of the higher political positions in Arizona at a time when we only had one congressman. Bill Schultz was a massively successful and well known real estate developer with unlimited money. Len is a little known political activist who was barely able to beat Don Goldwater ina Republican primary and wouldn't have won if McCain hadn't stepped in. And Joe, you are exactly right. I was working on something and several leading figures in the state party were only too happy to give me their time and information. Len's arrogant rudeness was striking and wholly out of proportion to his accomplishments.
Posted by: AzRep | June 14, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Whether Len will win, or make a good Senator, I leave to y'all.
What I'm wondering about is this: does this post constitute a 'formal accouncement of candidacy'?
I keed, I keed...
Posted by: Paul | June 14, 2009 at 10:35 AM
I am an independent that generally favors the Republicans over the Democrats and would prefer to see the Republicans mount a comeback nationally. I don't think that will happen soon because the "conservatives" are willing to take no loaf rather than half or three quarters.... The person who professed that he would never vote for Mr. Flake is, to me, a typical example. In my opinion, too many "conservatives" stayed home in 2008, which played a large part in Mr. Obama's victory and the Democrats taking so many senate seats. I don't consider Mr. McCain to be conservative, but I'd much rather that it was he who had nominated the next Supreme Court justice.
Posted by: mahtso | June 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM
I find all of this absolutely delightful. The Democrats now have a 60-40 advantage in the Senate. This assumes that Al Franken will be seated this summer, and also assumes that neither Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe will follow Arlen Specter a bolt the party.
Republican incumbents are abandoning seats in New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri, Florida, and Kansas. Weak Republican incumbents are in trouble in Louisiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Georgia. Holding the damage down to a 64-36 Democratic Senate would actually be a remarkable achievement for the GOP. So the Republican strategy is.....add another state to the endangered list.
Now the hard core conservative base is talking up a primary challenge to McCain. Hayworth spent a fortune in 2006 and lost a seat in a district with a huge Republican advantage in registration. Munsil lost every single county in the state in 2006. Bring 'em on. Even with the Obama campaign skipping the state completely, the Republicans had an awful year in Arizona in 2008--McCain winning his home state by an embarrassingly small margin, CD 5, CD 1, CD 8 all going Democratic by double digits, nearly getting swept in the Corporation Commission races. A high profile governor's race AND a high profile battle for the Senate, complete with blood nasty no holds barred Republican primary dogfights, are just with the Democrats want.
If the Democrats smell a bloody Republican primary, they'll find a candidate. I have a strong hunch, actually, that if a nasty primary battle is brewing, McCain will decide that he's served his country long enough and hard enough in the United States Senate. Obama will find a place in our government to utilize his knowledge and skill and experience. Munsil and Hayworth can fight over who gets to lead the party even farther to the right, ever farther down the road to political irrelevance.
Posted by: Commander in Chief | June 14, 2009 at 04:02 PM
If McCain loses to a conservative in the primary, I wouldn't be surprised if he pulls a Lieberman an runs as an independent--not necessarily to win, but to guarantee that the conservative does not win.
Posted by: Poison | June 14, 2009 at 06:06 PM
Much as I like Len Munsil, it would be a horrible mistake for him to run against McCain. The primary would be so divisive that it would hand the seat to the democrats. Munsil lost overwhelmingly to Janet and did not pull outside of his base. The last time we Republicans had a divisive primary for the Senate we ended up with 18 years of Dennis DeConcini. Please Len, for the good of the Nation, don't run. McCain votes with us far more than he votes against us. A democrat would vote against us most of the time.
Posted by: One of the Tom's | June 14, 2009 at 07:20 PM
Tom, I think you underestimate the surge that would come from a Munsil win. The free media attention that a competitive primary would bring would overshadow just about every other political story out there. And if Munsil succeeds in beating McCain, he becomes a media sensation, which is worth a ton of money and name id. He also becomes a conservative darling to conservatives all over the nation. The moolah would roll in for the general and whichever DemocRAT was dumb enough to run against the anti-Obama tide that will be sweeping this great nation, will be swept away in Munsil-mania!
Okay, so I got a little excited there at the end, but the premise is still valid. Munsil has better name id than just about any Dem out there not named Pedersen, Goddard or Gordon. And that's today, before he raises and spends X million on a primary, and before he gets all of that media attention I wrote about.
Posted by: John | June 15, 2009 at 02:22 AM
My biggest problem with characters like Munsil is they don't feel they have to pay their dues when it comes to running for higher office. They merely think that their strict adherence to ideology somehow entitles them to these high positions.
If Munsil wants to run for Senator, he needs to "degrade" himself and run for lower office first, and then build a name. Being an "activist" doesn't count.
I don't respect individuals on either side of the aisle that try to jump to the head of the line, whether its bored millionaires like Jim Pederson who want to be Governor or Senator, or political activists like Munsil that have no prior elected experience.
Posted by: Juan Martinez | June 15, 2009 at 02:24 PM
I'm not a fan of the "moderates" or McCain, but why do Republicans have to keep running the way-too-far-to-the-right candidates in state wide races? I hope Shadegg or Flake runs for senate.
Posted by: elephant | June 15, 2009 at 03:16 PM
I doubt Munsil (or anyone) would beat McCain in a primary, but if he did he would lose the general and, as someone noted, likely give the seat to the Dems for several terms -- as happened when the Conlan-Steiger battle gave the seat to DeConcini.
But there are people who see absolute purity as more important than accomplishing anything. "Compromise? Accept a proven winner who is conservative 75% or 80% of the time? Never! It's 100% or nothing!"
And of course they (and all of us) end up with nothing.
Posted by: BobH | June 15, 2009 at 03:51 PM
Greg this is kinda like your predictions that Schweikert would beat Mitchell and Bee would beat Giffords, DEAD WRONG.
You do seem to have a good track record in prediciton of the state elections but your predictions when it comes to federal offices has not been so great. McCain won't lose to anyone in the primary
Posted by: Johnny | June 15, 2009 at 03:59 PM
Juan Martinez - We live in a democratic republic in which the voters determine who will represent them in Congress -- not some aristocratic line of succession. Look where our current congressional leadership has gotten us: countless billions spent on bailing out numerous entities all of which were "too big to fail," impending government-run healthcare legislation, a near-nuclear Iran, a belligerant North Korea that threatens to destabilize the entire far east, and still no action on securing our border. If any of us were so unproductive in our jobs, I dare say we'd be shown the door. It sounds like we could use a fresh face with new ideas in DC. If the voters are willing to send Munsil to the Capitol, so be it!
Posted by: CD3 | June 15, 2009 at 07:40 PM
CD3,
The voters always decide, and they will come to the same conclusion with Len Munsil that they did last time around. He lost in an enormous landslide against Napolitano, and a big reason it was such a blowout was because Len Munsil had no prior elected experience.
The voters that determine these elections don't want a Governor or Senator who's only prior experience is being a political activist, whether its conservative or liberal.
Voters on both sides of the aisle want their elected leaders to have competence and experience, not just ideology. Having strong opinions doesn't mean you'll be a sound leader.
No law is getting in the way of these clowns from running, but don't be surprised when voters from both parties reject them en masse.
Posted by: Juan Martinez | June 16, 2009 at 01:47 PM
I was an early supporter of Munsil in 06. If he runs against McCain I will be an early supporter of Munsil taking a hike.
If Munsil wants to take another whack at the 9th floor or make a run for a Congressional seat, I'm all for it, and I would support him.
Posted by: Mike | June 16, 2009 at 04:32 PM