Delegates at Utah’s Republican convention just denied three-term Sen. Bob Bennett the opportunity for re-election. Bennett finished third in voting on the second ballot for the Republican nominees for Senate at the convention, and only the top two will move on to the third round and have the opportunity to win. Candidates Mike Lee (a former clerk for Sam Alito) and Tim Bridgewater (a businessman and perennial candidate) will now vie for the nomination, and Bennett could only challenge them as a write-in, which he declined (he said he would support the GOP nominee).
Utah has an unusual nominating process for their Senate seats. Caucuses choose 3,500 delegates for the state convention, and those delegates then get to decide who becomes the nominee of the party. If nobody reaches 60% on the final ballot, then a primary election makes the final choice between the last two candidates. That was the likely outcome tonight.
But Bennett finished third on the first ballot, moving into the second round with Lee and Bridgewater. From there, he only managed 26% of the vote on the second ballot and was eliminated.
This was actually the expected outcome. Conservative activists, who dominate the roster of delegates, were angry with Bennett over his vote for TARP, and his sponsorship of the Wyden-Bennett health care bill. Given that Wyden-Bennett never got the time of day in Washington, it’s simply amazing that this was held against Bennett, who has one of the most conservative voting records there is.
I agree with Nate Silver that political types will make plenty more of this than meets the eye. If all races were decided by small gatherings of activists the composition of our legislatures will look quite different. Indeed, Bennett would have been favored, by some accounts, in a primary opened up to the voters, though that could be a function of name ID.
But while in the short term, the now lame-duck Bennett might be freed up for a vote with Democrats here or there, over the long haul Republicans will now be even more frightened that, if they don’t move hard to the right, they will suffer the same fate. Illogical as that may sound, the Bennett ejection holds a powerful message that the far right of the GOP has taken over.
UPDATE: The Salt Lake Tribune reports that this is the first time Utah has denied a sitting Senator the nomination of their party since 1940, when Sen. William King lost his party’s nomination over his opposition to the New Deal.
UPDATE II: Tim Bridgewater took 57% of the vote on the third ballot, not enough to avoid a primary against Mike Lee. So there will be a primary June 22. Meanwhile Jim Matheson, the Democratic Representative from UT-03, did not get the needed 60% of the vote to win the nomination of his party, so he’ll face a June 22 primary as well.




53 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Alone the Bennett thing would not mean much because of its weird nature but this comes after Specter and Crist suffered the similar fates.
I wonder if this headline “Senator Bennett Loses” will have any impact on Andrew Romanoff’s appointed-Senator opponent (in adjoining Colorado) who has two Ns but only one T.
Honestly, I’d be OK with the Rethugs becoming purer rightists, if only it meant the Dems would become purer leftists. Better than having both parties pretend to be the other when they think there might be political advantage to it. Also would make it easier for the electorate to truly choose what kind of govt they want. And I’d be willing to live with whatever the people truly chose. It’s this business of big corporations buying out the votes and souls of both parties that I really can’t tolerate, because the interests of big business are so divergent from the interests of regular working people.
One can only hope. Our CO-Bennet is a presidential lap dog; witness the “no” vote on the watered-down Audit the Fed bill.
On topic though, I’m not surprised one wit. I’ve traveled to Salt Lake City 3, 4 times a year for the last couple years on business. It’s beyond conservative, and approaching wannabe theocracy.
However, there is a slow but steady change in SLC demography, and it’s to the young and to the democrats. It will be quite a while, and I mean quite a while, and not without a fight, but the Mormon Conservative base is being slowly eroded.
The hippies are gaining ground in downtown Salt Lake.
I agree with you, but sadly, all that usually happens is that, as the GOP moves further and further and further to the fringe of the right, then the Dems just move further and further and further past the so-called “center right.” It doesn’t turn out the way you posit, which is unfortunate.
But really, at the end of the day, they’re all in the pocket of the corporations, so not sure how much difference it will make. Interesting, though.
And yes, Kelly, SLC is definitely trending younger and more democratic, but sheesh! The rest of Utah is, uh, beyond right wing and has big old stranglehold on most of the politics there. I doubt we’ll see much move leftward (other than SLC) for a good while to come. Not to be rude, but the Mormons tend have huge families, and they rule the roost with an iron fist (to badly mix metaphors).
More like used-to-be theocracy than simply wannabe: the Mormons founded Utah as a religious/cult state, only giving up their cherished polygamy when they wanted to become a state (primarily for the drive-through money from wagon trains west).
Having lived there recently …
is much too strongly worded
What do we know about the Democratic candidates for US Senate in Utah? Even Howie Klein is asking about them on Twitter, so I imagine not very many people know very much:
Since when did they give up polygamy? Not even snark. It goes on way more than is let on by the LDS Church, quite honestly. I don’t really care all that much (except for the incidence of child abuse that goes on in some sects), but it does irk me that a church/society that has it’s own, shall we say?, “odd” marital practices has the brass iron nerve to spend millions on a proposition in CA to deny civil rights, in the form of marital rights, to gays in CA.
Well how would you word it?
My very liberal friends who lived happily in Salt Lake City said it was very easy for them to fend off the frequent attempts at proslytizing: “God told me you were wrong” is a response they cannot argue with, given the Mormon history of personal witness.
Have the Utah Republicans gone as far right as the Nazis & Fascists yet! Or are they just trying to fake us out??
Well, officially the head of the LDS Church had a revelation that coincided with the United States government’s demand that the Church give up polygamy to become a state, late in the 19th century. But I agree with you that there’s lots more polygamy than they let on, and not only in the heretic fundamentalist sects.
Bigotry ya think?
The two faced @#$@$^**’s
The underground punk scene there is quite wild!
Amazing to think that there once was a time when someone could lose with GOP primary voters for being too much of a fascist bigot.
Of course, that stopped being the case once the Southern Strategy was implemented. Nowadays, the only way King would have lost the nomination would have been because they didn’t think he was enough of a fascist bigot.
On both points, we are in agreement. They had their “revelation” when it was, shall we say?, convenient for them. Whatever. They can do as they wish, other than abusing kids, as far as I’m concerned. However, the LDS church, along with the political and legal powers that be in Utah, have an atrocious record in terms of acknowledging and dealing with the many issues of child abuse that go on in their state (also goes on a lot with Mormons elsewhere, but right now, we’re talking about Utah).
And I do have a big problem with that. But it ties into their religious beliefs (about which I am only marginally conversant) with men being prophets and having revelations, and hey: the law cannot get in the way of some man’s divine revelation…
Jon Walker is upstairs!
Feature or Bug? Weak Employer Mandate Invites Companies to Drop Health Coverage
LOL… sounds like fun. Last time I was there, I saw some interesting clubs, but being of a certain age, I’m beyond the stage of enjoying such fun stuff.
Well it disgusts me, but to be fair, it does tie into their religious belief system. That said, they had no business spending the LDS church funds on a political proposition in CA. So I wouldn’t frame it so much in terms of bigotry (although there is that, too), but an illegal activity due to a Church being so heavily involved in swaying politics. Just poured salt in the wound that it was in another frackin state. grrrrrr
Oh there is that also!! Where the F## is separation of church and state.. Is it not a technical violation of their religious exemption where they can be involved in government?
The Mormons control virtually every square inch of Utah with the exception of a few wards within SLC proper along with the University. Look at the composition of the Utah Legislature. That will provide the clearest picture.
As far as avoiding the proselytizing, that approach mentioned works fine if you’re single, not worth a shit if you have children.
Very common to see families with 12 children with six being a norm. And most are VERY devoted members of their local wards. My oldest son worked with two young ladies (teens) that were from polygamist families in the rural area. There were six young women who worked in his store. 2 out of 6, an anomaly yes, but much more common than people are aware.
In addition there is a strong immigration of converts from around the world back to the ‘Homeland’.
Have you been to Salt Lake?
The intersection of the two streets that divide the grid into Cartesian (grid) segments are Temple and State. Literally, the center of SLC is Temple and State.
The Temple is enormous, and the State capitol up the hill to the north a little ways is tiny and out of the way by comparison.
I said “slow.” If you wanted to counter with “glacial” I wouldn’t argue, as that’s merely a matter of degree.
But it’s changing nonetheless. There is a huge influx of “goyim” in the guise of non-Mormon Asians, and non-Mormon Eastern Europeans, and non-Mormon Hispanics most of all.
To suggest that it’s not changing at all, and to the younger, and to Democrat, I still disagree.
caveat – the Hispanic vote could affect the composition of their state house as there is a large increasing Hispanic population, and they are not generally LDS affiliated.
I’m not willing to accept a corporatist future.
It remains to be seen what this portents for the Democrats. Will the party take the opposite course and suddenly forswear their allegiance to multinational cash, moving to the left? Not likely. As it did with Arlen Specter, the national party would be more likely to accept Bennett than reject him, should he ever express a desire to join the party. Hippies they are not. Owned, they all are.
He got beat by Alito’s clerk and some perennial candidate?
Meet the new boss,
As insane as the old boss.
is very nicely put
no and no intention of doing so!!
Hey Kelly..
I believe it was a Litmus test that’s been brewing for quite some time. Utah’s Bennett may have voted conservative but he didn’t ‘sound’ conservative.
He was a Democrat.
Yo nahant!
I really hate going there, but I can’t avoid it. Feb was the last trip, June is the next. I do enjoy hanging with the rable-rousers after work though, gotta tell ya.
And there’s more of them and they’re louder than ever in the last 30 years of my acquaintance with SLC.
In 1970 it was not uncommon to see non-LDS affiliated small business fail, even in SLC.
Comparing that point in time to today displays a large change. (in SLC)
We lived in Highland, kids went to school in Alpine, Highland and Lehi.
Being non-LDS in that area is brutal. They never stopped their attempts.
Well, that’s basically my point.
In my job, I work with dealers of my product who are not LDS affiliated, as my product serves the under-served; poor, and minority generally.
So I’m naturally affiliated with the growing segment, and not the status quo. This is what forms my view.
Good point. As with Bush, it’s not facts that matter, it’s the alternate reality they spin with words. Same with Palin. Same with Beck. It’s what made Limbaugh a multimillionaire. It’s as if the nation is trapped in high school, stuck at an eternal pep rally for the sport of ranting on behalf of corporations and organizations putting on the show.
Although in giving it thought, their air pollution may have been worse to deal with than the constant proselytizing. With the population growth that the valley is undergoing, it can only get much worse.
Cynthia Kouril is upstairs!
Citizenship Strippers and Miranda Deniers
I agree, it’s for the bucks. Senator Franken was a fire breather when on the radio also but I’ve been around him in public. Nothing like the Partisan that he portrayed on the radio, in fact just about the opposite. Very engaging, looking for common cause for common ground. (while advocating for his position tho for sure)
I certainly agree with you about what “usually” happens. I wasn’t positing, only wishing (“if only”).
Also agree about the overarching corporate control. But, you already know that, I’m sure. ;-)
“God told me you were wrong.” Love it. ;-)
I just had a divine revelation, but I don’t think I’ll share it with you lol.
Yes it is. Go complain to someone. I’ll just hang here by my nipples until you get some action on that. Then we can do the same for the Christian fundies.
Is that a Mormon thing?
We need a third party, and it must be centrist, because that compromise is necessary (but, I believe, also adequate) to get the numbers we need for a real majority in short order. I can’t see any other non-violent way.
Can’t argue that one… I feel that they all should pay taxes if they cross the line between God and Rome/US Gov…
He voted for Bush’s TARP. That’s enough to get you shunned by the far right conservative purists. Probably by me as well, cuz I loathe the concept of bailouts for corporate failures. Noone bails me out when I make a mistake.
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, er, Mormon men? lol
Define a centrist on the economy, abortion, gun control, gay rights and war.
The problem is, compromise is difficult when both sides are entrenched in their opinions, corporations can spend whatever pleases their soulless selves, and voters are so trivially deceived.
I think this is hysterical! The GOP base is hsowing itself to be a joke. Mike Lee? The man’s number “1″ “priority” is the repeal of “Obamacare.” He may well promise to cure Reker’s homosexuality. He just fought the feds to keep off-road vehicles screeching through parks. You should read the guys senate site. He personally lowered the IQ of the entire web by a full point.
Then there’s Tim Bridgewater. What can ya’ say? This is a man who says, “Allowing re-importation of patented drugs from Canada… will decimate our drug industry and negatively affect the lives of each of us.” LOL!
So, good for Utah for seriously embarrassing themselves. Bennett may have been a Moe, but Larry and Curly here are just ridiculous. Say what you will about the Mormons, but at one time they were regarded as a rather heady bunch. Now they’ve officially lowered themselves into the intellectual swamp of the common rightwing Born Again rabble.
JMJ
I’ve tried to do that at various other times on various other threads. Usually I get jumped on by at least one person who distorts the meaning of the words I actually use, i.e. “centrist means corporate.” Au contraire, the slogan I would propose is “People vs. Big Corporations. Which side are you on?”, or something to that effect. To me, corporate is pretty far right; when corps are in bed with govt, that’s fascism in my book. Not a left wing phenomenon, no matter what Jonah Goldberg says. So it can be discouraging to try and articulate a concept that I’m still trying to clarify and flesh out in my own mind.
But the essence of what I mean by “centrist” is “down the middle.” And the issues/platform planks that would clearly belong there would be clean, honest, and accountable govt; rule of law for everybody; effective regulatory oversight and enforcement of the industries that get regulated; fiscal reponsibility and budget discipline; no unnecessary foreign adventures; quality public education; a minimal but dependable safety net; public option for health insurance and repeal of the antitrust exemption for health insurance companies; and a strong position against the very concept of corporate personhood.
Those are what I consider centrist positions, perhaps with some minor adjustments. BUT IT’S JUST AS IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHAT TO LEAVE OUT.
I would leave out, generally speaking, the divisive social issues that are the current battle lines. I would hope that the voters on both left and right would be willing to set side some of the activists’ pet issues for the sake of a return to pragmatism and sanity. I would make clear that the party’s position is that all laws relating to those divisive issues would be left alone in their current form for the time being and immediate future. I think that would appeal to the center, where the numbers are, and leave the extreme activists on both sides isolated on the extremes, where they rightfully belong in a democracy. Certainly for lefties, it would represent a HUGE improvement over the corporate oligarchical govt we have now. Sometimes half a loaf is a huge victory, in my view, when the alternative might well be irrelevance and extinction.
That’s the essence of the idea. I understand that it can only work if it has instant appeal to huge numbers, so I emphasize the things any reasonable moderate would embrace, and leave out the divisive and most difficult to reconcile issues.
What do you think?
Ah, a person with whom I can agree. You wrote truth.
I left out support for both the First and Second Amendments, and for civil liberties generally.
Thank you very much. If you liked that, please tell me what you think of what I wrote in Comment #49 and (probably) #51. I’d love to get a sense of whether those here think I’m onto something viable.
I think it’s a good idea. It makes me nuts when people start fighting for gay marriage or abortion rights or anything to do with immigration right before an election. Not that we don’t want to have those things be just and right, it’s just too easy for the right to get out the knuckle draggers when those issues are on the table.
If we had Glass-Steagall back and derivatives regulated and general financial regulation, medicare for all, habeas corpus and posse comitatus and miranda back. anti trusting the media, fisa back, etc. maybe we could form a coalition that would work.