- Dance with the ones that brung ya
Note:
The following are some thoughts on how Second District Congressman Mariannette Miller-Meeks (MMM) is sending the wrong message to constituents and other Republicans during and in the effort to retain her seat against Pelosi’s efforts in the House to “bump her off”. We continue to support that she won election to represent our district by getting more votes than Rita Hart. Nevertheless, besides this recent development outlined below, as we have maintained in other posts, is our concern over the implications of rhetoric she and her champions employ.
Her antagonist Rita Hart refused to submit to Iowa’s mechanism for challenging contested elections which ultimately involves a judicial panel. Instead Hart has taken the matter to the House which maintains a right to seat or not seat its members. Miller-Meeks’ employment of, shall we say, excessive confidence in Iowa election mechanisms and judges is troublesome in our estimation because those “features” are not unassailable. A limited challenge process involving a few counties can mask discovery of even a larger margin of victory for MMM. Congressional races are not “by county” they are about total votes throughout the district i.e. the total popular vote. We have no doubt that in counties MMM won handily, or conceded, there are likely relatively many more votes for her, if thoroughly reviewed.
There are other nuances about some of MMM arguments that we find clumsy if not a little reckless as to the bigger picture. Trump not being in the White House is far more devastating to our country than a minority member who won on Trump coattails who manages to give ground or show apostasy on key matters.
Miller-Meeks recent vote not helping engender enthusiasm for her fight to retain 2nd District seat
Second District Congresswoman Miller-Meeks joining House Democrats in repotedly voting for the Violence Against Women Act disappoints a lot of conservatives in the district, culture warriors, gun -rights activists and genuine feminists. It should be noted an overwhelming number of House Republican caucus members opposed the bill, nearly nine out of ten including most of the Republican women in the House. We see only two possibilities here and ask which calculation is worse for Miller-Meeks: be seen groveling for Democrat votes regarding the challenge to her seat from Rita Hart, or believing the legislation was supportable as written?
MMM has to know the legislation would have passed without her support so furthering it for any reason and ignoring what should be considered poison pills in it, creates a significant psychological hurdle for many to develop much enthusiasm for her election being sustained. They wonder, how does a serious conservative entertain Democrats, gratuitously helping them pass such bad legislation?
We suppose it disappoints her fellow Iowa Republican House members Representative Ashley Hinson and Representative Randy Feenstra who opposed it for good reason. Or maybe they think that MMM must be given a pass to maintain the seat, because well the vote made no difference. If that is their calculation then they have no appreciation for the brand and it is just more of the political circus that disgusts people. We will presume that is not the case.
Some conservative voters are probably asking if such politcal calculus is in play ~~ how far to go sustaining someone revealed as a once and future high-maintenance congressman regarding key votes, when Republican interests and resources can be applied elsewhere?
R Mall
