GOP Hopes to Elect More Republican Females to the House in 2022
Over 150 females have filed to run in the 2022 midterm election. The GOP needs five seats to take back the majority.
National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chair Rep. Tom Emmer predicted the House GOP could smash its record of female representatives in 2022.
“Thirty-two now, the highest number ever in our conference,” Emmer said. “But I don’t think that’s necessarily something to celebrate. We got started last cycle, we had success. Now we have to build off that success.”
The NRCC, the House GOP reelection arm, has seen over 600 Republicans file to run in the 2022 midterm elections. Over 150 of those candidates are females.
From Fox News:
The NRCC chair highlighted a couple of female recruits, including Esther Joy King in Illinois’ 17th Congressional District, who lost to Democratic Rep. Cheri Bustos by four points last November.
The five-term Democratic incumbent announced earlier this year that she wouldn’t run for reelection in 2022 and Emmer argued that Joy King’s “the reason that Cheri Bustos is choosing not to run again and retiring.”
He also showcased Monica De La Cruz-Hernandez in Texas’ 15th Congressional District, who’s running again after losing to Democratic Rep. Vicente Gonzalez by three points last November. And Virginia state Sen. Jen Kiggans, who’s hoping to unseat Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria in Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District. If Kiggans wins the GOP nomination, the 2022 general election in the district would be between two U.S. Navy veterans.
Emmer also touted the fundraising prowess so far of a number of freshman GOP female representatives. Among them are Reps. Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma, Ashley Hinson of Iowa, Nancy Mace of South Carolina, and Maria Salazar of Florida.
“They are leading from the standpoint that they are thought leaders within the conference, but also showing you that they are great campaign organizers and campaigners,” Emmer said. “They’re raising the necessary resources and they’re doing that job at home. I think that bodes well for us.”
The NRCC raised $79.2 million in the first half of 2021, including $20.1 million raised in June:
In its next filing, the National Republican Congressional Committee will report that it raised $79.2 million during the first half of the year, besting the $44.5 million raised in 2019 and marking the most ever raised for that period in the committee’s history. The committee now has $55 million cash on hand, versus more than $44 million for the DCCC.
But this year’s numbers were also bolstered by major contributions from Republican leadership accounts. House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy has transferred $12.76 million to the NRCC’s coffers this year, while House Republican Whip Steve Scalise has sent $8.39 million.
“We will take back the majority next fall and voters are doing everything they can to help us accomplish that goal,” NRCC Chairman Tom Emmer said in a statement. “Every vulnerable House Democrat should be eyeing the exits because if they choose to run, they will lose.”
The GOP needs five seats to take back the majority. Emmer believes they can “retire Nancy Pelosi” in 2022.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Better idea elect more Conservatives and fewer RINOs
People who won’t reach across the aisle to be fair.
Exactly, don’t need anymore Cheney’s
They’ll probably be more reliable than the corrupt male pussies making up most of the GOP.
Oh, so you mean the likes of Chaney, Murkowski and Collins?
To be fair, in both House and Senate R caucuses, there is a far higher chance of females than males being a RINO.
In the Senate, the female R’s range from radical Leftists to Moderates, with ZERO Conservatives. In the House, the situation is actually better.
Not that “male pussies” like Kinzinger don’t deserve all the abuse they get.
As for the overall point of this conversation: The odds of getting a RINO rather than a Conservative go up substantially if the candidate is female. So, why would anyone get excited about the current push to apply the D’s “Identity Politics” to R Primaries?
Are you really going to vote for one R over another R just because the first is a woman?
Worst possible reason to ever vote for anyone is their “identity” group.
Why not behave like a rational human and vote based on their position on the issues? Is the candidate a solid Conservative that will fight for us on issues that matter? We just don’t know, because we’re now being told to vote for them just to increase the % of women in our elected caucus.
As if that mattered.
The R women I have seen so far appear to be plenty young….for me that means under about 50 y/o. These women seem to have a good grasp on what is being done to American culture, education and families by “Democrats” and the Left.
Why is it a “success”, and why should we “build off” it? Why should anyone care how many of the R caucus are women, men, or whatever? It should be a matter of complete indifference whether the number of female GOP representatives is 200 or 20. Does anyone even bother counting what percentage of the GOP caucus is left-handed, or has brown eyes, or is allergic to tomatoes?! Would anyone describe it as a “success” if one of these metrics were to increase, or decrease?
Oh you mean content of one’s character? What one truly is on the inside and not what they appear on the outside? Where the hell have you been for the last 50 years Rip Van Millhouse?.
Yes, but this is the GOP.
“Why should anyone care how many of the R caucus are women, men, or whatever?”
I don’t know, but they do.
Regardless of past conversations, Milhouse is right on this one.
The like button isn’t working but that is how I and most Republicans feel.
A pro tip. To see upticks, precede your block quotes with a period.
Please stop beginning your posts with quotations – so that I can upvote you!
It’s great if you want government by feelings instead of by structure. On the other hand, you have to get women to vote R or you wind up with dem women, who presumably are even worse.
Dem women, deez women, oah doze women?
Asking for a friend from Queens.
Do you really think there are a significant number of women who will vote R if our candidate is female but not if he’s male? I know that’s a story people tell, but I doubt it’s true. If we were to run a woman for president, maybe, but I don’t think it’s true for any lesser position. Just as I don’t think running a black candidate would attract any black voters who would otherwise have voted D. Those who go for that sort of tokenism know, or should know, that a Republican candidate, even if she’s a black disabled lesbian, won’t vote for the sort of things they want.
“Do you really think there are a significant number of women who will vote R if our candidate is female but not if he’s male?” No I don’t. It’s not the voters that’s the problem. It’s the leaders.
In order to win the GOP has to do the following:
1. Address the voting fraud issue.
2. Develop a platform that addresses voters’ concerns.
I am not encouraged by the House Republicans’ threat to establish their own J6 commission. Wouldn’t it be a better idea to instead look at the swath of death and destruction the BLM/Antifa insurrection caused last year (with prominent Communist Party officials like Kamala Harris encouraging still more violence)? Or what about highlighting the surge in inflation and unemployment? Any commission the minority Republicans establish would be utterly powerless, but at least they could start talking about issues people actually care about.
The Communist Party is vulnerable on so many important issues, yet the GOP seems content to play “follow the leader” with Pelosi, Schumer and Biden*.
1. Voter Fraud is rare in this country and has not impacted the results of a single state this century. If you want to lose 2022 and 2024 make the GOP run on a non-existent issue the vast majority of people don’t care about. If there was any validity to the voter fraud claims Trump would have claimed voter fraud in a court of law not court of public opinion. Giuliani was asked point blank by a judge if the campaign alleged voter fraud and answered “no” which tells you everything you need to know about the claim.
2. I agree they need to address voters concerns; of which voter fraud is not one of them.
3. Your right they do need to speak to economic needs (which means not tax cuts for the rich but helping the working class base of the party) and they need to speak more about the culture war (which is the highest priority for a lot of the electorate)
I have doubts about whether you’re really a Republican.
1. There is very clearly rampant fraud in elections. When it last was enough to change a statewide result is an open question, but almost certainly no further back than Al Franken’s win in Minnesota. It is possible that it was enough to change one or more statewide results in 2020, but I don’t believe we will ever know.
In saying that it’s rare you are repeating the Democrat propaganda line that fraud doesn’t exist unless we can prove it, one vote at a time. But that’s very obviously not true. Election fraud is not rare, but it’s very difficult to prove. It’s like neutrinos — the fact that we only detect a few hundred a year doesn’t mean they’re rare; on the contrary, we know that they’re extremely common, that there are billions of them surrounding us and passing through us at all times, but they’re almost impossible to detect. Instances of election fraud are hard to prove directly, partly by its very nature, but even more so because the Democrats do everything they can to make them even harder. Last year especially, they pioneered new ways to invite fraud, and to ensure that it would not be found. And that’s the biggest prove that they believe there’s enough fraud to justify their efforts.
2. Tax cuts are not just for the “rich”. But even if they were, they are a matter of simple justice. Republicans ought to support tax cuts regardless of whom they help; the whole idea of tailoring ones principles according to whose ox is gored is disgusting, and what Democrats do. Republican support for tax cuts has never been premised on an assumption that the beneficiaries are likely to vote Republican, and it should never be.
Okay Milhouse. You nailed it!
Repeat after me: “I, , completely believe that the 2020 POTUS Election was as free of fraud, illegalities, and foreign influence as the 2000, 2004, and 2016 POTUS Elections.”
Thanks!
MAGA IS THE PLATFORM
Once again, the GOP are allowing themselves to be guided by faulty leftist ideology, as if the left even cares how many Conservative women are elected.
We’re Conservatives, we don’t give a damn about things like gender or race as long as that person IS THE RIGHT PERSON FOR THE JOB. And when I say the right person, I mean no reach across the aisle RINO weaklings.
Look at the state of our country and where reaching across the aisle has taken us. Let the left obsess over immutable human characteristics, we don’t need that bullshit. We need no-compromise street fighters who refuse to back down.
True. We don’t care. However, the wider electorate does care. That doesn’t mean we should pander to their interests. It does make sense, IMO, to be aware of the perceptions of the wider electorate, review the history of media bias in carrying water for d/progressive smears of r as the party of old white men. ECT.
The candidates still need to win the primary. No matter if they are the establishment preference or their gender. If the r primary voters select a well qualified female as the party choice what’s wrong with that?
If the best general election candidate as chosen in the primary is female great. If not that’s fine too. I don’t see that recruiting female candidates in the primary is a bad thing. IMO more choices are better than the tired establishment preference or because it’s ‘someone’s turn’.
As long as sex selective recruitment is affirmative action and not affirmative discrimination, then it may be possible to avoid the diversity trap.
I am not sure that the wider electorate DOES care about whether a candidate is male or female. A female GOP candidate is often subjected to vile sexist smears by the Communist Party and their toadies in the media (ex: Sarah Palin) and there are no electoral repercussions for the Communists. OTOH politicians like Cuomo, William Jefferson Clinton, Biden* and a variety of others stand credibly accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault, and there is no discernible effect on the popularity of these men or the Party that defends them.
The progressive media bias is set in stone. It doesn’t matter who we put forward, they will be demonized 24-7 regardless of who they are. We’ll always be the party of old white guys, of racists, or of whatever they want to label us for that news cycle.
We need to stop trying to satiate the left with stunts like this leftist-like “Recruiting Women” thing in the hopes that we might avoid the inevitable avalanche of negative leftist propaganda. THEY DON’T CARE. The left is on a tear, they are emboldened, and they cheat with impunity all while knowing the MSM will cover for them.
My point is, trying to play by their rules is an exercise in futility, and our country is quickly becoming a socialist hellhole. If there was ever a time we need to stick to our Conservative principles and put forth the best person for the job regardless of gender and/or race, it’s now.
There was a time when every one of your points would be great strategy, and the best policy. I wish we were still there. Unfortunately, that time has passed.
Candidate recruitment of other than ‘old, white, males’ who are tough enough to cast votes despite media opposition and to remain aloof from the concerns of the DC establishment isn’t pandering. It isn’t playing by their rules.
It’s a smart and strategic use of optics in the information age where a candidate’s photo may very well be the deciding factor for shallow, unmotivated, low info voters.
Look at the nomination and hearings for Kavanaugh and Barrett for an insight. Both contentious but Barrett wasn’t nearly derailed by crazy antics and impossible allegations.
Recruiting primary candidates isn’t anointing them. They have to perform and compete. The recruiting simply brings them to be evaluated by the primary voters and lets everyone know that they are welcome to earn the vote.
While it is good that there are both conservative men and women, ideally in equal distribution, the hope that men and women will participate in equal distribution is antithetical to the philosophy that recognizes and reconciles individual dignity, individual conscience, inordinate worth, and where men and women are equal in rights and complementary in Nature/nature. So, more men, more women, show me the principles, the strength and courage to stand, and competence to follow through. Baby Lives Matter (BLM)
In 2020 Federal courts from SCOTUS on down the line refused to do anything about obvious and blatant election fraud, so why on earth would anyone feel that the Dems will let any Republican win in the future?
I’m a helluva lot more concerned about thing like this than I am about how many of which sex are running.
One of the newer ones elected last time, Rep. Beth Van Dunne (Tx) was an awesome mayor back before Irving sort of melded into South Dallas.
A nation run by females is a nation under God’s curse.
Only genuinely conservative Reublican women need apply. People like Cheney might as well be Democrats.
I don’t give a rat’s behind who they are. As long as they have an intimate understanding of the United States Constitution, and have the courage to stand up and act accordingly, it just doesn’t matter. RINO’s need not apply.
How about focusing on electing more actual Conservatives, and skip the Left’s inhuman Identity Politics?