I am not surprised that the conservative wing of the Republican Party wants conservative candidates in safe Republican districts like NY-23. It’s the same thing liberals feel about Dem districts. We want to see them represented by candidates that will be as strongly progressive as the district allows.

And when as in this case, a candidate is chosen without a primary or any input except from party officials, you’re much more likely to get a candidate who is out-of-step with your party base. I believe in the primary process as a way of ensuring that the voters, the little people of the process, have some power in that decision.

But out-of-step with the base doesn’t necessarily mean out-of-step with the district. Whether liberal or conservative, if you choose a candidate who fits your ideology but who is too far outside the mainstream of the district, you’re going to lose elections. This is a balancing act that everyone interested in politics has to learn. Whether conservatives can walk that line is something that will only be shown over the next several election cycles.

I am surprised at the weight everyone is giving to this one small, sparsely populated district. I heard that in an off-year election only a few thousand people in this district are likely to come out and vote. I love upstate New York myself, but it’s hardly an area I would pick as a national bellwether. The proof of concept for the conservatives, I think, will come in 2010 when they’re painting on a much broader canvas. I can’t take this one election too seriously as predictor of future success or failure for Tea Party-style conservative philosophy.