New York Republicans have not won a statewide race (governor, attorney general, comptroller, US senator) in 12 years, mostly because NY is a solidly blue state by registration, but also because they have run lousy candidates.
That may well change in 2018, when popular Rep. Chris Gibson, NY-19, has said he will abide by a "self-imposed term limit" of eight years and give up his House seat.
Gibson tells his own story pretty effectively in this 2014 campaign ad:
On Wednesday, Gibson was pressed by Fred Dicker, a Murdoch Republican booster who hosts a radio show in Albany, about running for governor in 2018. He left that big door wide open:
That’s not something I’m planning on. But you never know. (We’ll) take it one day at a time here and focus on our service.
Dicker did not mention the "self-imposed term limit" or the other major statewide race in 2018, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's presumed re-election run, but he was clearly impressed by Gibson and was talent-scouting him for higher office.
Dicker is assuredly not alone in that.
More, below.
Five months into his first term, I wrote that Gibson would be hard to beat in 2012 for four reasons that are still relevant:
1. His bio -- hometown sports hero, Army career ending at colonel with some serious medals, Ph.D. from Cornell, and no hint of scandal.
2. His support base -- tea partiers, the GOP establishment, veterans and their family and friends.
3. His affect -- he comes across as soft-spoken, modest and likeable, just doing his best to serve in another capacity and fix the mess in Washington.
4. His work ethic in the district -- town hall meetings, appearances and speeches, local TV and radio, etc.
To which I should now add a videogenic family; a relatively moderate voting record, underscored by an endorsement this year from the Environmental Defense Fund; and a political killer instinct.
Here some of that, as Gibson seeks to define his 2014 opponent, Sean Eldridge, as a rich, out-of-touch outsider:
Back in 2012, he won by 7 in a more Democratic district (after redistricting added about half of Maurice Hinchey's district) that Obama carried by a similar margin.
This year, Gibson won by 30, by successfully defining his opponent, and despite being outspent. Sure it was a wave election, but Gibson's super-landslide win in an Obama district was uniquely impressive among NY congressional races.
Though he's a relative moderate (National Journal called him the "most liberal House Republican" last year), Gibson has enjoyed strong support from local tea partiers and from the national Koch political machine. No potential primary challenger from the right even launched a trial balloon in 2012 and 2014.
But Gibson is really quite right-wing, compared to the majority of New Yorkers. He is an active No Labels type, which means that he supports cutting Social Security, Medicare and nonmilitary discretionary spending, and also cutting taxes on millionaires and corporations. None of which is popular with most New Yorkers.
Gibson's ratings by conservative groups belie his relative moderation -- 82 percent from Ralph Reed's Faith and Freedom Coalition, 91 percent from NY SCOPE (an NRA-allied anti-gun safety group), 90 percent from Larry Pratt's Gun Owners of America (more extreme than the NRA), 100 percent from Gary Bauer's Campaign for Working Families, 75 percent from the National Right to Life Committee, 71 percent from the John Birch Society, 85 percent from the US Chamber of Commerce, 76 percent from the Concerned Women for America, etc.
Should Gibson more openly declare his willingness to run for governor or US senator in 2018, he will be an immediate favorite of the Republican establishment, the Conservative Party, and the tea party base, and will therefore be untroubled by a primary. He will be able to raise tens of millions easily from in-state and national GOP moneybags.
And he will be hard to beat.
Not impossible, but difficult and expensive.