2010 Elections

Scott Brown, Ron Paul and the Future of the GOP

Posted on February 24, 2010. Filed under: 2010 Elections, 2012 Elections, Dems, Elections, GOP, Issues, Political Parties |

The GOP and their teabagging stooges are quite angry today. Yesterday, Scott Brown broke rank and voted in favor of the Senate jobs bill (along with Collins and Snowe). This should not be a major or breaking-story because congressmen USED to vote with their constituents in mind all the time. Voting across party lines is not unusual at all, yet the Tea Party appears to have already given up on Brown. They have filled his website and Facebook page with comments like this one:

“You, Sir, are a RINO Judas. I hope you enjoy your 30 pieces of silver.”

Amazing really. One single vote and he is deemed a Judas. All of this, of course, makes the 2010 election ever more potent. It’s not just about the Dems losing control of Congress anymore. If the GOP does in fact win BIG this fall,  are these “supporters” –those responsible for this apparent conservative revival– going to react in a similar way when a freshly minted congressman decides to vote with his district or state in mind? If they do, then the GOP is going to have a major problem in 2010.

Mike Madden over at Salon has the same thing on his mind. He poses that the GOP is going to have a hard time keeping the support of their new activist base. The platform that the Tea Party wants them to run against –which is the only way they are going to do well in 2010– is one that the GOP was booted out for in 2006.

“…most of the things Republicans say they’ll do if they take power again — cutting spending, increasing transparency, ending earmarks — were exactly what helped voters sour on Republican rule in 2006. To keep the new elements of their activist base happy, GOP leaders will have to stick to their plan. “Keeping the support of tea party activists will require keeping our promises, it’s as simple as that,” one GOP aide

It’s ludicrous to assume the GOP will do any of these things and they know it. That’s their concern. If the Tea Party is this angry about Scott Brown voting with his constituents and “against” the Tea Party, then the GOP is in a lot of trouble. They’re already spitting on Steele on a regular basis using trademark bagger language.

“Michael Steele is an imperial chairman,” grumbled one GOP fundraiser to Politico.

In my opinion, a bagger-fueled 2010 GOP resurgence is going to 1) highlight the fractures between the libertarians and conservatives and 2) splinter the presidential field in 2012 leaving the Dems in a good position. I’m not sure who’ll represent the GOP in 2012, but I can assure you that Ron Paul will be a strong candidate (regardless of party) and if the GOP burns their libertarian bridges, they can both  kiss their 2012 chances goodbye.

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

GOP Takeover Unlikely

Posted on February 19, 2010. Filed under: 2010 Elections, 2012 Elections, Dems, Elections, GOP, Issues |

American conservatives have gotten themselves very excited over the past couple days as CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) has been underway. The message is the same it’s always been: lower taxes, less government and more national security.

As we know, they’ve also been sounding the jobless and deficit alarm a lot also. Well, not really. It’s more like they set the bank alarm off, ran away and then called the cops when a Dem walked in the door.

Short-term memories are in no shortage when it comes to the GOP and their stooge baggers, but just in case you’ve drank their tea also, take a look at this:

https://i1.wp.com/farm3.static.flickr.com/2801/4190849095_61cc1777a2_o.jpg

Calling for tax cuts might get teabaggers hard and the GOP establishment something to talk about, but it’s pretty clear that it had a terrible effect on the deficit. Maybe Bush was just a bad president and other GOPers had it right when they tried to give tax breaks?

https://i0.wp.com/www.headybrew.net/images/content/budget_deficit_or_surplus.gif

Nope, but they like to claim that it’s all about the trickle-down effect. If we give tax breaks to the wealthy, then middle-Americans will also be helped because the rich will hire them. Does that pass the smell test? Are they as innocent as they claim?

chart of the day, jobs lost in the bush and obama administrations
The point is that even though the facts are there that prove the GOP cannot effectively run an economy or the country, they still manage pass themselves off as the party of the common man. They have proven to be successful at manipulating the masses over the past year and now they’re claiming they’ll take back control of the Senate. They’re hoping for a 1994-style takeover and even throwing some names for the new “contract” around.
Unfortunately for them, there’s something called statistics and reality that seems to be in their way. Intrade is giving them a 30% chance of a takeover and Nate Silver –master statistician who predicted almost every detail of the 2008 election– has a message as well: Republicans Must Defend Seats Too. The caveat is this enthusiasm gap and unless the Dems pass something tangible through reconciliation, it might be hard. The public likes it when they see the government doing something.

Regardless of whether they takeover or not, the ball is still in the Obama’s court as he’ll have a golden opportunity to sandbag the GOP and follow in the steps of the 1948 election where Truman rain against a “do nothing” Congress.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Silver Lining of Bayh’s Retirement

Posted on February 16, 2010. Filed under: 2010 Elections, Dems, Elections, GOP, Media |

And there’s always a silver lining.

The resignation du jour that’s rattling the presses is that centrist, obstructionist Democrat, Evan Bayh has decided to retire. The GOP-favored MSM is playing into Michael Steele’s claim that Dems are “running for the hills.” Of course, being a member of the GOP requires the inability to speak the truth since the GOP faces MORE retirements that the Dems do, but that doesn’t matter when your party has contol of the conversation (as the GOP does right now).

The main obstacle for Dems is not that Bayh is retiring. I believe that to be a godsend since all he did was obstruct progressive policies. I’m no fan of Blue Dogs and couple Bayh with Nelson, then you have a deadly combination for progressives. Some are worried about the timing of this departure which give the Dems until Tuesday (in America) to get another name on the ballot. That’s not great, but there are two great things that will come from this.

1) It forces the GOP to make a decision as to who they’re putting on the ballot. They’re now stuck with two average candidates (Coats and Hostetler).

2) If one thing is true it’s that –nationwide– this election cycle will be an anti-incumbent one. Another truth is that in swing-states we can expect to see a GOP-leaning preference and enthusiasm gap. A new face might be the only thing that saves the Dems.

Unlike the retirement of Dodd, I was thrilled with this one. Bayh did very little to help the progressive cause. Without him, Dems don’t have to comprimise.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...