Tag Archives: Christine O’Donnell

Election Aftermath – A Slew of Senatorial Observations.

First observation, on the Delaware senate race. Choosing Christine O”Donnell over Mike Castle was perhaps the most self-destructive primary choice I have ever seen since I began watching politics, easily trouncing the previous record holder, John McCain”s presidential bid. The wildly popular Castle was thought to be a shoe-in for this seat, whereas O”Donnell never had a chance, and everyone knew she had no chance in the general well before the primary.

To support her regardless meant the concept of a moderately liberal Republican was so abhorrent to her supporters that they”d rather have an even more liberal Democrat – well, either that, or they all deluded themselves about her prospects. I could never buy this line of thinking, but perhaps that”s because I”m one of the myriad Libertarians who vote Republican for lack of a better party. I”ve found this to be a common theme among such Libertarians: since all of our votes end up being choices between the lesser of two authoritarians, we tend to roll our eyes when someone gets worked up because his would-be candidate doesn”t fill out all the correct bubbles on the political purity-test. Join the club, Delaware Republicans.

That said, this sends a powerful message to Republican moderates. You have exactly as much freedom to vote the way you want as Democratic moderates do: none. “Moderate” is an act you play to get re-elected; it isn”t actually allowed to influence your votes. Votes will be determined by the will of the party. One needs look no farther than Obamacare to prove that there isn”t a single Democratic senator willing to obey his constituents instead of the party. Now Republicans won”t be permitted to do so either. I can”t say I care much for this message. It seems to me that knocking off pseudo-centrist Democrats is a better way of getting conservative votes.

Second observation, also on the same race, criticizing the other side. The problem with Christine O”Donnell isn”t that she was too conservative, rather, she was just a bad candidate. The entire idea that statewide electability is determined by how close a politician is to that state”s mainstream is absurd. If Chris Christie, arch-fiscal conservative, can get elected Governor of New Jersey, clearly the problem isn”t that the Mid-Atlantic requires more centrism out of its candidates. Is there any senate seat in the country that Marco Rubio, Florida”s new senator elect and Tea Party favorite, couldn”t get within five points of winning? Most voters want a candidate who can demonstrate that he understands what he”s doing and can handle the reigns of power, i.e., a good communicator with solid credentials who inspires confidence in his audiences. Political positions matter, but are something of an afterthought as long as the candidate himself is sharp and inspiring.

Back to criticizing Tea Partiers: If the above is true, stop nominating conservative flakes merely because they”re conservative. If you don”t like moderates, find the conservatives that aren”t flakes and run them instead. If you promise to be real good on this one, Minnesota might lend you Chip Cravaak to give you some pointers on identifying them. Hint: They”ll look like Chip Cravaak.

Third Observation, on Connecticut. I know what you were thinking, Connecticut. “Let”s nominate McMahon for the senate seat! She has gobs of money, and money buys elections, right?” Turns out, Connecticut, that money can”t buy an election. A certain amount of money allows a candidate to get enough airtime to introduce himself to the people, butonce the candidate is a known entity, additional spending produces negligible results. For further reading, I refer you to Steven Levitt”s work on campaign spending influence, which concludes that spending has one tenth the effect that is commonly accepted. I bet you now wish you had nominated Rob Simmons for that seat instead, Connecticut. A retired Colonel who won a house seat in a Democratic stronghold… boy, he looks a lot like Chip Cravaak, doesn”t he?

And now, a personal note to some of the Minnesota house districts. To MN-7, you have no business being a Democratic stronghold. Why can”t you act more like your older brother, MN-8? To MN-3, please move east a few miles and get me out of Keith Ellison”s district. To MN-1, your representative has no business being a Democrat if he”s too afraid to include the word “Democrat” in any of his campaign ads. MN-2 and MN-6, keep up the good work.

Also, to our probable governor. Congratulations on doing what no Democrat has done in 20 years. I”m sure, barring a recount upset, that you”ll get straight to work on lots of important progressive goals like higher taxes, more spending, and trying to redistrict Michele Bachmann out of existence. I”m sure you”ll have no trouble doing that, what with your ironclad grip on the legislature – wait, what”s that? You”ve lost the house and senate? Well, you”d better go find them, since you can”t do anything without them. That was rather irresponsible of you. No one”s lost the senate since the 1970″s.

Now, if you”ll excuse me, I have to add Cravaak to my spell checker.

With Polls Bleak & November Near – It’s Obama Guy in Pain

I’m in for a big surprise when the fowl phone rings and it’s no other than James, the Obama Guy, once more. He’s got quite a bit to say about being down on his luck at Dominoes Pizza, and that’s just the start of it.

James is pretty depressed about the state of our land and doesn’t understand how his beloved Barack Obama can be sagging in the polls so badly. He also discusses his feelings on Christine O’Donnell, The Tea Party, and the Pelosi – Reid duet. It’s an emotional time on the newest GooseRadio Podcast…

On Christine O’Donnell, Ideology and Judgement

If you are reading this in Delaware, you should vote for Christine O’Donnell in November.

But we could have done so much better…

While much of Conservative World celebrates another evening of shocking primary triumphs, the results of the Delaware GOP senate contest continue to spawn no small amount of angst inside the party of Lincoln. Karl Rove’s controversial comments last evening on Hannity sum up why (via Politico) —

“I’ve met her. I wasn’t frankly impressed by her abilities as a candidate…. One thing that O’Donnell is now going to have to answer in the general election that she didn’t in the primary is her own checkered background….

There were a lot of nutty things she has been saying that don’t add up…. Why did she mislead voters about her college education? How come it took nearly two decades to pay her college bills so she could get her college degree? How did she make a living?”
Ya. Those are some pretty significant points right there. Rove’s honesty earned him a roar of disapproval from the Mama Grizzly herself. Even the all knowing, all seeing, Maha Rushie came after the venerable Rove today. That last one is hard for me to stomach because I spent many hours at the proverbial knee of El Rushbo as a young lad in a tractor somewhere in Eastern Montana. But Rove is right to ask the questions and Rush is wrong. Bam.

Christine O’Donnell has done some extremely good things. She’s spent much of her adult life advocating for traditional values, and she and I probably agree on 90% or more of the issues facing America today. When it comes to ideology, she is an excellent Conservative. Verily, I have thrown up my hands in frustration and disbelief at liberal Republicans like Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe time and time again as they’ve sided with Democrats. I want to be joyful when Conservatives trounce moderates!

Thing of it is – many of the judgments Christine O’Donnell has made in her personal life raise serious questions about her judgment. Judgment is something you need in high office. A Conservative with poor judgment is not going to be great for representative for Delaware or for the country as a whole. Fact of the matter is – there are a ton of Conservatives out there with good judgment. Perhaps even a few dozen in Delaware.

What Palin and O’Donnell are calling ‘Republican Cannibalism’ is just a lot of Republicans asking why on earth we’re circling the wagons around a candidate who gave sincere impressions that she didn’t have what it takes to serve her state and party well.

A solid candidate needs Conservative principles & good judgement. Nobody’s perfect, and no one will be baggage free. But we could have done a whole lot better on this one, and – in the future – we need to.

Photo Credit – Politco