Greg Prince's Blog

Musings and pontifications from a reality based progressive

Archive for the ‘Election 2006’ Category

Spoiling or saving?

Posted by Greg on January 31, 2007

Interesting piece at DKOS compares the “Green” spoiler effect that gave us President Bush, to the libertarian spoilers that gave us a Democratic Congress in 2006.

Missouri Senate

McCaskill (D) 1,047,049  50
Talent (R)    1,001,238  47
Gilmour (L)      47,504   2

Montana Senate

Tester (D)      198,302  49
Burns (R)       195,455  48
Jones (L)        10,324   3

Posted in Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

Survival of the fittest

Posted by Greg on January 1, 2007

Interesting analysis.  Check it out.

The Washington Times featured an interesting post election analysis that showed that Republican Senators gave far less money to struggling candidates than did Democrats. I believe that this is relatively true in the House races as well. It was not that they soberly calculated that they were going to lose in a landslide and decided not to throw good money after bad. They just threw their candidates, who were within fractions of a percentage point of winning, under the bus. Why?

I wonder if this is a symptom of a fundamental “survival of the fittest” instinct among Republicans – Colleagues and constituents just have to suck it up and get it done without aid or bailouts. This seems to be one explanation why conservatives raided the Treasury with a massive increase in Earmarks and no-bid contracts in Iraq and New Orleans. I sometimes wonder if the War in Iraq was merely a payback to the business interests of the Military-Industrial Complex. It seems to me that they did all of this because they could.

Posted in Election 2006, The Right | Leave a Comment »

Another democratic pickup

Posted by Greg on December 13, 2006

This was unforeseen.

U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla conceded defeat to former congressman Ciro Rodriguez in a stunning upset that completed the Democratic takeover of Congress.

The Republican incumbent lost Bexar County for the first time in his political career Tuesday night, and trailed Rodriguez, his Democratic challenger, in total votes across the sprawling Congressional District 23.

The Associated Press called the election for Rodriguez shortly before 9 p.m. Bonilla telephoned Rodriguez to concede around that time, according to his spokesman, Phil Ricks.

Posted in Congress, Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

A Republican’t bloodbath?

Posted by Greg on November 17, 2006

Americablog points to this article:

For all the focus on the Democrats, a former Bush official who predicts a coming bloodbath between the White House and disgruntled conservative Republicans brushed off the Pelosi-Hoyer tussle as much ado about process.

“The Democrats are the sideshow,” he said. “Bush self-destructing is the big story in town.”

It’s going to be interesting in the next months…

Posted in Congress, Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

A small dose of reality

Posted by Greg on November 17, 2006

It is, I suppose, time for an overdue commentary on the historic midterm elections.

It was a good night in most respects.  It was disappointing to see Scott Kleeb (NE-03) and Angie Piccione (CO-04) lose having donated to both their campaigns, but it was remarkable that a democrat would have even been competitive in those districts.  All in all a strong testimony to the effectiveness of Dean’s 50 State Strategy, and suggestive of good things to come down the road.

Locally things went particularly well, given the pickup of MN-01 for the Democrats, the takeover of the MN House, and enlarged majorities such that theDFL has a nearly veto proof majority in both houses.  But I can’t for the life of me understand why the voters of Minnesota’s sixth congressional district could be so amazingly stupid as to actually elect thebatshit crazy, theocratic wingnut Michelle Bachmann to the US House of Representatives.  And the electoral survival of Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is a disappointment.  I curse the governor every time I get stuck in traffic or see yet another pointless school fundraiser or tax hike.  I bit my lip and grudgingly voted for the self aggrandizing media whore theDFL nominated to oppose him….but I know many who couldn’t do that an respect themselves in the morning.  And it’s too bad.  Pawlenty survived by a fraction of a point.

The Independence Party came out a big loser in the Minnesota elections.  But not in the way so many people would think.  There’s been the usual whining that their presence took votes away from Hatch, returningPawlenty to office.  But there’s no way to say who would have been effected more.  It’s a reasonable observation that the moderate populism of the Independence Party fits well with theDFL , without the hard core leftist element that makes some people nervous.  But they seem to think lightening is going to strike again and they’ll pull, somehow, another 1998 a la JesseVentura .  Sorry folks but it ain’t gonna happen.  But you don’t solve the problem of significant numbers voting for third party candidates by bitching.  You solve it by giving them something to support in your own platform.

The media honeymoon for the Democrats is already over with the reporting over fighting and divisions.  That’s idiocy.  Olbermann explains it pretty succinctly :

Funny, how when Trent Lott defeated Lamar Alexander by one vote for the Senate minority leadership yesterday, it was characterized in the media as a remarkable comeback story, with the random kidding reference to that ironical word “minority.”  But when Steny Hoyer and Jack Murtha both stood for the House majority leadership today, that was characterized in the media as Democratic infighting, with frequent implications that the Dems were already coming apart at the seams.

Thoughtful conservative John Cole observes :

A snide observer might note that what you saw was just a real leadership struggle. Compare and contrast that to what is happening within the Republican House caucus, in which they just extended the middle finger to the public and elected the same exact leadership that was in place- Boehner and Blunt. No struggle, no debate, no chance for fresh blood- just a nice orderly succession in the DeLay bloodline.

Regardless, you have to love the right-wing spin on this whole affair- “Hoyer Humiliates Pelosi” is the typical response, and you can bet that a whole series of posts detailing the corruption of Rep. Murtha had to be shelved with Hoyer’s victory. Given that this is the same crew who, after being demolished at the polls on election day, claimed that Conservatism had won, that would be a pretty safe bet.

This was a leadership struggle, nothing more, and I do not think drawing any larger conclusions about whether or not the Democrats can work together makes any sense- after twelve years out of power, it is safe to say they are united against the Republican party (if there was a gaffe in all of this, it was Pelosi using the phrase “Truth to Power” in her remarks yesterday). Despite the best efforts of the media and the GOP to spin this as a terrible blunder, it will amount to little more than a blip, especially as the oversight begins in earnest this January.

A major catalyst for commentary is driven by a Time Magazine article which discusses myths percolating down from the midterms.  I usually read Time more like a comic book, but they’re gotten it right this time – I can say that since their own analysis essentially reaffirms what I’ve been thinking myself these past couple weeks.

MYTH: Republicans lost their base.
REALITY: The base turned out, they just got beat.

Yep.  Turnout wasn’t bad for a midterm, which makes it even tougher for the results to not be understood as something of a mandate against more of the same out of Washington.  At Firedoglake we read:

Yes, that’s right, Karl. Your revved up base still turned out in droves, based on your nasty “push the worst buttons of their souls” political strategery, and yet…well…you still got your ass handed to you.  Boo yah!

A lot too is that the old ploys to get out the vote worked in principle…they just worked differently than in 2002 or 2004.  Take, for example, the anti gay initiatives on the ballots in several states.  Kudos to the clearer heads in Arizona thatbitchslapped the constitutional amendment, but the real effects were probably in Virginia and Wisconsin where independents and Democrats turned out to support the amendments, but then voted for Democrats.

MYTH: The election was all about the war.
REALITY: It’s the dishonesty, stupid.
Time kind of overstates their case here.  We see 74% complain about corruption while 67% about the war.  The war did matter and it helped bring out the Democrats’ base.  But this is a stark repudiation of those, usually on the right, who said the culture of corruption wasn’t a big deal.  Moreover, it’s hard to separate dishonesty from the war since we know now that the intelligence was doctored to make a more compelling case for war in the first place.

MYTH: The losses Republicans suffered this election were no different than what you usually see in a President’s sixth year in office.
REALITY: Redistricting minimized what might have been a truly historic shellacking.

There are multiple stories to this one.  There really aren’t that many regularly competitive districts any more and in some ways it’s a shame.  It truly was a wave election, and the effects were felt throughout the ballot.  Not just national but state legislatures fell to the Democrats as well.  In terms of “getting” just how historic this change was, not one Democratic seat fell to Republicans this go around whether in the House of Representatives, the Senate, or governorships.  Typically  individual seats will change hands between parties, even though one party or the other will net an increase.  Even in 1994, for example, the GOP lost four seats to the Democrats despite their net gain to take control.  This time around there were ZERO Republican pick ups.  It wasn’t just a net gain for the Democrats, but a complete firewall in terms of what they already had.  It’s amazing.

More than that, it seems the GOP’s excessive and blatant gerrymandering may have even cost them a few seats.  It appears the GOP, desperate in their attempts to boost numbers, may have stretched base voters too thin between some districts making them only nominally safe for GOP candidates leaving them both vulnerable to Democratic takeover during political waves.

MYTH: Democrats won because they carefully recruited more conservative candidates.
REALITY: Democrats won because their candidates were conservative about their message.

Truth be told, oversimplifications like this are why I typically read Time more like a comic book.  The crux of the matter is that the Democrats are now the big tent party, with a whole lot more ideological diversity than you’re going to find within the GOP.  What we’re seeing is additional evidence of realignment and the possible relegation of the GOP to regional status.  The Democrats don’t need the south to get to a functioning majority any more, and the Republicans are losing strength almost everywhere but.

More to the point, the wailing cries from the wingnut caucus suggest a salving of conscience with the notion that “conservatives” won even if Republican’ts didn’t.  Yes there were some conservative Democrats elected just as there were some liberal Republicans defeated.  But a lot of liberals and even progressives (and an outright socialist) were elected as well.  Moreover, a lot of these conservative Democrats aren’t really conservative.  They’re not progressives but they are populists.  Have these conservative pundits actually read John Tester’s policy positions?  Or Jim Webb’s?  I don’t get the impression they have because the policies advocated by these supposedly “conservative” Democrats fit squarely into the mainstream of the Democratic party and will be fought tooth and nail by the GOP.

MYTH: Joe Lieberman’s victory proves the netroots don’t matter.
REALITY: The netroots had some key victories.
Among the stupider claims passing for “wisdom” among the chattering classes.  Lieberman is, in fact, among the worst ways in which to view theNetroots contribution.  From the article:

Of the 19 candidates that three of the biggest liberal blogs (Daily Kos, mydd.com and Swing State Project) raised money for, eight of the candidates won. … This cycle, bloggers may have been most strongly linked to Lamont, but they actually donated more money to Jim Webb of Virginia. Bloggers also made “macaca” into a scandal that helped sink Webb’s opponent, George Allen. The netroots’ record is probably too short to be judged definitively, but instead of looking at pure win/loss records, an examination of where the netroots put their emphasis suggests that the online community is either becoming more sophisticated in picking its candidates or is helping push long shots over the top.

The netroots have been influential on both sides of the aisle, but the focus seems to rest mostly on the left side.  OK, that’s fine for discussion purposes.  First off, Lieberman’s run as an independent is best understood as a victory for the netroots.  He lost the primary, but won the final based on his support from Republicans – and especially rightward leaning bloggers.  “Virtual” opposition on the left cost him the primary, and “virtual” support on the right strengthened his campaign in the final.  Yes, there arerightwing bloggers too and let’s not forget the role they played in the defeat, a couple years back, of Tom Daschle.

As far as the netroots go, they did pretty well.  Tester and Webb in the Senate are clear netroots wins.  But the larger story is the excitement generated by the netroots in races across the country that were FAR closer than they should have been.  Idaho-01 should not have been competitive.  Colorado-04 should not have been competitive.  New Mexico-01 should not have been competitive.  Nebraska-03 should not have been competitive.  And there are lots more.  Thenetroots are directly responsible for getting a buzz going in these races and starting the small time fundraising that got them to where they could compete on a more equal footing with established incumbents or in strongly GOP leaning districts.  This is how you build a majority, on district at a time.

Here’s looking forward to 2008 when we can fumigate 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue…

Posted in Bush Adminisration, Election 2006, The Blogosphere | Leave a Comment »

Showing up matters

Posted by Greg on November 14, 2006

What difference can a 50 state strategy make? This commentary and statistical analysis by Kos diarist Osterizer makes some interesting points:

The two districts that ‘flipped’ for Webb are both in the Northern Virginia area, as is Allen’s most-underperforming district, VA-08. But we see that Allen gained ground in only two districts. One of these, VA-04, was one of only ten districts in the nation where Democrats did not run a House candidate. Here we see another reason for the 50-state strategy — since Randy Forbes did not have a Democratic opponent to run against, he could spend more time in VA-04 stumping for Allen.

A lot of lessons. The obvious lesson was that we don’t always know in advance which districts will be competitive, and we aren’t in position to take advantage of it if we don’t have credible candidate in place.

But the above lesson is important too – it weakens things across the ticket and trickles into other races. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for splitting the ticket on my ballot when the choice of candidates justifies it. But giving them a free pass just doesn’t cut it.

Posted in Congress, Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

A frothy victory

Posted by Greg on November 12, 2006

Dan Savage takes a moment to ponder the defeat of the worst senator in the US, Rick Santorum.

It would have been a lot easier to be a total dick about Santorum’s defeat if he hadn’t made such a gracious—and apparently sincere—concession speech last night. I almost fell off the couch when Santorum asked the crowd to give a round to applause to Bob Casey.

Where was this graciousness and respect for political differences while Rick Santorum was in the U.S. Senate? And where was this graciousness during the actual campaign? Santorum stopped just short of accusing Bob Casey of flying off to Pakistan twice a week to rim Osama bin Laden. If Santorum had spent the last 12 years in the Senate being the person he was for 12 minutes during his concession speech, well, he might not have made so many enemies in Pennsylvania and all over the country.

But to anyone out there who is feeling bad for Santorum today, or his weeping children (what is it about Republicans that always makes you feel so awful for their kids?), I would direct your attention to this video clip. In an interview with CNN during the final days of the campaign, Santorum came out against—no shit—the pursuit of happiness.

The man clearly doesn’t get—never got—what this country is all about. America is a better place now that Rick Santorum has been turned out of the U.S. Senate.

Read it in full.

Posted in Congress, Election 2006, The Right | Leave a Comment »

Minnesota Results

Posted by Greg on November 6, 2006

A great site by MNPublius for coverage of election 2006, from a Minnesota prespective.

Check it out.

They say it works best in Firefox, but IE should be usable as well.   Note, everything shows up as zeros for now…for obvious reasons.

Posted in Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

Changing the Subject

Posted by Greg on November 2, 2006

Check out this at Daily Kos on Colorado’s Amendment 43.

Changing the subject indeed.  Brilliantly done.

Posted in Culture War, Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

Kerry in perspective

Posted by Greg on November 1, 2006

Courtesy of an honest conservative – there are a few of them left.

John Derbyshire at National Review observes:

John Kerry is awful, and anything we can do further to degrade his political prospects is worth doing. But really, I saw a clip of him making the much-deplored remark, and it was obvious that the dimwit in Iraq that he referred to was George W. Bush, not the American soldier. It was a dumb joke badly delivered, but his meaning was plain. My pleasure in watching JK squirm is just as great as any other conservative’s, but something is owed to honesty. There’s a lot of fake outrage going round here.

Meanwhile, what’s going on in Iraq that makes the administration so eager to stick pins in their John Kerry doll? Wouldn’t have anything to do with the abandonment of kidnapped American soldiers, or being pushed around by their Iraqi puppets, would it?

Andrew Sullivan rightly observes:

The U.S. military does not have a tradition of abandoning its own soldiers to foreign militias, or of taking orders from foreign governments. No commander-in-chief who actually walks the walk, rather than swaggering the swagger, would acquiesce to such a thing. The soldier appears to be of Iraqi descent who is married to an Iraqi woman. Who authorized abandoning him to the enemy? Who is really giving the orders to the U.S. military in Iraq? These are real questions about honor and sacrifice and a war that is now careening out of any control. They are not phony questions drummed up by a partisan media machine to appeal to emotions to maintain power.

And where, by the way, is McCain on this? Silent on Cheney’s “no-brainer” on waterboarding. Silent recently on Iraq. But vocal – oh, how vocal – on Kerry. It tells you something about what has happened to him. And to America.

Posted in Bush Adminisration, Election 2006, International, Terrorism | Leave a Comment »

Let there be consequences

Posted by Greg on November 1, 2006

GOPers who desperately deserve to lose include:

–AZ-Sen: Jon Kyl
–AZ-01: Rick Renzi
–AZ-05: J.D. Hayworth
–CA-04: John Doolittle
–CA-11: Richard Pombo
–CA-50: Brian Bilbray
–CO-04: Marilyn Musgrave
–CO-05: Doug Lamborn
–CO-07: Rick O’Donnell
–CT-04: Christopher Shays
–FL-13: Vernon Buchanan
–FL-16: Joe Negron
–FL-22: Clay Shaw
–ID-01: Bill Sali
–IL-06: Peter Roskam
–IL-10: Mark Kirk
–IL-14: Dennis Hastert
–IN-02: Chris Chocola
–IN-08: John Hostettler
–IA-01: Mike Whalen
–KS-02: Jim Ryun
–KY-03: Anne Northup
–KY-04: Geoff Davis
–MD-Sen: Michael Steele
–MN-01: Gil Gutknecht
–MN-06: Michele Bachmann
–MO-Sen: Jim Talent
–MT-Sen: Conrad Burns
–NV-03: Jon Porter
–NH-02: Charlie Bass
–NJ-07: Mike Ferguson
–NM-01: Heather Wilson
–NY-03: Peter King
–NY-20: John Sweeney
–NY-26: Tom Reynolds
–NY-29: Randy Kuhl
–NC-08: Robin Hayes
–NC-11: Charles Taylor
–OH-01: Steve Chabot
–OH-02: Jean Schmidt
–OH-15: Deborah Pryce
–OH-18: Joy Padgett
–PA-04: Melissa Hart
–PA-07: Curt Weldon
–PA-08: Mike Fitzpatrick
–PA-10: Don Sherwood
–RI-Sen: Lincoln Chafee
–TN-Sen: Bob Corker
–VA-Sen: George Allen
–VA-10: Frank Wolf
–WA-Sen: Mike McGavick
–WA-08: Dave Reichert

Posted in Congress, Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

Fighting old battles

Posted by Greg on October 31, 2006

The wingnut caucus seems to have jumped the shark with their latest, most desperate attempt yet to distract the American voters from the Republican’t’s tripartite legacy of failure.

Rather than focus on the quagmire in Iraq, rather than focus on out of control spending and deficits, rather than focus on the latest dance at the GOP ball – “the perp walk”, rather than focus on their supposedly safe candidates like Barbara “bitch slap” Cubin and George “have you stopped beating your wife yet” Allen, the political machine has decided to rely on the short attention span of some Americans by partying like it’s 2004.

That’s right. They want to pick a fight with John Kerry over Iraq, aided of course by the lapdog media and sycophants in the blogosphere.

But people are a little better informed now than a couple years back. And people who, like myself, were willing to give the chimperor the benefit of the doubt have come to realize the truth of the old adage, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

The uncomfortable facts are what they are. Iraq is falling into civil war. The military has lowered its standards in order to meet recruiting targets. We have no coherent policy, plan or strategy to bring about a favorable end in the Middle East. That it is lamented by the “French looking” John F. Kerry doesn’t make it less true. And only the truly flailing and desperate are going to misinterperate Kerry’s remarks as somehow a negative reflection on our men and women serving overseas. This is indeed a case where the rot starts at the top – at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Not that reality is going to stop the presidunce from lashing out impotently at Kerry’s “shameful” remarks. You can’t blame them for trying. But smart people recognize the true shameful activities are the suspension of habeas corpus, the illegal wiretapping, the deceit and manipulation of intelligence to justify the Iraqi occupation, the failure to secure American ports, the cronyism, the profligate spending, the deferral of science to superstition, the influence peddling, the corruption, the pedophile coddling, and the list could continue ad nauseam.

Smart people will ignore them. It’s just more distraction from a party apparatus that’s growing increasingly desperate and morally bankrupt.

Posted in Bush Adminisration, Election 2006, The Right | Leave a Comment »

Still time to fail

Posted by Greg on October 25, 2006

Is Andy Borowitz prescient?  Let’s hope not:

The sudden ascendancy of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has many Democratic Party regulars afraid that a White House win by the charismatic politician would destroy a losing tradition that has taken years to build, Democratic leaders confirmed today.

Across the country, polls showing Sen. Obama to have rising appeal across a broad spectrum of likely voters have rattled the nerves of longtime Democrats, who take pride in their party’s record of futility in presidential elections.

“This is the party of Dukakis and Mondale, Kerry and McGovern,” said longtime Democrat Carol Foyler, who still sports a “Kucinich in ’04” bumper sticker on the back of her Saturn. “We have worked long and hard to build that losing record and we are not prepared to pour it down the drain.”

Ms. Foyler said that if Sen. Obama were to win the White House in 2008, “such longtime Democratic traditions as concession speeches, finger-pointing, and clinical depression would be a thing of the past.”

Perhaps in response to the concerns of party loyalists like Ms. Foyler, Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean gave a speech today to reassure Democrats that even if Sen. Obama is nominated, “We as Democrats can still find a way to screw this up.”

“If it looks like we’re going to win, I make you this promise,” Mr. Dean said. “I will open my piehole and shoot our chances to hell.”

Elsewhere, the Malawian man who let Madonna adopt his son said that he only did it in the hopes that rearing him would keep her too busy to pursue her acting career.  

Posted in Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

Republicans I want to lose

Posted by Greg on October 24, 2006

Other than George Bush that is, since he’s done for and soon to be a lame duck.

 –AZ-Sen: Jon Kyl
–AZ-01: Rick Renzi
–AZ-05: J.D. Hayworth
–CA-04: John Doolittle
–CA-11: Richard Pombo
–CA-50: Brian Bilbray
–CO-04: Marilyn Musgrave
–CO-05: Doug Lamborn
–CO-07: Rick O’Donnell
–CT-04: Christopher Shays
–FL-13: Vernon Buchanan
–FL-16: Joe Negron
–FL-22: Clay Shaw
–ID-01: Bill Sali
–IL-06: Peter Roskam
–IL-10: Mark Kirk
–IL-14: Dennis Hastert
–IN-02: Chris Chocola
–IN-08: John Hostettler
–IA-01: Mike Whalen
–KS-02: Jim Ryun
–KY-03: Anne Northup
–KY-04: Geoff Davis
–MD-Sen: Michael Steele
–MN-01: Gil Gutknecht
–MN-06: Michele Bachmann
–MO-Sen: Jim Talent
–MT-Sen: Conrad Burns
–NV-03: Jon Porter
–NH-02: Charlie Bass
–NJ-07: Mike Ferguson
–NM-01: Heather Wilson
–NY-03: Peter King
–NY-20: John Sweeney
–NY-26: Tom Reynolds
–NY-29: Randy Kuhl
–NC-08: Robin Hayes
–NC-11: Charles Taylor
–OH-01: Steve Chabot
–OH-02: Jean Schmidt
–OH-15: Deborah Pryce
–OH-18: Joy Padgett
–PA-04: Melissa Hart
–PA-07: Curt Weldon
–PA-08: Mike Fitzpatrick
–PA-10: Don Sherwood
–RI-Sen: Lincoln Chafee
–TN-Sen: Bob Corker
–VA-Sen: George Allen
–VA-10: Frank Wolf
–WA-Sen: Mike McGavick
–WA-08: Dave Reichert

Posted in Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »

Predicting a bloodbath

Posted by Greg on October 24, 2006

John Cole has a prediction and a hope for the 2006 elections.  He looks as five indicators and opines:

All of those signs point to what I hope will be a real bloodbath for the GOP. I hope we get wiped out in the election, and I look forward to the circular firing squad, because I have a lot of ammunition and a flak jacket in the form of my archives (with four years of “I told ya so’s.”).

We need to get rid of the authoritarians, we need to get rid of the big-spenders, the religionists and the gay-bashers, the liars, con-artists, crooks, and thieves, and we need to start over. I really look forward to the day where I have the high ground on tax related issues because my party is not spending us into bankruptcy. I look forward to the day when my party, when faced with difficult scientific questions, turns to the experts (rather than turning on them) instead of Sen. Inhofe and James Dobson and Randall Terry. I look forward to the day when my party once again has enough of a moral standing that we should even be allowed to discuss human rights and torture in foreign regimes. I look forward to the day when we can, with a straight face, argue that we are the party of small government- after, of course, we get rid of the religionists who are trying to dictate who we can love, who we can sleep with, who gets to determine what we watch on tv, and who gets to determine our end of life decisions. I look forward to the day when it is once again the Democrats who look crazy.

But for right now, it is the GOP that is out of touch, out of control, and drowning in it’s own hubris. It is time to throw them an anchor, and it looks like there are a lot of people lining up on the docks to do just that.

Read his full piece.

And I really sympathize with him referring to the former supporters who have stopped drinking the GOP Koolaid.  You can count me among them.  In 2000 I was not at all excited about Gore, and Bush seemed to be, if bland, at least adequate to the task at hand.  Moreover, the days immediately following 9/11 were choreographed to present the illusion of competency that has been played well for four years. 

But to look at the GOP today, it’s hard to reconcile the gay baiting, race mongering, illegal wiretapping, habeus corpus shredding, payoff seeking mess the Republican’ts have become with the hopes of Americans.

They deserve to lose, and to lose big.  And here’s hoping they do.

Along those lines, drop by John Aravosis’ site and help out with donations to the Wyoming congressional race.  Note, Rankin’s bitch that Cubin should resign is just stupid if not hysterical.  But she definitely deserves to lose this election.

Posted in Election 2006 | Leave a Comment »