Not to bring Charles Krauthammer back into the negative spotlight, but there's a key consideration that he's left out of his assessment of the GOP's primary races:
Now, we are in a cycle where we have seen that this is not a normal Democratic administration. It's highly ideological. It's instituted changes over the last 18 months that are structural and some of them irreversible, like Obamacare and it will try to do the same in the next two years or six.If you're a Republican and you're a conservative, you want a majority in the Senate that will stop that agenda and you have to elect the most electable. Delaware is not Alaska. In Alaska you can endorse a Joe Miller, who's going to win anyway, even though he's more conservative. In Delaware, O'Donnell is going to lose, and that that could be the difference between Republican and Democratic control, and make a difference about the Obama agenda in the future.
What's missing is the degree to which the Tea Party movement is not just a reaction to the Obamanation, but to trends that even Republicans have helped to advance. In other words, voters do not trust the GOP to "stop that agenda." Republicans will slow it down rather, advance it more slowly but that is no longer a satisfactory objective. The edge of the cliff is too near.
"voters do not trust the GOP to "stop that agenda." Republicans will slow it down — rather, advance it more slowly "
Exactly. When has the national GOP proven that they will downsize government? They don't. They simply grow it in areas that they favor. When was the last 2-4 year period when the federal government remained at least stagnant, never mind shrunk? Probably never. And that's probably not coming anytime soon either, regardless of which party comes to power in January.
Posted by: Patrick at September 14, 2010 8:11 PMJoe Scarborough said it best about Delaware: "Republicans, do you REALLY want control of the Senate?"
Posted by: rhody at September 15, 2010 2:16 AM