 Completely outrageous.On Election Day, Leo Kim, 34, drove a group of elderly Korean Americans to the polls in Annandale, Va., a Washington suburb. They quickly found themselves in a scene out of the Jim Crow era.After presenting proper identification, authorities demanded that the seniors say their names and home addresses out loud in English -- a tough proposition for some with limited English skills. The poll workers had made similar demands on the other voters.It's amazing, not to mention completely unacceptable, that something like this can happen in America anywhere/anytime, let alone in Northern Virginia in the year 2012. Wow.P.S. This is the same community that Annabel Park and Eric Byler so brilliantly organized in 2006 for Jim Webb. In part, Annabel and Eric did this by making them aware of George Allen's remarks that there was a "real Virginia," and that it didn't include places like Annandale. It's amazing that 6 years later, that same George Allen was on the ballot in Annandale and that THIS happened. P.P.S. My understanding is that this incident took place at the Columbia precinct (Annandale Fire Station, Co. #8), which President Obama won with 64% of the vote. UPDATE: According to Fairfax County Democratic Committee (FCDC) Chair Cesar Del Aguila, much of the problem in this precinct resulted from "old, outdated, manual poll books," combined with communications difficulties. According to Del Aguila, this situation - to his knowledge, anyway - was "not anything deliberate." Still, he acknowledges, it wasn't good and "we have to do a better job" in the future... Photo from the Annandale VA blog |
"Jim Crow" Scene on Election Day in Annandale: "Korean people stand in a separate line!"
Friday, November 9, 2012
Analysis: Right-Wingnut Return on Investment in Election 2012 Was an Abysmal #FAIL
 A brand new analysis of spending by outside groups in the 2012 election cycle would be hilarious if it weren't so...actually, it IS hilarious! :) Below is a ranking, from most to least effective (the percentage is the amount of money spent that actually led to the desired result), of major groups' "return on investment" - ROI - for their spending during this campaign season).As you skim through this and look at the color scheme, I think you'll quickly notice a pattern: the pro-Republican outside groups had a generally abysmal ROI, including just 1.29% for supposed "genius"/"Bush's brain" Karl Rove's American Crossroads group, and an even worse 0.81% ROI for the NRA Political Victory Fund. In stark contrast, progressive, pro-Democratic, pro-women, and pro-environment groups generally had excellent ROIs, including around 98% for Planned Parenthood, 78% for the LCV, 74%/84% for SEIU, etc. On the "flip," I'll throw out a few ideas why this disparity might be the case, but first here are the raw numbers.Planned Parenthood Votes: 98.58% Planned Parenthood Action Fund: 97.82% Majority PAC (goal: "Protect the Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate"): 87.86% SEIU: 84.65% SEIU Committee on Political Education: 73.99% Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC): 79.73% League of Conservation Voters (LCV): 78.17% Worker's Voice: 76.14% Women Vote!: 73.16% |
| lowkell :: Analysis: Right-Wingnut Return on Investment in Election 2012 Was an Abysmal #FAIL |
| Congressional Leadership Fund (Pro-Republican, run in part by Bob McDonnell's buddy Fred "Nixon's corrupt Jew counter" Malek): 60.64% American Action Network (goal: "create, encourage and promote center-right policies based on the principles of freedom, limited government, American exceptionalism, and strong national security."): 60.33% Americans for Tax Reform (Grover Norquist's group; pro-Republican): 57.35% Independence USA PAC (Michael Bloomberg's group, supports candidates of both parties): 45.74% House Majority PAC (goal: "hold Republicans accountable and help win back the House Majority for Democrats"): 46.46% AFSCME: 44.60% Patriot Majority USA (liberal): 42.52% Club for Growth Action (right wing): 41.37% Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) 39.17% National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC): 31.63% Freedomworks for America (pro-Republican): 24.51% National Republican Senatorial Committee: 24.05% Ending Spending Action Fund (anti-Democratic/pro-Republican): 15.34% Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies (Karl Rove; pro-Republican): 14.40% Now or Never PAC (pro-Republican): 14.30% NRA Institute for Legislative Action: 10.25% U.S. Chamber of Commerce (basically an arm of the Republican Party): 6.90% American Future Fund (Koch brothers; pro-Republican): 5.57% Americans for Responsible Leadership (shadowy right-wing group): 1.96% American Crossroads (Karl Rove; pro-Republican): 1.29% NRA Political Victory Fund: 0.81%So, what's going on here? I chatted with two super-savvy Democratic political strategists this morning, and they made a few points worth repeating. *First of all, this is a huge embarrassment/meltdown for the right-wing groups, an almost total waste of their money and a repudiation of their entire strategy. Gotta love it. *Part of the problem is that these groups' messages were not in alignment with the Romney campaign's, also without the organizing technology and techniques Democrats figured out after 2004. *The Republicans completely failed to message effectively to minority groups. To the extent they DID message, it was hostile, such as "self deportation," "takers vs. makers," the whole "welfare" nonsense, the "47 percent," etc. The point is, Republicans communicate, just not in a way that's going to win them any supporters. #FAIL *Bottom line: the right-wing groups were extremely ineffective, for a variety of reasons, and basically wasted hundreds of millions of dollars of the Koch brothers', Sheldon Adelson's, the fossil fuel industry's, and others' unholy money. What a shame, huh? :) |
Second-Term Agenda: It's Time for Action on Climate Change, Including a Carbon Tax
Thursday, November 8, 2012
 With the election (thankfully, finally!) over and President Obama reelected (hallelujah!), it's time to start focusing on priorities for a second term. In my mind, other than the country's economy and fiscal situation, the #1 item on the "to-do" list for the next four years is clearly dealing with climate change. This isn't just a "special interest," it's a grave threat to the planet we all call home. The fact is, if we don't take strong action very soon, we're going to be witnessing a lot more storms like Hurricane Sandy, along with melting ice caps, rising sea levels (and acidification of the oceans), mass extinctions (eventually including our own if we're not careful), and other outcomes too awful to contemplate.Fortunately, we can do something about all this, and it's a huge undertaking, but it's not really that complicated. Simply stated: we need to switch from an economy powered by the carbon-based fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) of the 18th and 19th centuries to one powered by the non-carbon-based energy sources (solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, wave, and of course energy efficiency) of a modern, 21st century economy. The broad question, is mankind capable of rising to this enormous, existential challenge before it's too late? More specifically, is the our country's political system capable of doing anything this big?Here's the question posed by one of the best thinkers on all this, David Roberts of Grist: President Obama made a nod to climate change in his reelection victory speech, but does he actually intend to act on the issue in his second term? Will he follow up on his 2008 promise to slow the rise of the oceans, or will he stick with his oil-, gas-, and pipeline-loving "all of the above" energy strategy? And could he get anything through Congress anyway?My answer: an "all of the above" energy strategy may sounds good to focus groups, but it doesn't keep the planet inhabitable for generations to come. It's time we get serious and stop goofing around here, which is what we've been doing.Thus, in the first term, we had a convoluted effort, hijacked in large part by fossil fuel industries, to put a price on carbon in a convoluted, roundabout way, with massive subsidies to fossil fuel corporations thrown in to sweeten the deal. This was the core conservative idea, now bizarrely demonized by conservatives, called "cap and trade." Unfortunately, although there's a lot to say for that conservative idea, once it got into the "sausage factory" of our political system, it turned into something truly ugly. And then it didn't pass anyway. Lose-Lose. So, why didn't we just put a price on carbon directly, via a carbon tax, revenue neutral or not? Simple: neither party wanted to say the word "tax," let alone be seen by voters as imposing one on them. Ergo, the smoke-and-mirrors cap-and-trade scheme (a too-clever-by-half move idea from conservatives if we've ever seen one), which Republicans quickly relabled as "cap and tax," thus putting the dreaded "t" word in there and turning it into political poison, despite all the convolutions. In sum, "cap and trade" turned into the worse of all worlds - overly complicated, too many giveaways to corporations, labeled a "tax" anyway, AND didn't pass! Well, that idea's dead and buried now, so what next? |
| My proposal is simple: let's go back to the core concept here and not get overly complicated: simply put a TAX on the bad stuff you don't want (e.g., pollution), while lowering taxes on the good stuff you DO want (e.g., savings, income). Thus, a carbon tax, one which can be 100% revenue neutral if we want (just give back all the proceeds from the tax in a fair manner to the American people), or partly revenue neutral (e.g., only give back money to those making under a certain income threshold, let's say $250,000 a year, while using the rest of the money for clean energy R&D, home and business energy efficiency, etc.).But wait, you say, wouldn't anti-taxers like Grover Norquist oppose this, and wouldn't this violate Barack Obama's pledge not to raise taxes on those making under $250,000 a year? On the first point, let's face it, Norquist isn't likely to support anything reasonable on any subject, as he's a my-way-or-the-highway extremist. We simply need to marginalize that guy - and others, like the Chamber of Commerce, who do the fossil fuel industry's bidding - to the extent possible. But for reasonable, sane Republicans, the concept of taxing a "bad," making polluters pay, and correcting a clear market failure (by internalizing a massive externality), should be eminently reasonable and consistent with conservative philosophy (note: there used to be reams of environmentally responsible Republicans, from Teddy Roosevelt through Richard Nixon through George HW Bush...). As for Obama's won't-raise-taxes-on-the-middle-class pledge: as stated above, there's no reason why people earning under $250,000 per year can't be given back every penny of the carbon tax - whether in cash and/or in subsidies for solar panels, home energy retrofits, etc. - so that it's NOT a net tax increase. So much for that problem. Three final points. First, in addition to saving earth's environment from certain catastrophe, putting a price on carbon will send tremendously powerful signals to entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, investors, corporations, etc. that clean energy - wind, solar, etc. - is the way to go, while dirty energy - coal, oil, and to a lesser extent natural gas - are far less so. This should jump start a massive explosion in clean energy - an industry that's already doing well regardless - that will quickly transform our economy to one powered by clean, domestic, inexhaustible, job-creating, non-carbon-emitting energy sources. Second, in the context of reforming our country's tax structure, we should use carbon as the model for taxing "bads" (e.g., pollution, shipping jobs overseas, sprawl, wahtever) and rewarding "goods" (clean energy, building businesses in America, smart growth). Finally, we should seriously consider using a carbon tax as a way to simultaneously slash our country's deficit while investing in the clean energy economy of tomorrow. That would be a tremendous win-win-win, giving us a cleaner and healthier, more secure, and more economically prosperous country for the foreseeable future. Other than the entrenched fossil fuel interests and the politicians they've bought and paid for, who would be against this? Got me. |
Election Reveals Serious Problems for GOP (Heh Heh)
by: Elaine in RoanokeThu Nov 08, 2012 at 14:35:02 PM EST |
We all learned in this election season that Republicans often have a difficult time with arithmetic. Nothing shows that more than the fact that they assumed the electorate in 2012 would be 78% white. It turned out to be 72%. Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Simply muffling the voices of the crazies in their party like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock won't change the fact that almost 90% of the Republican members of Congress are older, white males who seem tone deaf to the concerns of the changing demographics of the nation. Republicans have spent decades using fear, prejudice and voter suppression to get their candidates elected. The time has come for them to return to responsible conservatism and end their foray on the dark side. As for my party, the Democratic Party, we have to find a way to engage our voters in every election, not just once every four years. When turnout is high, Democrats win. When some of us stay home, we lose. That problem needs to be faced in Virginia right away. 2013 is closing in fast. |
Winners and Losers: Election 2012
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
 Here are a few winners and losers (note: this list is FAR from comprehensive, and was put together on little sleep, so take it for what it's worth - probably not much!) from this (endless) election cycle that I think are worth highlighting. I'm not going to dwell much on the obvious winners (Obama, Kaine, Virginia incumbent Congressmen) and losers (Romney, Allen, Virginia congressional challengers), but instead pick out other things that sprung to my mind. Enjoy (or not)! :)Winners1. Nate Silver/538 Despite all the attacks on him by pundits jealous they don't have 1% the brainpower he does, as well as by Republicans frustrated that the math simply wasn't adding up their way, no matter how desperately they tried to "unskew" it, Silver appears to have predicted ever state correctly, pending results in Florida. That means Nate has now nailed 2008, 2010 and 2012. Any further doubters, other than the delusional? 2. The Kaine campaign (Mike Henry, Mo Elleithee, Brandi Hoffine, etc.): Mike and Mo had a rough 2008 (Hillary Clinton for President) and 2009 (Terry McAuliffe, Steve Shannon, Creigh Deeds), but bounced back strong this year with an impressive campaign against George Allen. The basic lesson here: when it comes to running general election races in Virginia, Mike Henry and Mo Elleithee (this year, add Kaine campaign Communications Director Brandi Hoffine to the mix) are pretty much the gold standard. Congratulations! 3. Federal employees Would have faced grave threats to their job security, benefits, you name it under a Romney/Ryan administration. Now, it's not as if happy days are here again, but they certainly dodged that deadly bullet. 4. Virginia voters: Showed up in huge numbers, stayed in line for however long it took, showed what democracy is all about. Now, let's do it next year and make sure that Ken Cuccinelli does NOT become our next governor (god forbid)! 5. Loudoun County and Prince William County Democrats: Great work carrying these crucial, swing counties for Obama and Kaine! Prince William was particularly impressive, with Obama winning 57%-42% there. Nice! 6. Latino Americans. Related to that last point, about Loudoun and Prince William Counties, is the rapidly growing clout of Latino Americans. That clout was certainly demonstrated yesterday in Virginia, as well as across the country, as Latino voters broke heavily for Democrats, and also helped propel Maryland's DREAM Act to victory. Si, se puede! 7. African Americans Despite attempts by Republicans to suppress their vote, including by cutting down on early voting and making them wait in line for 5, 6, 7 hours, African Americans showed true grit and determination to NOT be intimidated by the bullies, staying in line as long as it took and making their voices heard. Impressive! 8. Clean energy and the environment A Republican victory would have been disastrous for clean energy and the environment. Not that it will be nirvana under Democrats, but remember that President Obama invested more money in wind, solar, energy efficiency, and other clean energy sources than this country's ever invested before. That needs to continue over the second 4-year term and beyond, as we move from dirty energy to a sustainable, clean energy-powered economy that works for everyone. 9. Congressional Redistricting. As much as I hate to say it, Congressional redistricting was effective, both here in Virginia (where every incumbent won easily) and across the country (where Democratic gains were minimized). Sad, but until we get nonpartisan redistricting instead of "incumbent protection," this is going to keep happening. 10. Earned media. Proved to be far more effective than paid media, in my view, with the big stories "moving numbers" including the Democratic convention, the 47% video, the first presidential debate, and Hurricane Sandy. None of those had anything, really, to do with paid TV advertising. |
We Do Have a Mandate---- So What?
by: Teddy GoodsonWed Nov 07, 2012 at 18:23:19 PM EST[ |
 Congratulations to all the Democratic grassroots, to an outstanding campaign team, and to President Obama and Vice President Biden. What, exactly did we all win? Democrats still control the executive branch and half of the legislative, and the Republicans still control the other half of the legislative branch (thanks to some exotic redistricting) and the top of the judicial branch, SCOTUS.You might think Obama's strong win was proof that the voters re-approved his message and his accomplishments in his first term; the election could be regarded as a referendum on Obama and his "liberal" policies. Not so fast. Already, we hear The Establishment pundit class stating in no uncertain terms that we are still a "deeply divided nation," half and half, with the always-to-be-expected insistence that, well, Yes, Obama won, but... but half the country voted for Romney, so, of course Obama must now "move to the middle," and compromise with the losers--- who, remember, lost. This demand was not, so far as I can remember, imposed upon George W. Bush, who was appointed to his first term not by the voters but by the Supreme Court; he governed as ferociously as if he had received an overwhelming mandate, and charged off down an utterly disastrous road |
| Teddy Goodson :: We Do Have a Mandate---- So What? |
| Progressives have a bitter memory of how Obama did as the pundit class demanded after 2008; he started compromising and, in our eyes, caving in advance, trying to get Republicans to bargain in good faith so he could wash out the simmering rancor of the previous administration, and do what he was elected to do, govern the country. We all know how that turned out.Yet, despite that disgusting record of gridlock, when Republicans held America's credit rating hostage, there are some Democrats already naively saying that, now the voters have spoken, and Obama can no longer be turned into a one-term president, Republicans must modify their behavior; Speaker Boehner will "obviously" have to control his Tea Party caucus. This is, I believe, a foolish, futile hope. Most of the same intransigent ideological gang of self-righteous bullies is still in place in the House. They will fight tooth and nail to force Obama to do their bidding. If you have any doubts, watch this short post-defeat video from the Heritage Foundation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?f... In his victory speech, Obama laid out once again his policies, and extended his hand in bipartisanship to his defeated opponent, Mitt Romney, and to the Republican leadership in the House. ... much as he tried to do in 2009. Personally, I confess I do not expect results any different from what happened in his first term, I just hope he has more of a spine this time around. Here is what I want Obama to do in his second term: 1- First order of business: Immigration reform, and on Obama's terms. Make the Republicans swallow it or be exposed to the Latino voters (and other immigrants) for the bigots they are---- bring angry immigrants on the Hill to lobby and thus lock in the Latino voters as Democrats for the mid-terms (and forever), and put the fear of el Dios into Republicans. 2- Obama must spend time and effort building the Democratic Party, which he did not do at all after his victory in 2008; since he cannot succeed himself, OFA has to be integrated somehow into a reformed and strengthened party structure to ensure we do not have another collapse in mid-terms, and Obama can punish or reward Democratic politicians, so they fear not supporting his agenda when the chips are down. 3- Obama must go to the American people whenever the Republicans engage in obstructionism and hostage-taking: Tell the voters what a particular policy is, why it is good for us, and exactly how the Republicans are stymying it---- go over the heads of Congress directly to their constituents. His failure to explain and sell Obamacare enabled the Republicans to define it, then demonize it, and is a major reason why (combined with #2) that the 2010 mid-terms were a disaster not just in Congress but at the state and county levels all across the country. 4- Obama and the Democrats must continuously engage the electorate, explaining and raising the profile of Democratic principles, values, and policies. Obama successfully framed the 2012 election as a choice between two different visions of the country, and the electorate bought it. Now he has to deliver that choice continuously--- explain it over and over; I believe people will understand it. Let's not fall into the trap of "middle ground" which means tacitly accepting the Republican ideology of untrammeled capitalism and their bastardized "free market" theology as a basis for any reforms; that is fighting on hostile ground. 5- Tax reform has to be on the agenda. Beware of striving for a "grand bargain," in which, suddenly, earned benefits (i.e., "entitlements" in Republi-speak) are sneakily slashed in exchange for, say, higher taxes on millionaires. What we want, and what we must get, is a more progressive over-all tax structure, one fairer and, if possible, simpler.... Not just the income tax but also payroll taxes, for example. 6- Austerity has failed spectacularly as a recovery policy in Europe, and under no circumstances can Democrats permit this pernicious policy (the Ryan Budget, for example) to be part of the negotiations on deficit reduction. How we spend our money tells us what kind of country we want to live in; Tim Kaine was good at this when he was Governor. Will there be a "peace dividend?" The government can and does create jobs (take that, Ayn Rand), in research, development, infrastructure, green energy, education even. Why not? 7- Get that jobs bill passed, raise the minimum wage. Past experience shows that dong so does not, repeat not, kill jobs. When Republicans balk, see #3. Supply side economics or trickle down economics is a farce. What we have now is a shortage of demand; higher minimum wage and more wage-earners means theat money will be spent immediately, creating the demand that producers need to see before they fire up their factories and the economy can take off. 8- Clean up Citizens United and the Wall Street casino (we've made a start, but more needs to be done). Corporations are not people; this may involve a constitutional amendment and tougher disclosure laws, as well as funding Consumer protection. 9- What I have suggested here also means that President Obama will have to bring in some other economists and financial and budget gurus who have a rather different economic philosophy than those tiresome free market theorists and practitioners (like Larry Summers or Geithner). Milton Freidman free marketeers are not the only (or even the best) capitalist economists. Only with new faces and minds outside The Establishment can he achieve that real change he promised. |
National Election Results Open Thread / Live Blog
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
 The polls are about to close on the Eastern United States. At 7pm EST we'll see polls close in Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, and across most (but not all) of Florida. Virginia is of course, the first of the major swing states to close. So, to start out the night the big question: Are "you on your own" or we "all in this together"?IF YOU ARE IN LINE, STAY IN LINE. DO NOT LEAVE THE LINE!Electoral College Total of Called Races: Obama 303 - Romney 203. Update 1:00am: President Obama's Victory Speech: * "These arguments we have are a mark of our liberty." * "Our economy is recovering, a war is ending, and a long campaign is over. Whether I earned your vote or not, I have listened to your voice ... and I will return to the White House more determined than ever." * The President identifies his Second Term Agenda: Deficit Reduction, Immigration Reform, Energy Independence. Update 1:00am: Mitt Romney concedes, graciously. Barack Obama Wins Virginia! Update 12:15: Mitt Romney is disputing the election results in Ohio, but with the President's victory in Colorado this point is now moot. With or without Ohio, President Obama has been reelected. Update 12:00: President Obama wins Colorado and Nevada. President Obama leads Virginia and Florida but they are still too close to call. In an astonishing and pitiful move, the Romney campaign is disputing the Ohio result. A fitting end to a truly despicable campaign. Update 11:12: PRESIDENT OBAMA REELECTED! OBAMA WINS OHIO, IOWA, OREGON Update 11:00: Obama Wins California, Washington, and his home state Hawaii. Romney Wins Idaho and North Carolina. Oregon, Iowa, Nevada Too Early to Call, Leaning Obama Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado Too Close to Call. Update 10:00: CONGRATULATIONS SENATOR ELECT TIM KAINE (D)! Obama wins Minnesota Romney wins Missouri Update 9:50: NEW HAMPSHIRE GOES FOR OBAMA! |
Virginia Election Results 2012: Live Blog
UPDATE 11:22 pm: Barack Obama has now taken the lead in the State Board of Elections count, and that will only grow given where the outstanding votes are remaining (BLUE areas!). YES!!!! :) UPDATE 10:54 pm: George Allen is now conceding to Tim Kaine on TV. Also, @PeterHambyCNN has called VA for Obama. UPDATE 10:52 pm: Ben has called Virginia for Obama, and I agree, having crunched the numbers myself. With all the votes in NOVA still out, plus Norfolk and Portsmouth, plus lots of people still waiting in line to vote, and with Obama within 21,000 votes, I agree with Ben -- Obama's going to win Virginia and with it the White House! :) |
Election Day Open Thread: What Are You Seeing, Hearing?
Tweet from @frankoanderson - "Lorton Station precinct, they forgot to charge 2 machines so they lost power." and "Centerpointe precinct they're not letting people vote- electronic poll books frozen. They have paper books but won't use them." UPDATE 10:53 am: Long lines in deep-blue Arlington, I just got back from voting after about a 40 minute wait, couple hundred people ahead of me in line. UPDATE 12:53 pm: Anecdotal, but a good sign if true: " just voted in Northern Virginia area [in Prince William County] & the same place/area that Ive voted at for years and can report that turnout is up in general and far more Latinos than Ive ever seen voting" UPDATE 12:55 pm: Also, just saw this by @ThePlumLineGS. "Dems report long voting lines in Richmond, Newport News, East Henrico, and Arlington--all Dem strongholds in Virginia" UPDATE 3:03 pm: Mo Elleithee writes, "Seeing VERY high turnout across Virginia. On par with or maybe even HIGHER than 2008 levels. Long lines in many places. Please be patient and stay in line!" UPDATE 5:26 pm: I'm hearing that Loudoun County turnout is on track to exceed 2008 levels. That's potentially good news, as higher turnout means more Democratic voters, all else being equal... UPDATE 6:12 pm: Some exit poll info, I'd take it with a huge grain of salt though... |
A True Change Election
Monday, November 5, 2012
by: TheGreenMilesMon Nov 05, 2012 at 09:32:59 AM EST |
 If Republicans can't get enough old white dudes to support their extremist policies, they have to cheat by trying to prevent young & brown people from voting - and even that doesn't work anymore.That's what I'll remember most about the 2012 election. Yes, I'll remember Mitt Romney making class warfare explicit with his 47% comment, Paul Ryan making generational warfare explicit in the vice presidential debate, Rick Santorum explaining that he's against welfare for blah people, George Allen running a campaign that made Fred Thompson look passionate & energetic, and Scott Brown begging Elizabeth Warren to stop bringing his party into their campaign. Oh, and Mitt wanting to fire Big Bird.But I'll most remember how far the GOP has narrowed its field of play, as Buzzfeed visually explained. The 2012 elections have revealed just how much the GOP's exclusionary extremism - against brown people, against women's rights, against LGBT equal rights, against young people, against low-income families, against conservation, against cities - have narrowed Republican path to victory. |
| TheGreenMiles :: A True Change Election |
| When you hear that Mitt Romney barely scraped out a win in North Carolina while losing Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, Iowa and likely Florida ... and that a Senate that was supposed to be primed for GOP takeover is now a Democratic gain ... if I was a Republican, I'd be wondering how Karl Rove's plan for a permanent conservative majority has suddenly flipped into a minimum of eight years of playing defense.As Duncan Black put it at Atrios, "For awhile it was 'the heartland' and 'the South' and now it's simply 'white dudes in the heartland and the South.'" And with that core constituency, the plan still worked! They not only won big percentages of white men, they turned them out in high numbers. The GOP's percentage of the white vote was the highest it's been since George H.W. Bush clobbered Mike Dukakis in 1988. But in 2012, that's not enough to win a national election - or even a statewide election in much of America. Look at Jon Tester pulling out a surprise win in Montana, or Bill Nelson destroying Connie Mack in Florida. I wish I could say that I was confident today that Republicans across America are blinking their eyes, wondering how they could've fallen under the spell of Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh & David Koch as they lined their own pockets and marginalized the entire party. In an ideal world, a Republican Party interested in broadening its base could return to that pragmatic past and play a critical role in hammering out solutions to some of our biggest problems - from immigration reform to climate action to easing skyrocketing student loan debt burden. I grew up in a New England that was filled with reasonable Republicans, people like Lincoln Chafee, Bill Weld and Jim Jeffords. Having strong, sensible Republican candidates on the ballot kept Democrats honest & on their toes. (And unlike Christine O'Donnell, Richard Mourdock & Todd Akin, they actually won statewide elections.) But you know how this story ends: Chafee, Weld & Jeffords were all subsequently cast out of the GOP. But today those same hucksters are telling Republicans that they didn't go far right enough. It was Sandy! And the media! And the blahs! And Mitt was never one of us in the first place! And if you'll just write a check to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or Karl Rove's Super PAC, next time it'll all be different. They promise. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
