William Katz: Urgent Agenda
|
||
|
I'M AFRAID THIS IS RIGHT – AT 9:08 A.M. ET: The Politico tilts liberal in its analyses, and that must be considered when reading. However, I think this analysis of yesterday's primaries is largely true, and should be unsettling to our side:
Sorry to say, but that is correct, as we noted last night, when early returns were coming in. In Colorado, where a Democratic Senate seat is very vulnerable, the GOP could have nominated the solid Jane Norton, but instead chose the buffoon Ken Buck, who should not be allowed near a microphone. In Connecticut, the GOP voters had a choice of some decent candidates for the Senate seat being vacated by Chris Dodd, but chose Linda McMahon, an entrepreneur from the pure, saintly world of professional wrestling. Connecticut could conceivably have elected a Republican to the Senate. The state regularly elects Republican governors. But McMahon may tip too far on the embarrassment scale. Previously, GOP voters chose the semi-whacked out Sharron Angle for its Senate candidate in Nevada, running her against Harry Reid. Harry Reid's defeat had been a foregone conclusion. It no longer is. And the nomination of Rand Paul in Kentucky is a further embarrassment to the party, since Paul is a libertarian, not a Republican. Congressional seats are obtained one by one by one. People in each state or district size up their local candidates. No matter what national trends are in play, a party has to have good candidates running locally to win. My fear is that we'll wake up the morning after election and find that the Democrats still control the Senate because the Republicans blew key races with nutso candidates. That does not seem to be a major problem in the House, but the Senate is pretty important. Think Supreme Court nominations. Overconfidence is rushing over the GOP. Let's get rid of it, fast. There's a lot of work to do, and some of the people up front may not have been the best choices. August 11, 2010 |
|