|
Why Christine O'Donnell's victory is scary
 In which a Washington Post lib laments the fact that the impending stampede of trunks isn't going to be bipartisan. Like the current Congress has been.Partisan Democrats are delighted about Christine O'Donnell's Republican primary victory over Rep. Mike Castle in the race for the open Delaware Senate seat. We'll see what happens in November. She wasn't supposed to win against Castle, either. I'm despondent. Take a deep breath. Have a cigarette. It'll help you relax. From the Democratic point of view, the defeat of the moderate, well-known Castle turns what had looked to be a lost cause into a likely win. For now. If Castle was supposed to tromp her let's see what happens next. My crystal ball's in the shop for repairs. Yesterday she was down 25 points and had $90K in the bank. Overnight people donated a million dollars and she's trailing Coon by 11. Sounds like a lost cause to me, NOT! Keeping the seat in Democratic hands could be the margin of control in the Senate. So the folks who focus on electing Democrats and keeping a Democratic majority can't be blamed for breaking out the champagne over O'Donnell's win. Go ahead. Get a little tipsy. It's good for you. Not me, for two reasons. A tee-totaler, are you? What's the other reason? First, I had thought the silver lining of this election year might be to produce a Senate with a more robust cadre of moderate Republicans. Because Publicans love sending RINOs to Congress. Tell us how conservative you are, how you're gonna get rid of the national debt. Then go sing sweet harmony with Nancy and Harry. Oh, yeah. We need more of that. That caucus has pretty much dwindled to the two senators from Maine, with very occasional company from colleagues such as Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and departing Ohio Sen. George Voinovich. It's awfully hard for a caucus of two to break with the party. Which brings up the question of why they should break with the party, and why Dems shouldn't break with their party to support things like tax cuts and fiscal responsibility and prosecuting thugs standing outside polling places with truncheons and attitudes. Peer pressure isn't just a phenomenon of middle school. It's alive and well in the U.S. Senate, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has done a good job of keeping party discipline. A larger number of moderates among his herd of cats might make that more difficult and enhance the prospects for bipartisan legislating. "Bipartisan" seems to equate to supporting Dem policies whether the Dems have Congress in a hammerlock or not. I think most of the country's been shocked and disgusted at the contemptuous lack of bipartisanship by the Dems. There's no reason for anybody to want the Pubs to do anything other than assert control. "Moderation" -- since it's likely the Pubs aren't going to get the hammerlock the Dems have had -- is going to consist of insisting their own side be heard and even occasionally have its way. If Boehner can't achieve that then he's going to get bounced. There is strength in numbers, and you could imagine a bolstered group of (at least relative) moderates made up of the likes of Castle, Carly Fiorina (Calif.), Mark Kirk (Ill.) or Dino Rossi (Wash.) Yasss... Another Gang of Nine or whatever it was, more Mavericks. Now, it's as plausible to envision a bolstered Jim DeMint caucus, following the disturbingly powerful junior senator from South Carolina: Sharron Angle (Nev.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Ken Buck (Colo.) -- plus the two other incumbent-slayers of the primary season, Mike Lee in Utah and in Joe Miller in Alaska. Scary. Very scary. I'm positively clutching myself. I'll probably put somebody's eye out with this thing... But not as scary as reason number two: the ripple effect of victories such as O'Donnell's on other Republican lawmakers. Republican members of Congress look at races such as those in Utah, Alaska and now Delaware and think: There but for the grace of the Tea Party go I. They will be that much more watchful of protecting their right flank against a primary challenge. They will be that much less likely to take a political risk in the direction of bipartisanship. They'll be that much less likely to dump any principles they brought to Washington and go for the boodle. In this sense, it matters less whether O'Donnell will win the general election -- that doesn't seem likely -- than that she won the primary. Welcome to the Revolution, toots. The Delaware result might be good news for both Tea Partyers and Democrats. It is not good news for the cause of good government. Like we've had for the past couple years... Posted by: Fred 2010-09-16 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=305713 |