A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
Scott Rasmussen has an excellent round up of this election season in today's Wall Street Journal. He begins by pointing out the numbers that astoundingly favor Republicans this year:
In the first week of January 2010, Rasmussen Reports showed Republicans with a nine-point lead on the generic congressional ballot. Scott Brown delivered a stunning upset in the Massachusetts special U.S. Senate election a couple of weeks later.
In the last week of October 2010, Rasmussen Reports again showed Republicans with a nine-point lead on the generic ballot. And tomorrow Republicans will send more Republicans to Congress than at any time in the past 80 years.
This isn't a wave, it's a tidal shift—and we've seen it coming for a long time.
And yet, he goes on:
But none of this means that Republicans are winning. The reality is that voters in 2010 are doing the same thing they did in 2006 and 2008: They are voting against the party in power.
Sounding that note, he cautions "politicians"--though it looks like he's talking specifically to Republicans--"to leave their ideological baggage behind" when they come to Washington to govern next year.
In this environment, it would be wise for all Republicans to remember that their team didn't win, the other team lost. Heading into 2012, voters will remain ready to vote against the party in power unless they are given a reason not to do so.
Elected politicians also should leave their ideological baggage behind because voters don't want to be governed from the left, the right, or even the center. They want someone in Washington who understands that the American people want to govern themselves.
Rasmussen is arguing that a vote cast for Republicans this year should be interpreted as a vote cast against Democrats. And yet, I would say that a vote cast against Democrats this election cycle can be more appropriately interpreted as a vote cast for small government conservatism (if not necessarily for the Republican party itself). After all, Rasmussen himself points out that voters are particularly motivated to vote against Dems because voters "believe that cutting government spending is good for the economy," and they oppose health care reform--two small government conservative stances.
- Comment (10)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
Thanks, Scott. Someone should probably tell you that it's our "ideological baggage" that WINS us elections (such baggage defined as conservative foundational principles). It's when we're milquetoast Republicans - Democrat-lite - that we screw things up and that earns us the moniker The Stupid Party.
No, Scott. The people WANT the GOP to enact our ideological baggage, because they understand it's the antidote to Obama and the Left's ideological destruction of America. They WANT us to stop Obama. They understand that our traditional ideological baggage is precisely what allows the American people to "govern themselves."
Furthermore, the reason the Republican team isn't winning, the reason it's the Democrat team that's losing, is because the American people perceive the GOP as Democrat-lite, given the GOP's governance over the past decade or so. If the GOP will return to its foundational principles (sorry, its "ideological baggage"), it will start winning handsomely again instead of simply being the occasional beneficiary of the other guys throwing up on their shoes.
Edited on Nov 1, 2010 at 6:57amJul '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
dittoheadadt:
No, Scott. The people WANT the GOP to enact our ideological baggage, because they understand it's the antidote to Obama and the Left's ideological destruction of America. They WANT us to stop Obama. They understand that our traditional ideological baggage is precisely what allows the American people to "govern themselves."
Everything you said and more!
Just wanted to add that My Daughter came to me with her Mail In ballot to ask about the 8th Congressional District. She wasn't sure what to do. Reichert voted For Cap and Tax, but held the line on Health Care.
So I told her, "Follow these instructions carefully, take the pen in your Right hand, with your left hand use the index finger and thumb to hold your nose, then fill out the ballot for Dave (RINO) Reichert."
No, I didn't want her to vote for Reichert, but the one candidate we were all planning to see run against him in the Primary, ran against the Mother in Left Wingtips instead.
So, I am not voting for Reichert, I'm voting against democrat whatsername.
And I'm Watching Them, along with the rest of the Tea Party!
Jun '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
Ditto, dittoheadadt!
Oct '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
That's what all of these pundits who talk about the Tea Party as a wing of the Republican Party don't get: While the Tea Party is willing to ally with Republicans *for now* because the Repubs are the closest to them ideologically, it's only a stopgap alliance, depending on what the GOP does with the majority they're being handed.
In fact, I believe that tomorrow will be a victory for Conservatism, not for the GOP. And they'd better remember that.
Jul '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
I think there is a chance that this election could pull the center of politics to the right. An example of this happening right now in Florida. Dems are trying to force their own endorsed candidate out of the race for the benefit of Charlie Crist.
There is a chance that future elections will be between candidates who look like the economic left and right of the republican party instead of the between the economic left of the republican and democrat parties.
Edited on Nov 1, 2010 at 8:23amSep '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
To me this election is about small government conservatism from an economic perspective. The problem that Bush started with his compassionate conservative message was the creation of big government conservatism. After this election we need to watch our representatives closely to make sure they are working on economic matters and not on social matters. That is where the Republicans will get tossed: if they concentrate on any social issues and not economic ones. I have faith that many of our social ills would solve themselves if the right economic policies are put into place. The biggest problem is going to be in the Senate. There we have the"Old Bulls In The Senate" who may decide not to go along with the reform program. To succeed the People will need to start pounding them mercilessly if they try to hold things up like they did in 1995. The time to start being vigilant with the Republicans is November 3rd. Prepare to begin hearing statements in the press about how far the old bulls are willing to go. If they start to relent they need to be reminded, especially the ones coming for reelection in 2012, that the People know how to elect alternatives.
May '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
Emily Esfahani Smith, Ed. :...[Rasmussen says] "voters don't want to be governed from the left, the right, or even the center. They want someone in Washington who understands that the American people want to govern themselves."
·
Doesn't seem like Rasmussen knows what "governed from the right" means. It means, roughly, that "the American people want to govern themselves," so his sentence here is non-sensical.
Normally Rasmussen is spot-on, but he's confused at the moment.
Edited on Nov 1, 2010 at 3:21pmJul '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
"Elected politicians also should leave their ideological baggage behind...."
Everyone knows the direction of this election. So, to Me, this reads as if the left are surrendering, but on their conditions.
It doesn't work like that, unless they're Squishes (R).
Jul '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
And another thing, how in the world does he think politicians get elected?
"I stand for nothing. I'm against nothing."
Jul '10
Re: A Vote Against Dems, Not for GOP Tomorrow
I agree with the premise, Emily. The same folks who threw the establishment Republicans out two years ago and now expressing their disgust with the replacement gang.
If the GOP does not heed the message they will be out on their collective ear in two years.
But underneath that is a more important message. The people of this good country are sick to death of the state of governance - at a very deep level. The good news is that the proper solution to that fits the GOP vision much more closely than the progressive vision. In other words, what the people want is what we have to offer - IF we are willing to hold ourselves accountable.