Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Bachmann, Schmachmann!
First, Happy 4th to my friend Peter who I greatly respect. But on this, we disagree. Come to think of it, happy 4th to everyone.
Second, a plug for my new “Murphy’s Law” column in TIME. Topic is Michele Bachmann’s impact n the GOP Race. Please don’t send me any angry letters or cardboard Uncle Sam hats. Send them to Rob Long.
My view is this: I think she will have an impact on the race, but I think her odds are being nominated are ziltch, as I told Matt a few months ago. I think her support will crumble with time in the spotlight, and deservedly so. I think her appeal is limited to one part of the primary; real estate Rick Perry may well challenge her for. Finally, I think she would lose a general election in a landslide. Conservatives need to remember that until the country changes what it thinks, nominating a candidate that pleases only conservatives (and only one part of the conservative electorate at that; remember her insane Kucinich vote on Libya?) is always going to be a losing plan. Why ape the Democrats circa 1972 and find a George McGovern?
Finally, if Rush – to his credit a Ricochet reader – wants to tee off again, I want the record to state that I don’t live in DC and care less about cocktail parties there. In fact, the last time I had dinner in a four-star restaurant in Georgetown, it was with Rush Limbaugh! (Some years ago; it was a fun dinner.)
Published in General
And that is where I part company with you, as do WFB and others. We do not believe in surrendering winnable ground- to seek purity. ·Jul 1 at 9:56am
Duane,
It all depends on what you consider winning. If we pick up those 4 seats and have a senate that is willing to “Work with the president” to raise spending, taxes, regulations, pass cap and trade and card check, is not looking for a fight on health care and the debt limit, while allowing the president to have the cover of a bi-partisan senate. I would say we have gained nothing other than 4 people on c-span voting the wrong way consistently will have (R) after their name instead of (D). What benefit do I get by supporting one of these candidates in the primary? A possible no vote on card check and taxes? Sorry not good enough. I don’t need purity; however, you have to give me SOMETHING.
Additionally I am trying to figure out these 4 sure fire senate seats where the TEA Party candidate blew it completely?
I’ll give you Castle, Although I am not convinced we’ll see a difference in voting records on that one.
Angle lost in NV but her establishment challenger melted down in the primary, so I think it is kinda a stretch to say she was a sure fire winner against Reid.
In CO it was a very tight race and the repub candidate for governor blew up. I think that could have negatively impacted any repub senate challenger. Also very different from Angle or O’Donell, The tea party candidate was highly credible.
In AK we didn’t lose the seat. I will say that if a TEA party candidate had done what Lisa M. would never hear the end of it from the establishment.
Additionally the establishment left CA, WA, and WV on the table. CA was probably a long shot but WA and WV were “winnable” races.
This is the problem I have with the gotchya media, and the way even Ricochet responds to bad press from the bad press mavens at the New York Times and the Washington Post, to name two frequent sources. The opposition press is the opposition press. Anyone that thinks these people are in the game to do anything but shut down the other side needs a short course in classical rhetoric.
This is why I so enjoy Andrew Breitbart. He broke the code and he’s a genius at putting it all in perspective. He was taking on the Journolist before he even knew there was one. Just because he’s paranoid does not mean they are not out to get him. And us.
I’ll also note that every single time a contributor or member posts tactical and/or strategic political advice, it might be a touch awkward to demand a resume.
And I’ll note that that grossly misrepresents what I’ve been saying all along. Members? Resumés? I explicitly refudiated that. Experts? Resumés? You’re damn right.
Look, my point is this: based upon his resumé, clearly he’s a successful political consultant. But his post to start this conversation was not as a political consultant. It was as a political analyst. I would argue that success at one does not confer expertise in the other, which is why I repeatedly asked for his bona fides as an analyst, since he was analyzing Bachmann’s chances, not advising her how to win.
If he wants to trade on his expertise here in Ricochet, I’d suggest he post a roadmap of what it would take for Bachmann to win the nomination and the general. For THAT kind of thing would be in his wheelhouse. So far there’s been no evidence provided that political analysis is his strong suit. And we’re up to how many posts here??
Good point. I don’t know if it counts as a “gaffe” but Reagan’s first debate in 1984 left everyone on the Right gasping and quivering and everyone on the Left salivating. As gaffes go, that debate was maybe a candidate for Mother of all Gaffes.
He ended up winning…49 states. I guess the punditocracy would argue that with a better first debate he woulda won Minnesota, too. So he failed. Just like Bachmann will, of course.