Looking back on mini-Tuesday - I was pretty bummed about PA-12 until I read (after the fact) that Democrat Mark Critz ran on a platform against health care reform, cap-and-trade, and other issues near and dear to the Obama agenda. Fred Barnes explains: "Anti-incumbent? Try anti-Obama."
Update (5/20) - NRO: "Did Joe Sestak's surge save Mark Critz?" We're going to have to do this all over again in November without these special circumstances.
7 comments:
Murtha Jones
said...
Start bumming again. This is Tim Burns' campaign site on health care: "I’ll vote to repeal the healthcare bill." Tim Burns on cap-and-trade: "I’ll work to... fight-off harmful legislation like cap-and-trade." Two candidates, same two positions, in a district that went 59% for McCain a year and a half ago. The most avid voters went big for the Democrat.
Health care reform is already passed, and without a vote from the vacant PA-12. Critz's "opposition" is meaningless. Besides, Critz said that if elected, he would NOT vote to repeal the bill. Here's Critz's anti-Obama stance: "There were flaws that would’ve kept me from supporting it." The end. Burns' campaign heavily stressed that he would vote to repeal. That central plank of the 2010 GOP platform didn't sell, not even in a conservative district.
Critz says that he intends to co-sponsor the Employee Free Choice Act. He will vote to let the Bush tax cuts lapse. He's hardly a tea partier dressed in blue.
There is nothing in yesterday's results that represents a "silver lining" for the GOP. Absolutely nothing. The first day of the Republican resurrection was cancelled.
The end of the Nate Silver link: "But make no mistake: there are garbage cans being kicked, and consultants being sworn at, at NRCC headquarters right now. And the Republicans may need to engage in some self-reflection about whether nationalizing the race will be the optimal strategy in each of 50 distinct states and 435 distinct Congressional Districts."
Mark Critz's theoretical "no" vote on health care would have made it 219-213 instead of 219-212. Is that a big comfort to conservatives whose NRCC just spent over 10% of their cash on hand in a single district to NOT begin taking back the House?
7 comments:
Start bumming again. This is Tim Burns' campaign site on health care: "I’ll vote to repeal the healthcare bill." Tim Burns on cap-and-trade: "I’ll work to... fight-off harmful legislation like cap-and-trade." Two candidates, same two positions, in a district that went 59% for McCain a year and a half ago. The most avid voters went big for the Democrat.
Health care reform is already passed, and without a vote from the vacant PA-12. Critz's "opposition" is meaningless. Besides, Critz said that if elected, he would NOT vote to repeal the bill. Here's Critz's anti-Obama stance: "There were flaws that would’ve kept me from supporting it." The end. Burns' campaign heavily stressed that he would vote to repeal. That central plank of the 2010 GOP platform didn't sell, not even in a conservative district.
Critz says that he intends to co-sponsor the Employee Free Choice Act. He will vote to let the Bush tax cuts lapse. He's hardly a tea partier dressed in blue.
There is nothing in yesterday's results that represents a "silver lining" for the GOP. Absolutely nothing. The first day of the Republican resurrection was cancelled.
Whatever. Six months is a lifetime in politics, so we'll see in November.
I think Nate Silver makes a lot of good points here:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/05/what-tuesday-really-meant.html
Well, naturally. So why feel relief now?
The end of the Nate Silver link: "But make no mistake: there are garbage cans being kicked, and consultants being sworn at, at NRCC headquarters right now. And the Republicans may need to engage in some self-reflection about whether nationalizing the race will be the optimal strategy in each of 50 distinct states and 435 distinct Congressional Districts."
Mark Critz's theoretical "no" vote on health care would have made it 219-213 instead of 219-212. Is that a big comfort to conservatives whose NRCC just spent over 10% of their cash on hand in a single district to NOT begin taking back the House?
Cook Political Report on PA-12: "Sizeable Dem crossover vote for Burns, but huge GOP surge just a myth."
I think the big head fake for me was seeing a Daily Kos poll indicating Burns by six. Six!
Shame on me...
Pennsylvania voters were saying "Boo-urns."
Ha-ha. Nice ref.
Post a Comment