Frank Rich Takes On The 'Randslide'

New York Times:

If there is one certain outcome to recent American elections, it's this: The results will invariably prove most of the Beltway's settled political narratives wrong.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[Ricardo01]

11:51 AM on 05/24/2010

About 170,000 more Democrats voted in the KY Senate primary than did Republicans. Randslide? Rots of Ruck.

[Rooster Coburn]

07:44 AM on 05/24/2010

Oddly, though, I encounter far more hoplophobia on this site than on any libertarian or conservative pages.

[ZeraLee]

05:01 AM on 05/24/2010

"past performance is not indicative of future results"

Translation: republican extremism has gotten out of their control - all bets are off.

[maxfax]

12:08 AM on 05/24/2010

According to Bob Schieffer, summing up his contentions the more extreme the party not in power, gives the other party the edge. We'll see who's right in November.

[18wheeler]

11:45 PM on 05/23/2010

Granted, as a foreigner, I sometimes am at a loss when it comes to USA politics, but primary vote numbers say the democrat is ahead in Kentucky right now. A total of 350,783 voted Republican, and 514,173 voted democrat in the primaries for senate. What am I missing here? Why they keep repeating that "Paulin" is 20 points ahead in the polls?

[Marioth]

11:57 PM on 05/23/2010

Because he's not. After a primary election, the polls are "reset" to a certain extent to reflect the new playing field. That 20 points ahead poll came too close to the election to be of much value.

I just hope the enthusiasm you observe lasts through November. Rand Paul is not what our Senate needs right now.

[KOSMOCITIZEN]

11:36 PM on 05/23/2010

It is time for GOP to:

ACT conservatively, and THINK liberal..

[unam]

11:05 PM on 05/23/2010

Anyone who wants to know what a country with no government looks like should visit a sub-Saharan African country. It is total chaos and survival of the fit. There are no roads, no power, no security and no regulations/laws. Rand Paul needs to visit one of these countries before spouting his no government nonsense.

[SteadyOn]

11:09 PM on 05/23/2010

Good point.

[J-Rome]

11:38 PM on 05/23/2010

That's a pretty broad indictment of sub-Saharan Africa. As someone who travels to sub-Saharan African countries Angola, Namibia, and South Africa frequently, I can tell you that these nations have governments that while no where near perfect are not nearly as bad as governments in central and northern Africa.

Your general point is valid with respect to certain nations in Africa being lawless (the "Congo" comes to mind) and that rand paul would perhaps benefit from a visit to such nations to get a sense of what it is like to live in a country where the term impotent is synonymous with the word government, but this characterization is not true of every nation in Sub-Saharan Africa.

[Querent]

09:45 PM on 05/23/2010

I think some of Frank Rich's arguments are pretty tenuous.

For instance, Mr. Rich says, "But the enthusiasm gap remains real. Tea Partiers will turn up at the polls, and not just in Kentucky." I wonder how Mr. Rich knows this. Is it because in the polls, the "Tea Partiers" call themselves "Very Likely to Vote" or "Certain to Vote"? That's the only evidence for the thesis that I have seen. But is that really evidence? The self-designation of "Very Likely to Vote" is not just a response to a question. Like everything else involved in political discourse, it's a message. It's like saying to the poll respondent, "Do you really mean it?" And the respondent answers, "I really mean it."



Well, isn't that very same behavior typical of the teabaggers? They're in your face. They're dramatic. The baggers are always emphatic about what they say. Of course they're going to say, "I'm a certain voter." 



So what? How many of them are there? Well, again, no one knows. If you ask people, "Are you a Tea Partier?" some of them will say yes even if they have never actually laid eyes on a bagger. Let's face it, people lie. The baggers say there are millions of them. Their convention was attended by 600. Their organizers say their demonstrations are huge. The press says small, and the civil authorities say very small. They fake pictures to make their turnout look bigger.



[Marioth]

12:01 AM on 05/24/2010

You describe a tempest in a teacup. Politics is about building and moving coalitions, not aliening your fellow citizens, while wishing them to fail. It's why the Tea Party really cannot go anywhere but more crazy. They are already at n*azi. There are few worthwhile arguments beyond that.

[planetjeffy]

01:14 AM on 05/24/2010

well put and fanned

I know some disaffected tea party types and they are all talk. They rant and rail against the government but rarely vote. I think they are more attracted to a 3rd party candidate and not sure how excited they are about the Republican party.

[Querent]

09:40 PM on 05/23/2010

(continued)

I think it's possible that the importance of this "enthusiasm gap" is largely overstated. I personally am somewhat disgusted with many of the current administration's policies, but I will certainly be voting. So my lack of enthusiasm doesn't translate into a lost vote.

Mr. Rich also references the President. He mentions the widespread dissatisfaction with the President's policies among Progressives, citing that as decreasing the likelihood of high turnout. I feel like I ought to write the next sentence in caps.

THE PRESIDENT IS NOT RUNNING!!!!!!! In many of the House races, and even in some Senate races, Progressive candidates are running. It's not necessarily clear which are which, at this point, though usually it is. But Blue Dogs seem to try to pass as Progressives, if they can get away with it. But that means these elections are worth voting in, regardless of one's opinion of the President. And let's face it, what Republican could possibly make any politically aware voter vote for him instead?

Bottom line: I ain't afraid of no Teabaggers.

[J-Rome]

12:05 AM on 05/24/2010

Nuff said! Fanned and faved!

[vonric]

09:34 PM on 05/23/2010

Thoughtful and articulate post that clearly delineates the risk of writing off the constituancy that supports Rand Paul in all of what most consider to be kooky ides. The risk of just laughing off this boob is that it only exacerbates the anger of his base, which are already inflamed, enraged and disenfranchised by the fact that the body politic left them out in the cold several decades ago. They pine for a time long past, and a freedom in action that others found poisonous.....but their voices, like any true fanatic fringe voice, is wildly disproportionate to their true numbers. The paulists, if I may call them that, with no offense to theology, will continue to articulate their perceptions until, eventually, they all die off.

[olivia]

09:24 PM on 05/23/2010

Paul is still about a thousand times smarter and more interesting than Palin.

[Todd Sullivan]

10:52 PM on 05/23/2010

he's probably a thousand times smarter and more interesting than a rug, but that ain't saying much. this guys views on race relations are dangerous, more so because he's so well-meaning about it. he's the kind of guy who "hates" the worst of social ills but has a sickening knack of rationalizing them. as the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[user168]

11:00 PM on 05/23/2010

Doesn't matter, they are both a thousand miles from any truth. The only stupidity in this world is not knowing one is not true.

[KathrynLW]

09:07 PM on 05/23/2010

What's wrong with this picture:
Sarah Palin is getting $75,000 plus $18,000 expenses to speak at CSU Stanislaus! And the school is so broke, they stopped giving scholarships!

http://palingates.blogspot.com/2010/05/sarah-palins-secret-speaking-fee_24.html#disqus_threa

[Querent]

09:52 PM on 05/23/2010

It's probably coming from the students' activity fees. You know, they don't really need that extra side-horse in the back of the gym.

[olivia]

09:06 PM on 05/23/2010

We should have been softer on him because now look what has happened: the GOP is going to shush him. Who knew how little it would take - 24,000 comments? I'm starting to think HuffPo is a force to be reckoned with.

[ljkcan]

10:39 PM on 05/23/2010

It makes me feel there are sane people in America when I read the opposition to his offensive comments. I was in the US this weekend and I was reading USA today and there was a letter to the editor from a man in Florida.

He said he remembers being a Vietnam veteran and having to fly back home because there were still places he could not stop at due to his color. I really think Mr Paul should have gone on TV this morning and clarify why on earth in the year 2010 he thinks business have the right to refuse people and understand how deeply offensive it is for many Americans.

[Bloggerrogr]

08:55 PM on 05/23/2010

When I see the tea-whiners marching arm-in-arm down Wall Street and confronting the crooks and liars that pitched this country into a financial ditch, THEN, I will give them some cred.
Until then, I shall consider them to be a greedy, out-of-touch bunch of social malcontents who have failed to come to grips with this society's changing demographic.

FWIW

[Querent]

09:54 PM on 05/23/2010

What an excellent point. I fully agree.

[vgirl1]

08:49 PM on 05/23/2010

As a famous comedian recently said, when someone has to begin a statement with I am not a racist you can bet your bottom dollar..............

[olivia]

09:07 PM on 05/23/2010

When a person is asked for the first time to clarify his views on national TV and he is immediately on the defensive, you can bet his views are not those of the majority.