Looks like the pundits are all wrong, again. Looks like all the analysis is once more misplaced and incorrect. Eric Cantor did not lose to a Tea Party groundswell.
Did his pleas influence Democrats to turn out and vote for Brat? Does that explain how the polls were so off? Were they only polling Republicans? Was immigration reform as big an issue as the conservative and liberal pundits would have you believe?
The defeat of Eric Cantor, the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, by David Brat, a little known professor of economics at Randolph-Macon...
I came to Washington to do nothing, and I rose through the Republican ranks while doing nothing. Doing nothing became second nature to me. But in these last two years, I did in fact lose my way. I now see this.
Who is David Brat, the out-of-nowhere college professor who beat Eric Cantor in the GOP primary?
Journalists and pundits are treating this nationalism-inflected populism as if it were somehow a new phenomenon. In fact, this populism can be traced back to the end of the Cold War.
The message this sends to other Republicans in Congress (both House and Senate) is that this can happen to anyone. The fear this is going to create may become all-encompassing in the House, and possibly even the Senate (if Republicans win control of the chamber this November). The Tea Party sword hanging over their heads is now plain to see.
To see a candidate taking on an incumbent with an astronomical cash advantage, running on a platform in part opposed to money's influence in the political system, and win is an amazing thing in this day and age. Maybe this is the beginning of a trend in both parties.
Pandering to voters who view illegal immigrants as hurting the economy, sponging off the government, and taking American jobs helped Brat make history. However, the political rhetoric and hyperbole doesn't correlate with the aggregate economic data.
As news spread last night that Tea-Party Republicans in Virginia ejected House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Arapahoe Country Tea Party activists--here...
Immigration used to be a wedge issue in the Democratic Party. No longer. Now it is a wedge issue within the Republican Party and between the GOP and ordinary Americans.
Instead of victory, we have humiliation. Defeat. And a sweet, sweet vindication that the Republican strategy of stoking up faux-populism, of just saying no, of never proposing a solution to any problem, has blown up so spectacularly because in their gorgeously gerrymandered districts, people -- voters -- have bought the line.
The expected right-wing electoral bogeymen had begun to diminish. Obamacare was working, climate change was everywhere, gay marriage was yesterday's fight. Something new was needed. The Tea Party, we fearlessly predict, will turn to "amnesty" and try to broaden the argument.
Republicans have blocked almost all of the president's initiatives after the 2010 election. They wear obstructionism like a medal on their chest. Now they should pay the price for serving narrow ideological and economic interest groups -- instead of America.
These are young people who didn't choose to come here. Their parents brought them. An opportunity to serve in the military would give them a chance to demonstrate their loyalty to the United States. In the long run, the ENLIST Act would allow these folks to become full, productive members of society.