All the pundits are writing about what Eric Cantor's loss means to the Republican Party. Democratic politicians are wisely keeping quiet, not wanting to appear like they're gloating at someone else's misfortune. But it's a two party system, what does this mean for the Democrats in years to come?
Eric Cantor's upset shows that big money doesn't always win, and that K St-bashing populism wins elections. Let's hope that Democrats across the country take that to heart and fight back against the big money flooding their races.
Just as traditionalists once poo-pooed telephone surveys over face-to-face, so too must the modern American political pollster embrace new methodologies or risk finding themselves the punchline to the next Eric Cantor joke.
Recent history provides a cautionary warning about candidates citing God as a divine political kingmaker, summoning them to run for election.
The defeat of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was quickly interpreted by national media as a signal that immigration reform was dead on arrival. But for immigration reform advocates, the strategy has not changed.
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...