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.
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.
As we ponder the future of immigration reform in the U.S. it is important to remember that it is not fundamentally a controversial policy.
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.
While pundits may argue about why Cantor lost, they are in agreement that no one could have seen this coming. Democrats weren't paying attention to a Republican primary in a Republican safe district.
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.
Eric Cantor was not a sufficiently hardcore fundamentalist? Eric Cantor?
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.
Reports of conservatism's death have been greatly exaggerated. Reading recent predictions of the demise of anti-statist politics, one might think we have arrived at the dawn of a new social democratic America.
In the ALEC otherworld, actual economics do not count. It's all about a business-friendly environment. Hello, Third World.
Choice is hard. Life is hard. But Joe Miller has abandoned complexity in lieu of irresponsible soundbites. To make such a wildly inaccurate policy statement, purposefully and solely for short-term political gain, is a reprehensible breach of ethics and is beneath even the basement level of politics we associate with the modern day campaign.
Opponents of the law have filed four lawsuits designed to stop families from obtaining the very thing that allows them to afford their health insurance premiums: tax credit subsidies.
There is advocacy journalism and there is Citizen Koch.