Other than the defeat of newly-minted Democrat Arlen Specter, no other primary result has more potential impact on the makeup of the Senate. Bloggers are working overtime to weigh in on it, as covered by the ever-diligent Andrew Sullivan.
I am particularly struck by these comments. First by Matthew Yglesias:
The rise of Rand Paul and his securing the GOP nomination for the Kentucky Senate seat is one of the things that will spark divergent reactions in DSCC headquarters and in the minds of responsible liberals. By nominating a lunatic, Republicans have suddenly taken what should be a hopeless Senate race and turned it into something Democrats can win. At the same time, by nominating a lunatic, Republicans have suddenly raised the odds that a lunatic will represent Kentucky in the United States Senate.And by David Frum:
How is it that the GOP has lost its antibodies against a candidate like Rand Paul? In the past few months, we have seen GOP conservatives rally against Utah Sen. Bob Bennett. There has been no similar rallying against Rand Paul: no ads by well-funded out-of-state groups. Some senior Republicans, like former VP Dick Cheney, indicated a preference for opponent Trey Grayson. But despite Paul’s self-presentation as “anti-establishment,” the D.C. conservative establishment by and large made its peace with him. It is this acquiescence – even more than Paul’s own nomination – that is the most ominous news from tonight’s vote.My emphasis.
Yglesias is generously not applying the lunatic term to departing KY Senator Jim Bunning, or to Jim DeMint (SC), or Sam Brownback (KS), or Saxby Chambliss (GA), or Tom Coburn (OK), or John Cornyn (TX), or Jim Inhofe (OK), or Joe Lieberman (CT).
Frum's comment about Dick Cheney's endorsement of Grayson gives me hope that his "golden touch" will yield similar results for Carly Fiorina in the California Senate race.
No comments:
Post a Comment