I like to look at the big picture rather than get bogged down by how individual precincts voted. Moderate Republicans may soon see more distance between themselves and the Tea Party than between themselves and the Democratic Party. I also wonder whether a fair number of establishment Republicans voted against Cantor because of his leadership role in the do-nothing Congress.

 

Of course you do when it's convenient for your agenda.

One poll showed 70% of voters in Cantor's district mostly agreed with his position on immigration reform.

 

He had poor overall numbers in the area of performance.

 

"Crony capitalism" was the main charge made by his opponent.

One poll showed 70% of voters in Cantor's district mostly agreed with his position on immigration reform.

 

He had poor overall numbers in the area of performance.

 

"Crony capitalism" was the main charge made by his opponent.

Too pro-Wall Street, an analyst on CNBC just opined.

Thanks Marvel for the info on guns and gun clubs .

Eric Cantor to Step Down as Majority Leader

 

No surprise here.

Read today's headlines. This was much more than a mere primary in Virginia. Huge upsets like this one will only embolden our friends on the far right. By the way, Cantor was the only Jewish GOP member in Congress. Now there are zero. With every election, the GOP becomes less diverse.

Ridiculous. What kind of people vote solely on a candidate's religion or the color of his or her skin? That's a rhetorical question, the answer is pretty obvious and it explains to a large extent why Obama won a second term.

 

Cantor lost because conservatives believe that he was working to help Obama get his amnesty for illegals agenda through Congress. A vote for Cantor was a vote for Obama and Obama lost.

I've never understood why there are Open Primaries, just does not seem right.

Open primaries help the national GOP nominate many candidates that the majority of Republicans don't want. They are only one of the reasons that we have been saddled with so many dull, moderate presidential candidates since Reagan left the White House. The timing of the primaries (open primaries early) and both the debate formats are other tools that moderates use to control the selection of candidates.

 

The more that the GOP can make campaigns expensive media affairs, the less likely incumbents will lose. Cantor had several times more money left in his war chest than Bratt spent on campaigning. I wonder if Cantor thinks spending his last $1.5 million would have made any difference.

But don't open primaries also invite the opposite party to vote against incumbents in their other party.

 

If Kentucky had open primaries I could have seen the Dems voting for Bevin, giving two chances at beating Mitch.

Open primaries help the national GOP nominate many candidates that the majority of Republicans don't want. They are only one of the reasons that we have been saddled with so many dull, moderate presidential candidates since Reagan left the White House. The timing of the primaries (open primaries early) and both the debate formats are other tools that moderates use to control the selection of candidates.

 

The more that the GOP can make campaigns expensive media affairs, the less likely incumbents will lose. Cantor had several times more money left in his war chest than Bratt spent on campaigning. I wonder if Cantor thinks spending his last $1.5 million would have made any difference.

Republicans prefer the anointing of a candidate (GWB in 2000) rather than having numerous and free-wheeling primary debates (2012). That's why the party's brain power wants to rein in the discussion in '16.

Republicans prefer the anointing of a candidate (GWB in 2000) rather than having numerous and free-wheeling primary debates (2012). That's why the party's brain power wants to rein in the discussion in '16.

Are you sure that you authored this post? This is exactly what I have been saying for several years.

 

A series of real nationally televised debates would greatly benefit Ted Cruz's campaign, if he decides to run. That is the last thing that guys like Eric Cantor want to see. Not many Democratic incumbents want open debates either. Nobody wants to answer for allowing Obama to trash the Constitution without objection.

Republicans prefer the anointing of a candidate (GWB in 2000) rather than having numerous and free-wheeling primary debates (2012). That's why the party's brain power wants to rein in the discussion in '16.

 

Sounds eerily like the Dems for 2016, wouldn't you agree?

Sounds eerily like the Dems for 2016, wouldn't you agree?

Yes, I agree. Hillary needs to "show me," not just "show up." Let's round up the five or six strongest Democratic candidates to further the progressive cause in America, have a series of free-wheeling debates, then let the voters decide.

 

Sounds good on paper, but we all know that the fattest cat (financially) usually wins, despite what happened last night in Virginia.

Yes, I agree. Hillary needs to "show me," not just "show up." Let's round up the five or six strongest Democratic candidates to further the progressive cause in America, have a series of free-wheeling debates, then let the voters decide.

 

Sounds good on paper, but we all know that the fattest cat (financially) usually wins, despite what happened last night in Virginia.

Who would you think the top 5-7 Democratic Candidates will be? That would be a good thread to start a discussion of who's going to be battling for the nomination.

Ridiculous. What kind of people vote solely on a candidate's religion or the color of his or her skin? That's a rhetorical question, the answer is pretty obvious and it explains to a large extent why Obama won a second term.

 

Cantor lost because conservatives believe that he was working to help Obama get his amnesty for illegals agenda through Congress. A vote for Cantor was a vote for Obama and Obama lost.

 

Is there a poll that shows that conservatives were against Mr Cantor's support of immigration reform? The one I saw said 70% of Republicans were fine with his stance.