fingerpointing

Politico.com:

National Republicans agree on this much about the 2013 campaign in Virginia:  It wasn’t supposed to go like this.

Well before the last votes are cast in the state’s off-year governor’s race,  GOP leaders are already engaged in a spirited debate over why, exactly, a fight  against a Democrat as flawed as Terry McAuliffe has turned into such a painful  slog of a campaign. Even Republicans who haven’t yet counted out their nominee,  state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, view the governor’s race as a profile in  frustration for the GOP – an election that should have leaned toward the  Republicans, but where Democrats have held a persistent lead in polling, money  and tactical prowess.

The GOP’s internal discussion about the race mirrors much of  the broader national tug of war within the conservative coalition, between  officials and strategists who want the party to trim back some of its most  confrontational tactics and hard-edged rhetoric, and activists bent on drawing  the starkest possible lines of contrast with the Democratic party of President  Barack Obama.

The clearest battle lines will emerge after Tuesday; but the Washington  community has groused for months about Cuccinelli’s history of incendiary,  ultra-ideological stances, while rank-and-file activists have watched with  horror as well-tailored GOP donors have defected to McAuliffe. Everyone in the  party – establishment and tea party alike – has fumed over the ongoing ethics  controversies that have rocked outgoing Gov. Bob McDonnell’s administration and  undercut Cuccinelli’s anticipated advantage over McAuliffe on personal  integrity.

A Cuccinelli defeat, in other words, would have a thousand fathers. But this  much is already clear: the GOP’s accumulated problems in Virginia have brought  the party to the edge of a historic defeat in a nationally pivotal swing state,  potentially producing a Republican shutout of all five statewide offices  (governor, attorney general, lieutenant governor and two U.S. senators) for the  first time since the Nixon administration.

Republican Governors Association executive director Phil Cox, whose group has  spent nearly $8 million boosting Cuccinelli, firmly rejected the idea that the  Virginia race reflected any limitations of conservative ideas. But he allowed  that there may be lessons to learn about how you go about delivering a  conservative message.

Is it safe to go out on a limb and make a few observations?  As troublesome as the McDonnell scandals have been, I really don’t think they have impacted Cuccinelli all that much.  Cuccinelli is his own worst enemy.  The Republican shut down of the government didn’t add to his popularity.  If there is stench, it is from that debacle, not from McDonnell.

Most of us don’t care much for what McDonnell did with Star Scientific and its CEO.  However, I am not ready to say the man did anything illegal.  He exercised bad judgement.  I don’t want him removed from office even.  Let’s hop over to Cuccinelli.  He did some of the same things.  Bad judgement all over the place but illegal?   I don’t think so.

Cuccinelli’s problem can be summed up with a simple statement about him being an ideologue.  He is way too far right and culture warrior for the average Virginian.  He has a litany of attacks on women’s rights and reproductive rights.  He will pay at the polls.  It’s really that simple.

Politico might have other ideas but they don’t necessarily have their thumb on the pulse of the Virginia voter.

In summation, It’s over tomorrow at 7 pm.  No predictions here.  Karma is a bitch.

 

32 Thoughts to “Let the finger pointing and debates begin…..”

  1. Cato the Elder

    It’s a little more complicated than that.

    It’s a well-known fact that Cooch doesn’t play ball with lobbyists, all Star Scientific crap aside. This in turn makes a lot of business types very nervous, which is why you see a lot of them who gave to McDonnell either sitting out or getting behind Terry.

    With Terry, you know the guy is a hustler, he’s motivated by the dollar. Guys like that are very easy to work with (read: buy off) because they take the guesswork out of the equation and eliminate uncertainty: you can count on Terry to be Terry (much like Clinton). Even people like the NRA aren’t concerned about the guy because if you have him bleating about gun control while the GA tells him to pound sand you get to claim victory and watch the contributions roll in. In fact, he would be the best case scenario donations-wise.

    My Republican insider friends will no doubt dislike what I’m saying, to which I say don’t hate the player: I’m just explaining the game. Terry plays it and Cooch does not.

    Bottom line is a lot of business-minded people who finance campaigns aren’t happy with the choices, but don’t see four years of Terry as the worst thing that could happen to the commonwealth, and that calculus is probably correct.

    1. @Cato

      And its a little more complicated that your assessment. Millions of dollars have been infused into this election from people *I* didn’t know HAD millions of dollars.

      To simply write it off as McAuliffe being shady is a partisan comment. If the dealings with Star Scientific and the buying and selling of their stock didn’t hit you as shady, I don’t know what would. How about not resigning to run for governor?

  2. Starry flights

    Meanwhile up in New Jersey, Chris Christie is about to be reelected overwhelmingly. Cooch is about to get his butt kicked. So I would ask my right leaning friends, which of these two is the real RINO?

  3. I admit to being very partisan during the state election. Straight ticket.

    Its probably time to do away with the convention as a method of selecting candidates. I think EW Jackson personifies why.

    How would Bill Bolling be holding up against Terry McAuliffe? We have no way of knowing but I don’t think the party faithful and the business community would have jumped ship. There are a lot of people out there who feel he would be winning.

    Let’s just say it would be an entirely different ball game, regardless of outcome.

  4. Pat.Herve

    I guess Cooch is just not Conservative enough to win the election, if only they had picked a more Conservative candidate.

    I am on the same page as Moon, the problem with the nomination process was the convention – the base might like it but the electorate does not.

  5. Rick Bentley

    Pat made me laugh there …

  6. @Starry flights
    Seeing that Christie is basically a conservative Democrat…..Christie. But he gets a pass since he’s running in a Democrat stronghold. ‘

    Personally, I don’t call liberal Republicans RINOS. They’re just progressives.

  7. @Moon-howler
    I was a Bolling supporter. Cuccinelli should have run for AG or Lt. Gov. He got greedy.

  8. Elena

    Cargo,
    I guess Reagan was a RINO? He raised taxes and granted amnesty to immigrants.

  9. Pat.Herve

    @Elena

    He must have been a RINO as his administration sold arms to Iran and funneled money to the Contra’s – against Congress’s wishes (the law). And shredded all the documents it could.

    I often wonder how many of those TOW and Hawk missiles were used against the US and our allies.

  10. See my statement about RINOS above yours.

    As for the amnesty….Reagan signed it. Not his fault that Congress didn’t follow through. He was told that the one time amnesty would be enough and then a fence would be built and illegal immigration would be fought. Oh…look… Liberals lied again.

    TOW and Hawk missiles against the US and allies…….probably none. Iran hasn’t fought anyone. Hezbollaw and Hamas have used those weapons either.

    Even the F-14’s that were left in place were useless to them.

  11. EDIT: Hezbollaw and Hamas have used those weapons either.

    Hezbollah and Hamas HAVEN’T used those weapons either.

  12. BSinVA

    When Christie wins and Cooch loses, the teabaggers will say that Christie ran a good campaign and Cooch didn’t. They will further add that Cooch’s loss was due to bad campaigning and not his far right social positions.

  13. Kelly_3406

    @BS

    If Cuccinelli loses, conservatives will note that Virginia is being overrun my dumbass liberals from the National Capital Region who never met a government entitlement they didn’t like. These are low-information voters like those in California who supported Obamacare until they found out they had to pay for it.

    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-sticker-shock-20131027,0,4888906,full.story#axzz2iyDLHrVx

  14. @Cargosquid

    Christie is NOT a democrat. He is a moderate conservative. You don’t get to give people their stripes.

  15. @Cargosquid

    I think many people like Bill Bolling. l might not vote for him but I do respect him.

  16. @Kelly_3406

    Conservatives would be wrong if that is what they would be thinking.

  17. Pat.Herve

    @Kelly_3406
    attitudes like that are part of the problem You were probably agreeing with Karl Rove that Ohio could not have been lost for Romney.

  18. Starryflights

    Cuccinelli is going to her his butt kicked tomorrow.

  19. @Moon-howler
    Sure I can…..my opinion is my own. He’s basically a conservative democrat in his positions.

    1. Please state that is your opinion since that is not who he says he is. You can say whatever you want but you would be wrong.

      I can say that Ted Cruz is a Nazi or fascist or an anarchist. It doesn’t make it true.

      If you think HE is what a conservative democrat is like, I simply don’t know what to say.

  20. Kelly_3406

    @Pat.Herve

    No. But you probably cannot see how something as wonderful as Obamacare would be a detriment to electing Dems. Obama’s endorsement yesterday did not even mention Obamacare. McAuliffe has stated he is “all in” but somehow that wasn’t relevant after healthy people discovered they have to pay more. Somehow the 2012 presidential election was supposed to be a referendum on Obamacare, but that was while Obama could still lie about keeping your same doctor and plan if you like them. It is probably too little, too late for Cooch, but group plans will start get cancelled next year. It will be curious to see if Obamacare is still wonderful then

    1. No one has said that Obamacare is perfect. It does need tweaking. We knew that would happen.

      It’s a start in the right direction.

      I resent like hell paying more for my insurance because of the slugs who don’t have insurance and then walk on their bill. Why do you Republicans keep defending these people? YOU pay for them. I don’t want to. You know damn well they aren’t going to pay their hospital bills if they get sick.

  21. @Moon-howler
    So…its okay for people to pay more for their insurance because Obamacare needs to subsidize them instead?

  22. Rick Bentley

    “I can say that Ted Cruz is a Nazi or fascist or an anarchist. It doesn’t make it true.”

    Right … he’s just a run-of-the-mill populist blowhard, whose issue of choice has a 15 minute shelf life.

  23. Pat.Herve

    @Cargosquid

    cargo – do you remember Katrina? All the shenanigans that the insurance companies did to deny claims – it was not flooding it was just water damage. How about all the policies that were canceled and the rise in rates across the US to the insurance companies for the losses? That is how insurance works – those in the pool pay the same share, always hoping to never need it. 65% of all bankruptcies are related to medical costs. The US spends more on healthcare than any other country and has worse outcomes. Out infant mortality rate is worse than many other countries – http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/09/graph-of-the-day-the-united-states-has-a-really-high-infant-mortality-rate/ But lets try and keep an unworkable, fraud laden, wasteful system instead of trying to make changes to it. What the ACA has done is taken what the R’s have pushed for since 1974 (yes under Nixon) and what the Heritage Foundation wanted. Orrin Hatch and Chuck Grassley proposed legislation in 1993, Newt supported it.

  24. Pat.Herve

    @Rick Bentley

    and his Dad is a Birther….. we can say that about him too!

  25. Kelly_3406

    @Pat.Herve

    I always wondered about infant mortality being higher in the US, so I did a little research. It turns out that many countries “doctor” their statistics. If a baby is born alive and then dies in the U.S., it is counted against the infant mortality rate, no matter what the size or birth weight was. However, countries like Sweden consider a baby with small weight/size that dies within 24 hours of birth as stillborn. They do not count these deaths against the infant mortality rate.

    In fact, the US has a very good survival rate for low birthweight babies. Some of these countries with socialized healthcare limit the treatment of these small babies, because they do not consider it a good use of limited resources.

    Will Obamacare do the same? The cost of medical care and the infant mortality rate could be reduced in one fall swoop by withholding treatment and declaring the babies that don’t make it as stillborn.

  26. Pat.Herve

    @Kelly_3406

    Yes, some countries do have different ways of measuring infant mortality – ie, if the baby does not breath on its own, it is not considered an infant mortality and is considered a perinatal mortality. Sweden and Germany do happen to use the same WHO criteria as the US so should be a very good comparison – http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2006/9241563206_eng.pdf – Can you point me to any information where treatment in Sweden is limited to some of these infants?

  27. Pat.Herve

    @Kelly_3406

    also of note is the difference of mortality rates within the US – States like Mississippi have a rate of 10 per 1000 vs Utah and Massachusetts with 5 per 1000.

  28. middleman

    …and Mississippi unconscionably refused to expand Medicare under the ACA, which would have helped to deal with this infant mortality problem, at no cost to the state.

    Kentucky has become the model for how the ACA can work in a poor southern state. If only the poor folks had the big money-fueled “free speech” PAC’s that the rich do, maybe more poor southerners would get help instead of being left for dead by their “leaders.”

  29. Excellent point, middleman.

    That’s been going on in the south for far too long. Isn’t that sort of what happened during the civil war. The money rallied the troops. How many poor southern boys met their demise compared to the rich ones? At least the rich ones were on horseback.

Comments are closed.