Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (130138)	2/4/2010 7:34:15 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542147

The argument goes off the rails here. Either there is a significant regional variation in the Republican party or you need to attach more significance to the fact that moderate Republican candidates have won four of the five significant elections in the last six months (IL primary, NJ, Virginia, and Massachusetts). I think you are doing apples and oranges here. Let me try something with you. I think Kilgore is arguing that the energy in the party is coming only from the most conservative/activist element, whether one calls it tea party or not. That the "establishment" hasn't so much controlled it as is controlled by it. So it's not so much the views of the candidate is it is how far he/she has to go to the right to get the nomination, then elected, then govern. Let me look at your cases. Massachusetts was a win for the activists; without them (regardless of Scott Brown's view) he would not now be a senator. Martha Coakley would be. It's also the case for the Virginia governorship. In each case, the Rep candidate was "the" candidate. Regardless of views. I suspect the VA governor will turn out to be as conservative as most tea partiers but we'll just have to wait and see. So in this argument we are down to Illinois and New Jersey. I know a bit about the latter. Christie is definitely not from the hyper conservative wing of the party. His opponent in the primaries was, got tea party support, very active, etc. And they lost. So far it looks as if the tea party is out. But there is more to see. In this case, I'm waiting to see how he governs. He's not been particularly outspoken about his abortion views but the Rep establishment in the state is largely pro choice. Christi Whitman is the clearest illustration; Tom Keane as well. So one test will be to see how far to the right he goes on that. In the primaries he went far enough to keep his base in the general. He has, however, appointed to head the state education department a darling of the very conservative wing of the party. Last name is Schundler. Forget first name. An indication that Christie will govern further to the right than traditional NJ Reps. So, NJ is on the fence right now as to how far to the right the tea partiers will drag the state party. And if they are successful here, or even close to being successful, it will be hard to make a national argument that the Rep establishment is "in control." Illinois I just don't know enough in detail. My wife grew up there and we lived in Chicago from the summer of 63 to the summer of 69, the first year working with gangs on the west and south side (and some other stuff), the last set of years in grad school at Northwestern. I knew a bit about Illinois politics then, but certainly not now. But even with this, of the five, I think three go to the very conservative set, one is still to be determined, and one I simply don't know about so will take your word for it. Any thoughts?