I'd say James' take is 50%-75% right. 50% right off the bat because we know a Castle victory would prove at best meaningless, by his being the third lady from Maine, adding "bipartisan" cover to all manner of statist mischief even probably sometimes where the Maine gals refused to budge. Like cap-and-trade.
He has assured us that this will be the case. That he won't even temper, e.g., his support for that energy rationing scheme that's been a disaster where it was tried in the admitted model, Europe, shows he's a) impervious to reconsidering his dogma or, b) given that the proposal in the name of the climate would, according to no one, have any detectable imapct on the climate, he continues to hold on to that rationale for the agenda (one that even Lindsey Graham famously, hilariously ditched), he has a listening or comprehension problem. These aren't mutually exclusive and in fact might be complementary troubles.
He knows what he knows and that's all he needs to know. Elect him, and you will affirm and elevate that approach. What the heck. Arrogance of politicians isn't an issue this year...
I think O'Donnell is trying but has yet to provide similar proof-in-advance about the other proposition, that she is not electable. Experience is that wave elections generally wash back out around six years later because all sorts of otherwise "unelectable" nominees are elected.
A month or so ago Sharron Angle wasn't electable either. She's in a dead heat with the Majority Leader. O'Donnell's baggage troubles me more than Angle's did at this point in my hearing it tossed about. But the truth is that, about that, we just don't know.
But we do know about Castle. It's not complicated.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article