Re: George Neumayr’s The California Dead:
Over the summer, George Neumayr blamed Bill Simon’s campaign problems on liberal bias in the California media. Now he is blaming Simon’s defeat on something he calls “liberal Republicans.” This is typical of the political immaturity of the far-right of California Republicans.
George, I have some news for you. There are virtually no liberals in the Republican party. There are many moderate Republicans; for instance, there are legions of people who vote Republican because they are fiscally conservative but are basically pro-choice on abortion. Such people are not liberals; they just aren’t doctrinaire far-right conservatives.
There are lots of similarly-minded people who do not automatically vote Republican — these are the “independents,” the “swing voters,” and they have to be motivated to come to the polls and vote our way. Simon’s failed to project himself as a serious, effective candidate to “swing voters” and that is why he lost.
California is now a thoroughly liberal state. How else can you explain voters approving every single bond measure ($20 billion worth) during a time of gaping state budget deficits? So, my fellow California Republicans, remember the lesson of Bill Simon during the primary in March 2006. Vote for the Republican who can persuade the “swing voters” in the general election. It was as plain as the nose on your face this last March that Bill Simon was not up to that job.
— Tim Bacon
George Neumayr replies: Where were all those “legions” of moderate Republicans in the primary when Richard Riordan lost to Bill Simon by 18 points?
GRANHOLM FOR PRESIDENT
Re: Enemy Central’s Major Regroupings:
There’s another solution to this problem — annex Canada, making all ex-Canucks eligible. Well, at least the ones born in North America.
— H. Koenig
Nancy Pelosi as EOW? She will probably turn out to be a good friend of ours, in an indirect way. She should fill the role of Minority Leader quite well…for many years.
— Ted Angell
Re: Bill Croke’s What Happened in Al Simpson’s Wyoming:
It saddens me greatly to hear that the GOP lost its hold on the Wyoming governor’s mansion. I spent my adolescence in the Cowboy State and living there as a teenager helped me become the conservative that I am today.
Also, I am a former KTWO-TV employee and from my experience there management and the bulk of its workforce is a very nervous (and very left-wing) bunch. Many of them (who shall remain nameless) take much pleasure at taking shots at conservatives and the GOP on and off camera.
Alas, a well done piece.
— Tyler M. Kimball
THE ONE AND ONLY
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s Lords of Innovation:
Does anyone understand Democrats better than Bob Tyrrell? Long before Don Imus — in a speech to the Washington press corps — likened Carville, Reno, Shalala, Reich, Achtenburg, and the other Clinton Democrats to the alien bar denizens in Star Wars, Tyrrell wrote The Liberal Crack-Up, in which he chronicled the lives of the passingly strange Democrats of the Carter era. This classic book, which may be out of print, was an epiphany — opening my eyes that these creatures had escaped from their Brigadoon liberal village (heretofore I believed the regular Democrats lifted the spell on them and allowed their appearance only each four years in the a.m. hours of Democratic national conventions) and were abroad in the great world. In his book, Tyrrell recognized that they — Cuomo, Abzug, Carter himself and others — were essentially evildoers , but as only he can also limned how ridiculous they were. I gave copies of The Liberal Crack-Up to my sons when they were of political age and will do it again for my newly minted grandson, Nathaniel Wheatley Stiyer — just 10 days old.
— J. R. Wheatley
RE: Re: Jeremy Lott’s Crocodile Tears:
Jeremy Lott hit the nail on the head! I especially liked the comment, “and one lone idiot from Vermont.” I guess we won’t see the esteemed Independent from Vermont chairing any committees.
— Wm. Mark Cosby
What Democrat issues? They have no issues other than individual politicians hanging on to their personal power.
Social Security? Nothing. Even the most economically ignorant voter grasps the problems with Social Security. Left unchanged, either FICA tax will have to take most of a workers paycheck or those who have already paid into the system will get nothing in return. Democrats plainly demonstrated that they wanted do to nothing to Social Security. How many voters want most of their wages taxed? How many voters want no benefit? How is it theirissue?
Blacks? How many election cycles can pass where Democrats say “vote for us we’re the only hope” then do absolutely nothing for race relations? Carl McCall, black candidate, DNC pulls all the funds for a grudge match between white guys. (Who was the black Georgia guy wanting to be head of the DNC?) Sorry, we want white ‘ole Terry in there pulling strings. What have Democrats ever done for race relations? Is there a black Senator? Did Clinton have any meaningful black cabinet members? By the way, Secretary of State and National Security Advisor are not token positions given for pandering’s sake.
Economy? We all watched Democrats “talk down” the economy after the Enron collapse. (Note to Daschle: are we all so stupid that we’ll forget Gene Sperling lambasting GWB for “talking down the economy” in early 2001 only to watch every senior Democrat “talk down” the economy only a year later?) Democrats were gleeful to trash everyone’s savings plans — Republican and Democrat voters alike — every way they could. All designed for a few big lies and an election. What were the voters supposed to vote for? A glorious return of the Carter/Mondale years of double digit inflation, 70% marginal tax rates, gas rationing and embarrassing international incidents?
Prescription drugs? There was a prescription drug plan passed by the Republican House, waiting for the Senate to pass and “conference.” The Democrat controlled Senate did nothing. Again hoping to lie and deceive before an election.
The Democrats of the early 21st century have absolutely nothing to offer voters. Nothing. The party is run by the Clintons. The Clintons, undeniably, operate on lies and deceit. Bill’s bold faced lies are now legend. Hillary changed her last name to “!” in 2000 — at least until the election was over. When they’re not lying, they’re screwing their friends — ask Carl McCall.
So there’s the Democrat voters choice. The “new” Democrat of lies, deceit and betrayal, or the old Democrat (who between the Nobel prize and Senate races were boldly on display) of inflation, taxes, rationing and international debacles.
Let the pundits whine. We’re not a stupid as they think.
— Howard Wimbrow
Ocean City, MD
Re: David Hogberg’s The Shocking Third Rail of Election 2002 :
You suggest that “exit poll results [are] increasingly suspect…” My view is exactly the opposite, that they are accurate and reliably predictive. It is my view that in 2000, the Voting News Service (VNS) declared Gore the winner in Florida more than three hours before their data supported such a claim to persuade the shallow Californians that they should cast a vote for the winner rather than a protest for Nader. VNS got caught lying about the timing and wiggled out by claiming “mistake.” Similarly, on Tuesday, it is my view that the very early VNS returns (with methodology vastly improved from 2000) demonstrated a clear landslide for the Republicans and, rather than influencing the Californians with news of this disaster, elected to fold and not do damage to their candidates on the left coast. Thus, it is not the polls that are suspect but the poll takers.
What Providence has bestowed on us today! After reading Ben Stein’s comments on the E! site sent me on a little curiosity trip and led me right to you! I misses you all since the AS went silent, and now it is back with a bonus! Bravo to you all, and now with the Republicans in power, look forward to your lampooning of the wallowing Liberal elite! Vive le Prowler!
— Greg McAtee