A devastating loss
A devastating loss, no other way to spin it. I think the President will do surprising well working with the newly elected Democats (many of them Reagan Democrats or Perot types) as he did in Texas. That said, it is pretty bad for Republicans and bad for anyone who takes a forward looking approach to economic issues.
My main disappointment is George Allen losing (most likely). I believe he ran a bad campaign but the situation was considerably exacerbated by the fact the press disdained him and refused to give him the benefit of the doubt on anything and wrote profiles of opponent Jim Webb that just scraped the surface.
For example, the press could have at least investigated more into the circumstances surrounding Webb's resignation after less than a year as Naval Secretary. Does he have a problem working with others? This could be problematic in the chummy world of the Senate. If the press investigated Allen's divorce, why not Webb's previous two? Why did his son leave Penn State in the middle of his academic career to fight in Iraq, a war which his father adamently opposed? It seems odd that his son was not in ROTC and did not join one of the academies but instead chose to enlist in the military in the middle of his academic career. Did he have a different view of the war, did he not like school, that might be something that was relevant? Jim Webb, previous called affirmative action state-mandated racism, which he backed away from coveniently to support it for blacks and poor whites (just the voters he needed), so a question to follow up with would be would he make illegal for latinos or ethnic minorities to get affirmative action? He previously refused to shake John Kerry's hand and called Clinton immoral, why does he now hold a favorable opinion of both men. These are all questions that voters should have known before casting their vote.
My main disappointment is George Allen losing (most likely). I believe he ran a bad campaign but the situation was considerably exacerbated by the fact the press disdained him and refused to give him the benefit of the doubt on anything and wrote profiles of opponent Jim Webb that just scraped the surface.
For example, the press could have at least investigated more into the circumstances surrounding Webb's resignation after less than a year as Naval Secretary. Does he have a problem working with others? This could be problematic in the chummy world of the Senate. If the press investigated Allen's divorce, why not Webb's previous two? Why did his son leave Penn State in the middle of his academic career to fight in Iraq, a war which his father adamently opposed? It seems odd that his son was not in ROTC and did not join one of the academies but instead chose to enlist in the military in the middle of his academic career. Did he have a different view of the war, did he not like school, that might be something that was relevant? Jim Webb, previous called affirmative action state-mandated racism, which he backed away from coveniently to support it for blacks and poor whites (just the voters he needed), so a question to follow up with would be would he make illegal for latinos or ethnic minorities to get affirmative action? He previously refused to shake John Kerry's hand and called Clinton immoral, why does he now hold a favorable opinion of both men. These are all questions that voters should have known before casting their vote.
posted by The partisan moderate at 10:02 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home