Well, for starters we know that the actual outcome of Tuesday’s Senate election in Massachusetts…
…didn’t come out the way the Boston Globe tried to ‘Quantum Theory’ into existence…
Also we know that President Obama has gone from making fun of Scott Brown and his truck…
…to claiming kinship with him – blaming Bush (which somehow never seems to get old) for Brown’s victory and tacitly admitting that Coakley was part of the ‘establishment problem’, even though he stumped for her. (not quite sure if that makes him wrong, lying or foolish)
Okay, so that’s the ‘fun’ stuff that we know.
Then there’s the less-fun stuff that we’re going to admit we ALSO know…
The RNC still doesn’t get it.
If there could be a better example of a decentralized election campaign, driven by the enthusiasm of an attentive electorate than Scott Brown’s campaign, I would have a hard time imagining it.
From his success with online contributions, to the Tea Party support , to the simple fact of Brown’s impressive 120K-vote-margin win in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 3:1
From the start, the RNC level of ‘support’ for Brown has been little-and-late , despite the obvious and glaring opportunity to win the Senate seat held by Ted “Swimmer” Kennedy for the past 47 years, in a race against an unmotivated Dem with delusions of entitlement and a lock-step approach to Barack Obama’s increasingly-unpopular Socialized Healthcare scheme.
Given the way the RNC got it’s helping of insult-and-injury from Dede Scozzafava - AFTER pumping upward of $1 Million into her NY-23 congressional campaign, I personally would have expected them to be eager to put that beclowning behind them and throw their efforts into – I dunno – an actually-conservative candidate for a change… but apparently, Steele & Co. saw that Senate seat with the same glow-of-Democrat-entitlement that had Martha Coakley wearing shades.
Scott Brown’s response to the GOP’s “hey-good-luck-with-that”?
“But even Brown has downplayed his lack of national GOP firepower in his race against Democrat Martha Coakley, saying, “We’re doing very, very well on our own, and I don’t want to be beholden to anybody at this point.”
“Don’t want to be beholden” – it has a nice ring to it, no?
Ah… but Michael Steele doesn’t think so:
”In a memo to RNC members today, Steele said the national committee has been “working very diligently behind the scenes” with the Massachusetts Republican Party for the past three months to make the race what it is today…”
“We have stayed out of the limelight while supporting the Brown campaign and the Massachusetts Republican Party,””
So, funding Brown to the tune of 1/20th of what they coughed up for the Margaret-Sanger-award-recipient is “Working Diligently Behind the Scenes”…
Leaving public support of Scott Brown to Sarah Palin (whose support I’d rather have any day & twice on Sunday) – that’s just “Staying Out of the Limelight”…
And watching the wind and polls and waiting until the momentum seems unstoppable, to come out and say “If-it’s-a-win-or-even-close-it’s-all-because-of-us”…
What is that, then?
I do have to admit that the Good Chairman is right about one thing though:
”This is a model for campaigns of the future.”
Yes - Yes Sir, it is…
Campaigns by conservative candidates, supported Tea Party Groups, 912 Coalitions and groups of alert, engaged citizens working in support of their country and economy…
…and left free of the influence of a paralyzed, confused, feckless and wind-testing RNC.
You’re absolutely right, Mr. Steele – this IS the model for campaigns of the future…. which begs the question:
Why do we need you?
- Ron
You hit it right, we don’t need them at all really. Now, with the internet, we can reach every candidate we want with the click of a button. We don’t really need a national committee to ‘direct’ us.
I don’t think a third party is necessary, we can just take back the Republican party the way Brown took Massachusetts by working together and not letting them tell us what we are going to do.
Spot on, MD. Great analysis, and a slick, clean presentation of it. Just the way I like it.
GHS
GHS! Hey, I was just thinkin’ about you the other day - pulled out your album - MBTE likes it too…Dude! new site & everything! Cool! It’s going on the Blogroll (write something new, wouldya!?!)
I donated to Scott’s campaign. I have not, and will not, donate to the RNC until they “get it”. Note that I’m not holding my breath…
someone at Ace’s makes this point: become a precinct committeeman.
post from ace’s: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/297301.php
and his link: http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.com
Steele: ”This is a model for campaigns of the future.”
Not many plaudits in a failure. A better view on the RNC’s part in Brown’s win is that the RNC (with Steele) was gunshy after botching the Scozzafava race, hence the lack of help, but was putting on extra makeup to make up for being a weak player in the win.
Hopefully, Steele didn’t mean that the RNC’s future plans are: support the grass roots candidate very little and then claims the win due to behind-the-scenes help. But the kneejerk and the venality are in place for such a plan. After all, that’s how Steele got his job in the first place (and that was probably a politically good, but calculatedly venal or if you like unprincipled, move as well.)
I think it’s great the GOP backed Scott Brown…but why are they and Scott Brown now backing a pro-homosexual rights candidate??? I am losing ALL faith in the party…this woman is clearly a Democrat running as an Independent. These types of candidates will be the downfall of the GOP against Dems.
Shaunna O’Connell of Mass. belongs to the same pro-homosexual “United Church of Christ” denomination that Obama belonged to. In her BIO on “Shaunna2010.com” she says she belongs to West Congregational Chruch in Taunton, Mass. If you look up their website http://www.uccwebsites.net/westcongtauntonma.html and go to the main church page link “UCC.org” and look at beliefs under “Change the World” you will see their/her pro-homosexual beliefs. These are NOT conservative Republican values!!
Я разбираюсь в этом вопросе. Можно обсудить….
…to claiming kinship with him – blaming Bush (which somehow never seems […….
Качество сносное……
…to claiming kinship with him – blaming Bush (which somehow never seems […….
Вразумительный ответ…
…to claiming kinship with him – blaming Bush (which somehow never seems […….