Showing posts with label virginia primaries. Show all posts
Showing posts with label virginia primaries. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Eric Cantor Out as Majority Leader

A simply stunning outcome last night in Virginia.  A house majority leader loses in his party's primary.  Something that has never happened in the history of our country.  I personally thought that Cantor didn't take the race seriously enough but would still win out in the end.  I was wrong.  He lost by more than ten points.  

But I will say that people who don't understand the ins and outs of Virginia politics are getting some things wrong.  On the national stage they are talking about how Brat won on the amnesty issue.  There may be some of that in there, but it certainly wasn't the entire reason.  Cantor's view on immigration is exactly like Lindsay Graham's and he won easily.  

In Virginia there is no party registration.  As such whenever there is a primary anyone can vote.  It is very easy for people in the other party to show up at the polls and place a vote for a candidate that is most likely to lose to their candidate of choice.  As such, there is great deal of back and forth about conventions vs. primaries within the local political debate.  Cantor firmly falls on the primary side of the debate.  An issue that I agree with him on.  I personally feel that primaries are the most inclusive and that conventions put some voters into the position of not getting their voices heard. But even that isn't all of the story.  There is a parliamentary rule in Virginia called slating.  In slating when you get 50% of your district to agree to use this rule only a certain amount of people are allowed to vote in a convention or committee meeting.  So if you don't happen to fall into the chosen few, even if you are willing to travel the convention you can't vote.  

Many in Virginia have very strong feelings about slating.  Most of which are highly negative.  I personally believe that this is the rule and those who know the rules of the game best win.  So I am not going to put people who like this practice down.  They are following the rules of the game.  If you don't like the rules, get yourself into position within the local committee to change them.  Complaining and calling others cheaters doesn't solve anything.  My main point here is that Cantor and his camp really upset many people by using these rules.  At least that is the impression that many have.  Heaven knows that, especially in politics, perception is reality.  

David Brat had no money.  He spent somewhere around $200,000 total on his campaign, whereas Cantor spent more than that on one dinner for his supporters.  But what he did have was very dedicated volunteers that literally knocked on every door in that district that was marked as a republican.  Again, there is no party registration in the state, but voting habits get you listed as a D or an R.  Brat also did get some much needed help from two conservative radio talk show hosts.  Mark Levin, who lives in Virginia, and Laura Ingraham, who lives in D.C.  Both of them had him on their show and Ingraham did at least one rally with him.  Both have large audiences and it seems it had at least a little bit of an effect. 

There also was the issue that many in his district felt that he didn't listen to them.  That he was no longer representing them, but looking towards being the Speaker of the House when Boehner decides to step down.  He was next in line.  I have heard many in his district say that they didn't get return calls or letters when they would contact his office.  They felt he lost touch with what his job was supposed to be; representing them not worrying about consolidating his own power.  He rarely spent time in his own district. Another big difference between he and Lindsay Graham. Graham is very well known for being excellent on being there to listen to his voters.  His staff is actually larger in his state than in D.C.. 

For those in the media that are saying he (Brat) is some sort of right winged lunatic it is going to be difficult to get that to stick.  Cantor labeled him as the liberal in the race.  Cantor campaigned on being the true conservative.   His policies are simply basic republican fare.  He campaigned on giving power back to the states, the amnesty issue and the rule of law, reducing our national debt, and reigning in out of control government.  There is nothing extreme about those views.  That is what the GOP is supposed to be for.  

Another very interesting part of this story is how Brat campaigned.  He actually stood up and talked policies instead of platitudes.  He never made personal attacks on Cantor.  Many in the media called him a joke based on this alone.  

I think that Brat has shown that people are hungry to be talked to like adults.  They can understand policy issues and they aren't all that interested in the personal ugly side of politics.  That of course isn't going to go away anytime soon because they do work.  But a small shift is happening.  

I had no dog in this fight.  I see both sides of Cantor staying and Cantor going.  Politics is much like a marriage; a series of compromises.  But when those compromises almost always walk away from the basic tenets of what the party is supposed to stand for, it may be time for a change in leadership.  Cantor went after the tea party quite publicly.  While no national Tea Party "group" gave Brat the time of day, the local activists took notice and put the work in to show him that they are still there and are expecting results.  

The district is pretty conservative and I personally find it a good thing that dems are going to pour money into that district.  It is less they can use on other races.  It isn't impossible for a dem to win in that district, but it seems this is lining up to be a republican wave year much like 2010 and it isn't likely that dems can take advantage of Cantor's demise.   

Friday, February 28, 2014

A Little Twat and a Whole Lot of Controversy - When Republicans Are Their Own Worst Enemies

Bob Fitzsimmons, Treasurer of the Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) used the word twat in a facebook discussion a few nights ago.  Twat in case you don't know is sometimes used as slang for the female vulva.  

Now, I am not going to sit here and defend the use of that word.  It never should have been used.  The problem is that if you read the exchange in context, he was referring to the comment that someone else had made as ridiculous.  He used the wrong.  Obviously he isn't up on sexual slang words.  He should have used the word twaddle, which means stupid speech.  


Now, what you can't see in the above graphic is the comment he was answering.  That comment was about why Delegate Barbara Comstock should be the nominee in the hotly contested republican primary simply based on the fact that she is a woman.  His comment was about identity politics.  I am not sure who, if anyone, he is backing in this contest, but I can tell you that I support Barbara.  I like Barbara.  I have worked many a days knocking doors in her elections for the state delegate seat that she currently holds.  But I don't support her simply based on the fact that she is a woman.  I HATE identity politics.  It is a losing game and I have little respect for people who voted based upon gender, skin color, or financial status of the people in the race.  To me that is the democrats game and played a big part in why President Obama won his election.  On this Mr. Fitzsimmons and I agree.  We are never going to beat the democrats in that game, so lets put up the best possible candidate in each and every race.  I happen to believe that Barbara is that person.  Her voting record speaks for itself.  At the end of the day that is what really matters.  

What really sits in craw about this entire unfortunate episode is that people who don't like Mr. Fitzsimmons, for reasons ranging from he is a supporter of conventions over primaries (which I am not) and he is also a big supporter of Ken Cuccinelli and more libertarian leaning people, have used this to try and force him from his job.  Insert primal scream here.  

This has turned into a national story that has been on HuffPo and in The Washington Post simply because people, who I won't mention by name, even though I would bet my bottom dollar are involved, are using this to oust someone they disagree with.  

The man made a mistake.  He used an unfortunate word when he wasn't clear on the meaning.  There is no way that anyone reading what he wrote can misconstrue that he was calling Delegate Comstock a twat or even the young woman he was having the discussion with that word.  

Here is the post he was responding to with the name of the person not included:
I also think women are going to be very frustrated about about a man trying to usurp Barbara's position in this race. If women come out in force for her, it will create a battle cry for Republican women so loud that Howie Lind won't have a prayer of competing with her. Republican women are a force to be reconed with and I for one want to see this power harnessed effectively in key political races.
His response was the he doesn't like sexist twat.  Now, if he was talking about this woman or Barbara it would make sense that you would be able to replace the word with the name and it would still make sense.  But you can't do that in this case.  Because he wasn't referring to a person, he was referring to the thought of using identity politics.  

So, now we have a national story about how republican men and party officials were using sexual terms to talk about a woman when clearly that isn't what happened.  

We don't need the democrats to do anything, we are doing a bang up job all on our own.  Should he have apologized for using that word?  Absolutely.  Should he lose his job over it?  No, a very clear and unambiguous NO.  This has been blown out of proportion by people who don't like him and his stances.  Those are the people who should be called out in all of this.  Not a man who obviously needs to spend more time with a dictionary.  

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Virginia Primaries Heating Up - Ken Vaughn for Congress VA 11th

We have our primaries coming up in Virginia in just over a week.  Things are getting hot around here with last minute campaigning and the get out the vote effort.  


A man I know and genuinely like is running for congress in the Virginia 11th.  His name is Ken Vaughn.  He and his wife Julie were one of the first people that I met when I decided to dip my toe into the activism world; having no idea where it would lead.  


Ken and Julie opened up their home to strangers and helped get us organized.  Believe me in the progressive la la land that Northern Virginia is, that wasn't an easy task.  Ken took it many steps beyond me and decided to run.  When he made this decision it was before redistricting and he wasn't sure if he would be running against Moron Moran or Connelly.  Once the lines had been set, he found out he would be running against Connelly and would have to face a primary challenge.  


If you live around the NOVA area, help Ken with his GOTV efforts, if you don't you still help out with a small (or not so small) donation.  Every little bit matters when election day is in less than two weeks.  


Ken is an honest man.  He will work to help us get back on a path of fiscal sanity.  


Here is one of the latest email ads and this should strike a cord for all fiscal conservatives:  Spending must be curbed, and it must be done now.



After more than a year on the campaign trail, my primary opponent has finally explained how he wants to cut government spending:
With 48 cents of every dollar the federal government plans to spend next year going to a so-called 'entitlement', I recall what the famous outlaw, Willie Sutton, answered when asked why he robbed banks:  "Because that's where the money is!"  Six cents of each dollar will go to paying the interest on the national debt, 27 cents will pay for national security related expenditures, and the remaining 19 cents will be used for everything else the federal government does. 

We can absolutely find some savings within the latter, but significant entitlement reform will be required to make a serious dent in our deficit and national debt.  We should not go after retirees and near-retirees, but rather restructure the system for future generations who would virtually lose all benefits when the programs collapse.
After highlighting how much money is spent on entitlements he fails to identify a single cut that he is willing to make today. Instead, his proposal is to have the “future generations” pay for all of our spending!
I find that proposal to be fundamentally immoral.
There is a better way. It starts by resolving to live within our means. Just as when an overweight person pledges to get into shape, it’ll take work and require a change in lifestyle, but we can succeed, if we unite behind a common goal.
To achieve our goal, we must first define what that goal is. Our Congress needs to set a budgetary goal with measurable milestones. Just as President Kennedy pledged to put a man on the moon within a decade, we need to rally behind a goal of returning our debt to a sustainable level within 12 years.  Once we know what our goal is, we can then develop a year-by-year debt plan showing how we will get there. Our Congress should then raise or lower the debt ceiling based on this plan. This will put real constraints on our budget.
Whoever wins this congressional race will be only one voice out of 435 in the House. That person will need to work with others in Congress to get things done – as a result, it is impossible to predict what the detailed spending and tax policies might look like at the end of the process. However, common sense tells us that virtually every program will have to contribute to the solution. History has shown that it is unlikely that federal revenues will exceed 19% of our economy, regardless of what our tax policies are. That means we will need to cut federal spending by about a third if we are to be responsible. This will not be easy but my website provides a sample budget that describes what this might look like.
My question to you is: Would you rather have your representative join with the current majority from both parties in stealing from our children’s future, or would you prefer to have your representative lead the way towards a more responsible budget?
I will lead.
We are now twelve days away from the primary election, and every dollar counts. Please help the cause by making a $250, $100, $50, or $25 donation today.
In Liberty,
Ken Vaughn
Ken
Our campaign is very excited to announce the endorsements of the following 11th District voters:
David Ray- State Central, 11th Congressional District
Geraldine Davie- Delegate to the Republican National Conventional, Virginia’s 11th Congressional District
James Lightweis- Delegate to the Republican National Conventional, Virginia’s 11th Congressional District
Steven Yeh- Former Congressional Candidate, 11th Congressional District
Terrence Boulden- African-American Coalition Chairman, Fairfax County Republican Committee
Fredy Burgos- Burke Precinct Captain, Fairfax County Republican Committee
Ralph Hubbard- Sully District Chairman, Fairfax County Republican Committee
Please join us at some of our upcoming events:
PWCRC Call center event with Ken Vaughn
Tuesday June 5, 6:00pm- 8:00pm
Prince William County Republican Committee Headquarters
4431 Prince William County Parkway, Woodbridge 22192
RVSP to campaign@vaughnforcongress.com
Get-Out-The-Vote Canvassing Effort
Saturday June 2, and Saturday June 9, 10am- 2pm or 2pm- 5pm
Vaughn for Congress Campaign Headquarters
10410 Main St. Fairfax 22030, Suite 220
To reserve a spot on our Canvassing Team RSVP to campaign@vaughnforcongress.com
Related Posts with Thumbnails
 
Google Analytics Alternative