Republican Referendum Tomorrow

Filed in National by on September 14, 2010

So PPP’s poll does not synch up with Castle’s internal poll. Well, we all know that in the end there is only one poll that matters and that is being held tomorrow. But what will Republicans really be voting on?

I agree with the political observers who think that this is a vote to see if the Republicans want to continue to be a real political party. It is a referendum on whether they want someone who embodies their anger or someone who can go to Washington and transact business with normal adults. It isn’t so much a “conservative v. moderate” vote (all Republicans are conservative nowadays). It is an “angry v. less angry” vote. And while the less angry people appear to be on the outs, that might be a function of the fact that angry people are louder.

They are loud and incoherent. 11% of PPP’ Delaware Republicans poll respondents, for example, replied that Christine O’Donnell “is too liberal.” Just let that sink in. Angry incoherence is practically regarded as a virtue among O’Donnell supporters. Al Mascitti had an O’Donnell supporter on today who struggled to explain his anger under the lightest cross examination. All he knew, at long last, was that the government is bad. Government programs are bad.

But do a majority of Delaware Republicans agree that government is inherently bad? Are a majority of Delaware Republicans really willing to overlook the facts of Christine O’Donnell’s deeply flawed candidacy and vote for her because she is passionate?

By this time tomorrow we will know.

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (15)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anon says:

    I don’t have a prediction, but some archive diving reveals something from 2007 (damn have I been doing this that long?):

    Castle is SOL; he has no friends on the left or on the right. He can maybe still claim to represent the center, but he is vulnerable to emerging events over the next year; stuff could happen in the Middle East and in the economy that would change the way the center sees him.

    Also, there are upcoming spending and tax votes that will further define Castle to both sides.

    Al Mascitti’s response is fun (we love you Al!). Al is technically right; Castle no longer cares to run for the seat:

    Uh-oh, an outbreak of Blogger Fever… Yes, that accurately presents the views of the politically active in Delaware. Now that we’ve dealt with 3% of the electorate, maybe you can explain why the rest will change their minds about him. He will keep his seat as long as he cares to run for the office, unless he pulls a Bill Roth and keels over in public.

    me again:

    He will keep his seat as long as he cares to run for the office

    Exactly. The Dems’ job is to help make that decision easier for him. A primary challenge from the right would help too.

    57% is awfully close to 49%, and Castle knows it. Castle has done nothing to increase his margin since 2006.

    In 2008 Castle will surely lose some Republican votes based on his recent votes, and I doubt he will make up the difference by attracting new crossover Dems.

    In 2008 Castle will have his hands full first trying to avoid a serious primary, and then avoiding debates with (hopefully) a strong Dem challenger. I’m not sure he’s up to that (politically, not necessarily health-wise).

  2. jason330 says:

    Very prescient.

  3. Aoine says:

    look what I found – O’Donnell’s bush beater is a deadbeat financially as well…..

    oh and well lookie here – O’Donnell’s flunkey evan does not pay his bills either:!!

    SK08J-07-001 CYNTHIA BIDINOTTO-SLATE VS EVAN A. QUEITSCH DEFENDANT 01-JUL-2008 – he had to have his wages garnished coz he would not pay…..

    Case: SN01C-10-083 ANGELA CUMMINGS VS EVAN A. QUEITSCH DEFENDANT 10-OCT-2001 – personal injury accident

    58 MORIARTY STREET DOVER DE 19901
    Case: J0702009416 CYNTHIA BIDINOTTO-SLATE VS EVAN A QUEITSCH DEFENDANT 02-FEB-2007 – he was evicted for non rent payment

    so we have one non-bill payer supporting another thief – nice one……..
    Good tea bag representation……
    and hese are fiscal conservatives???

  4. Brooke says:

    Some of this is simpler than a lot of y’all like to think.

    Stem cells.

  5. The GOP is voting not to be a governing party. The base doesn’t want them to do anything but say no. They’re punishing anyone who has tried to be bipartisan. Do they think gridlocked government is the same as smaller government?

  6. pandora says:

    It’s beginning to look like Delaware may be the battle ground for the war between the “moderate” Republicans and the Tea Party. No matter who wins today I don’t see the losing side supporting the winner. The party split seems poised to happen here.

    For almost two years we’ve been telling the “RINOs” to take control of their fringe, and they did nothing. Now, it may be too late.

  7. Jason330 says:

    They did something. They fed the base a steady diet of hatred and dumbed down patriotism for 8 years and thought they could control the monster they were constructing.

  8. They’ve cynically manipulated the ‘silent majority’ into voting against their own interests since Richard Nixon. Actually since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ‘Divide and Conquer’ and win by 50% plus one was the strategy. Resentment was their stock-in-trade. First it was blacks and hippies, moving on through Hispanics, gays, Muslims, you name it. Not to mention ‘big government’. The billionaires on the hill were the beneficiaries, as they effectively manipulated the know-nothing ‘patients’ in the asylum. And kept their obscene tax breaks and corporate laissez-faire.

    This could be the year where the inmates take control of the asylum. The biggest losers–the billionaires on the hill.

  9. anon says:

    This could be the year where the inmates take control of the asylum. The biggest losers–the billionaires on the hill.

    How exactly would teabaggers vote against the interests of billionaires?

    That is what concerns me – even if teabaggers don’t win much this year, they have been legitimized by taking part in real elections, and the Overton window is shoved way over to the right. There is every reason the new floods of corporate money will go to teabaggers, if not this cycle then the next.

    I am making the obvious assumption teabaggers would be no more able to cut spending than any other Republicans.

  10. Well, first, the teabaggers are NOT billionaires. If there is indeed a strain of populism there, they are not going head-over-heels for the HAVEs.

    Secondly, this is the last line of defense for the American Taliban. They are a shrinking demographic minority. They will never gain control of any government worth governing. So, at best for them, this is the ‘Vietnamization’ of the Rethug Party, i.e. “We must destroy the Party in order to save it.”

    This last line of defense will prove to be a Maginot Line which, ironically, conjures up the French origins of the billionaires on the hill. They lose. We win.

  11. anon says:

    I’m fairly sure this happened in 1964, too, when the Goldwater thugs took over and promptly crashed & burned. But the GOP was back in power by ’68, thanks to a determined, dedicated, ambitious politician whom everyone had written off after a devastating loss (actually, two). So it may not be the end.

    Who could be Delaware’s Dick Nixon, leading the party back from zombie-land? Charlie Copeland? Tom Wagner? John Burris?

  12. anon says:

    2012: “Vote for Evan, and nobody gets hurt.”

  13. Joanne Christian says:

    Oh great–now my ASU kids are checking in w/ this

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129832759