![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
defrogLike most of you, when I need hard-hitting post-election analysis that cuts to the heart of the matter, I turn to science fiction authors.
Which is handy, because John Scalzi has saved me a lot of work with this post right here, which pretty much sums up my thoughts in general (except for the part about John Boehner, which doesn’t apply to me).
One key takeaway:
Which brings me to Harry Reid.
The AP has a good article analyzing how he managed to beat Sharon Angle despite his own liabilities as a politician. Namely: take her batshit extremist statements and exploit them at full volume.
I’m not especially interested in endorsing Reid per se, or trying to make the case that Democrats are generally a better party to have in charge of the country. But I think it’s worth pointing out that if you are running against anti-intellectual hate-mongering waterheads who have the nerve to blather about limited govt whilst pushing for tougher laws limiting the rights of gays, Muslims and foreigners (or people who look like foreigners), and take Glenn Beck's conspiracy theories seriously, they shouldn’t be that hard to beat. And if they are, it’s yr own fault. Because you can’t always rely on them to self-implode like (and I’m just pulling a name out of a hat here) Christine O’Donnell.
Reid’s people evidently had the right idea. Even the National Republican Senatorial Committee (which managed Angle’s campaign) is impressed. Reid’s campaign should be a key case study for the Demos in 2012. Because Scalzi's right on another point: the Tea Party won’t be going away any time soon, and we’ll be seeing more paranoid batshit weirdness for as long as Obama is still El Jefe.
Negative creep,
This is dF
Which is handy, because John Scalzi has saved me a lot of work with this post right here, which pretty much sums up my thoughts in general (except for the part about John Boehner, which doesn’t apply to me).
One key takeaway:
Dear Democrats: You managed to lose the House in historic proportions to a party whose strategy was to harness the inchoate anger of old white people so stupid that they don’t sense the inherent contradiction of screaming about a smaller government whilst cashing their federal checks. You are morons. Please find someone who can play this game and put them in charge of your electoral strategy, because what you’re doing now isn’t working.
Which brings me to Harry Reid.
The AP has a good article analyzing how he managed to beat Sharon Angle despite his own liabilities as a politician. Namely: take her batshit extremist statements and exploit them at full volume.
I’m not especially interested in endorsing Reid per se, or trying to make the case that Democrats are generally a better party to have in charge of the country. But I think it’s worth pointing out that if you are running against anti-intellectual hate-mongering waterheads who have the nerve to blather about limited govt whilst pushing for tougher laws limiting the rights of gays, Muslims and foreigners (or people who look like foreigners), and take Glenn Beck's conspiracy theories seriously, they shouldn’t be that hard to beat. And if they are, it’s yr own fault. Because you can’t always rely on them to self-implode like (and I’m just pulling a name out of a hat here) Christine O’Donnell.
Reid’s people evidently had the right idea. Even the National Republican Senatorial Committee (which managed Angle’s campaign) is impressed. Reid’s campaign should be a key case study for the Demos in 2012. Because Scalzi's right on another point: the Tea Party won’t be going away any time soon, and we’ll be seeing more paranoid batshit weirdness for as long as Obama is still El Jefe.
Negative creep,
This is dF
