So... how about that Tea Party?

[Kasz216]

Sqrl said:

Desroko said:
Also:

Jack Murtha's longtime aide defeated a Tea Partyish Republican in the special election in PA-12. This is the only district in the country that went for Kerry and McCain, and the prototype of where the GOP needs to win in November.

And the runner-up in the Kentucky Dem primary actually garnered more votes than the winner, Paul. So much for the the enthusiasm gap.

I'm starting to think those predictions of a massive Republican landslide were badly mistaken. This is going to be a normal midterm election, nothing more.

Yeah I know right?

When the pro-life, anti-health-care, anti-cap-and-trade, pro-gun, democrat wins in blue PA it sure is a sign that the conservative brand is going to be in trouble in the general election .....  Democrats moving to the right and winning aren't exactly an endorsement of their chances in November given the current climate and perceptions.  Things may change on both counts, but you can't give a serious analysis of a race without actually considering what the candidates ran on.  If it takes a conservative democrat to win in an already blue territory don't you think any stemming of losses in November will come at the expense of moving those seats to the right anyways?  Even if it is less than if they had lost?

As for the difference in votes, it's pretty basic that  participation in primary voting is far from being a primary indicator of true voter enthusiasm, the breakdowns in party participation simply don't hold in the general.  I'm really not sure how you thought this was anything but a non sequitur.

Who knows, maybe you're right, maybe things won't go so well for the republicans in November, but your reasoning for it here is closer to wishful thinking than reality.

 

The difference between a Republican and Democrat in Pensylvania is nothing more then where they thought it would be easier to win in the primary.