Back from Away

Only two hours away from the United States and America looked ridiculous. From abroad, we look like a bad reality show with the sans culottes running around. Tea parties are for little girls with imaginary friends. Apparenty, there seem to be alot around. The victory of Christine O'Donnell in Delware is like randomly picking a neighbor to be a nominee for the U.S. Senate. Imagine my surprise when from afar I saw Karl Rove actually accuse a Republican of waging a dirty campaign. After all he is the architect. But he soon came back to support her. The question is whether her victory will solidify the larger story of the Republican Party simply going mad.

I came back to E.J. Dionne wakening from a deep sleep to discover moderates are gone from the Republican Party, something anyone breathing could tell you after the last 18 months. Olympia Snowe, who was a long-time friend of Mike Castle from their days in the House, lamented the diminishing number of moderate conservatives left in both chambers. In her home state of Maine, where she won re-election with over 70% of the vote, the tea baggers have taken over the Republican Party and now 68% of them want a more conservative nominee than Snowe the next time around. The role of Senator deMint in fostering runs against incumbent Republicans is beginning to tick Republicans off. Charles Cook, who had predicted a Republican takeover of both houses of Congress has backed off, saying that the O'Donnell win ends the GOP's chances for a victory in the Senate.

How bad is Christine O'Donnell? Besides the various appearances on Bill Maher's comedy shows, she has been sued by a Farleigh Dickinson University for failure to pay outstanding debts, she accepted a graduate scholarship at Claremont even though she didn't graduate from college until this year, and she paid her rent and personal expenses from campaign funds from the last campaign against Joe Biden. She says she is being followed everywhere and must check her bushes. She keeps her home residence private because bill collectors are after her. And she hasn't had a real job in years. She sounds like Allan Keyes without the minimal qualifications.

She must be bad news. The night she beat Mike Castle, his campaign manager walked across the street to the Coons headquarters and picked up lawn signs for Coons. Christine O'Donnell also has imaginary friends--she claims to have been backed by a Catholic group that simply doesn't exist.

What observers have not mentioned about the five tea bagger candidates for the Senate is that all of them are extreme Christian right-wingers, even Marco Rubio in Florida, who is more of an opportunist. Christine O'Donnell is the most visible extreme Christian after Christian reconstructionist Sharron Angle. Joining Ken Buck, they are absolutists against abortion, even though they proclaim to be small government conservatives. Throw in Mike Lee from Utah and Joe Miller from Alaska and you have candidates that have no ideas about the economy whatsoever.

Another characteristic is that almost all, with the exception of Rubio, avoid debates and the press. This is a deliberate strategy because they want to avoid expsoure to the average voter. Joe Miller on Fox News was a astonishing in his economic illiteracy. He claims unemployment insurance is unconstitutional--something the Supreme Court has actually ruled on. And he claims we are going to face almost $140 trillion in a national debt in a short time--that's ten times the amount we have now. He wants to end Social Security and Medicare. This seems to be a tea bagger perennial.

A Canadian said to me that these people don't care, they've given up. In a way, he is right. They have given up on self-government. That's why there are no standards by which they observe. Lisa Murkowski commented how the tea baggers pumped $600,000 into Alaska to run a campiagn against her totally based on lies. If you check comments out of Ms. O'Donnell's mouth you'll also notice that she is a habitual liar. The same applies to Sharron Angle and the other tea baggers. In their worldview, this simply doesn't matter.

SO AFTER A WEEK, how do the mid-terms look? Nate the Great still has the Republicans taking the house by 223 to 211 but he has blinked somewhat upping the odds of the Democrats retaining control to 37%. The Republicans are now campaigning on de-funding everything that passed in the last Congress--which ups the stakes for Democrats. And if you care about the national debt, keeping the Bush tax cuts for the rich will add another 3.8trillion to the national debt. Interestingly, all the teabaggers are for keeping the tax cuts for the wealthy. Paul Krugman had a wonderful op-ed about the selfish rich today.

But what still makes me hesitate is the massive unpopularity of the Republicans as compared to the 1994 wave election. For example, a CBS/NYTimes poll conducted September 15 has Republican approval at 20%. In a Washington Post poll on who deserves to be re-elected, Democrats top Republicans 34 to 31%. But what is most astonishing is that the GOP net favorable is now a negative 25, which means they have fallen by three times since July. And now President Obama is in the campaign mode and Organizing For America has ramped up their operations even more since I left. Remember President Obama has about a 48% approval rating, while campaigning against people with a 20% approval rating. The AFL-CIO just sent out their largest mailing in years to solidfy the Democratic base. Even though there is little more than 40 days left to the election, I think only a small percentage of Obama surge voters can turn the tide. I also have noticed that even the disgruntled Left is getting its act together because they understand the stakes.

President Obama did himself and the rest of us a service by appointing Elizabeth Warren special adviser with the task of creating the new Consumer Protection Agency. But I have a question? What in Elizabeth Warren's speeches make her a "progressive"? I know she appeared at Netroots Nation and frequently on the Rachel Maddow Show. But when is defending the middle class the sole property of "progressives"? The whining from the Republicans about her should tell you how far that party has grown away from the middle class. But nothing Elizabeth Warren has said or written is anything but clear-headed and commonsensical. I read in the Washington Post that her appointment was popular but polarizing. After watching countless interviews and Youtubes of her lectures, I can not think of a less polarizing figure. I think any fair-minded person would see her as a straight-talking person of intelligence and commonsense. Already we have the Wall Street Journal raising doubts about whether she can really create the Consumer Protection Agency because of legal restrictions and other hoo-haa. This reminds me of the constant challenge on anything President Obama does.

For election junkies, Steve Singiser had an interesting post at the Daily Kos "Likely Voters, Unlikely Voters" about the accuracy of polls based on registered voters versus those of likely voters. The conventional wisdom is that likely voter polls favor Republicans, particularly in low-turn out mid-terms. But what Singiser's analysis shows is that likely voter polls generally favor the front-runner. But at the end of the day, his analysis of polls from 2006 and 2008 indicate that polls based on registered voters won 32, polls on likely voters 21 and three were ties. For a full analysis, his post is worth reading because it's conclusion is counter-intuitive to how ,at least, I've been taught to think.

And file this away--I just came across my notes on Hans-Herman Hoppe, who is a favorite of libertarians. When thinking of the tea-baggers, remember Hoppe advocated something called "anarcho-fascism". He wrote "Democracy: the God That Failed". Through in a dab of Christian theocracy and you basically have tea-baggism.