Posted on | November 30, 2010 | 11 Comments
The day after the Delaware primary, I asked, “Is this really about 2012?” It seemed to me that many ruling-class Republicans — especially those aboard the Mitt Romney 2012 bandwagon — were attacking Christine O’Donnell as a proxy for Sarah Palin.
Given the extraordinarily good news on the House side, with the GOP gaining 63 seats, it seems absurd that some conservatives continue to cry over spilled milk, endlessly rehashing the failure of Republicans to capture a Senate majority, and especially bemoaning the outcome in Delaware.
Even if this is not merely a proxy for arguments between pro-Palin and anti-Palin camps within the GOP, it has certainly turned into one of those Dougherty’s Law situations: “If it were more like me, the Republican Party would be better off. It’s failing because it’s like you.”
In other words, the elitist attacks on O’Donnell are a veiled way of attacking the supposedly unenlightened hicks who supported O’Donnell. Longtime O’Donnell supporter Jerry Wilson at Goldfish and Clowns is sick and tired of this argument:
[T]here was a ton of ammo used in the debate over the choice between Mike Castle and Christine O’Donnell in the Delaware senatorial primary. The division was sharp, with one side stating that no matter how liberal Castle’s voting record was, he was at least a Republican and apparently electable unlike krazee Christine, while the other insisted Castle was a no-go and O’Donnell was indeed a viable candidate. Neither side was inclined to give the other much credence, and the discussion became extremely toxic.
A seldom commented on element of this was how the Castle supporters had zero personal investment in him, while O’Donnell boosters often had a strong connection with her. . . .
On a related topic: Who is Ned Ryun, and why is he attacking Tea Party candidates?