berni_mccoy (17,795 posts)
Cantor lost because of Immigration Reform, Yes, but not for the reasons being reported.
This was a stealth hit from the left. No one expected Cantor to lose. His internal polling had him up 20+ points. There was large turnout for a VA primary. But VA has open primaries, and a number of people from the left voted against Cantor to undo his seat. Right now all the pundits are proclaiming that Immigration Reform is dead because Cantor's opponent, Brat, ran against Cantor on this single issue. But what happens if Brat doesn't win? Then a Democrat wins the seat in a notably Republican District against a candidate who ran on killing Immigration Reform.
When that happens, Immigration Reform will be very alive and well. This is the next big item on President Obama's agenda. Cantor was one of the heads of the hydra and Obama's operation cut it off last night. Cantor has been instrumental in obstructing *everything* even when it was something Republicans wanted. He was instrumental in the shutdown, he was instrumental in every party-line vote to repeal Obamacare. Despite what he publicly said, Cantor had no intention of helping to pass this important legislation and Obama knew it. Cantor lost his seat because he was obstructing Immigration Reform, not because his candidate campaigned on it. Obama is not messing around. What happened last night sent shockwaves, for sure, but it isn't the kind of shockwaves being reported.
Obama will pass Immigration Reform during his second term. Cantor losing his seat was the first shot of that battle. The Repubs know it.
Got that?
According to this low-function retard pro-immigration dems crossed party lines to vote against a pro-immigration GOPer in order to bring in a anti-immigration GOPer who will then lose a R+10 congressional district to a dem.
Had Cantor remained and won re-election Obama would have a pro-immigration party leader with bipartisan cover. Now, if the dem wins the best Obama has to look forward to is a party loyalist with no seniority.
However, the GOP contender is now competing in a R+10 district.
And this brilliant plan is going exactly as they want it to...or something.
There's this:
Lex (33,554 posts)
6. The Dem running for that seat
that Cantor just lost is not a strong candidate by all accounts, and probably because people thought Cantor had a lock on that seat--and because it is a deeply red district.
But then there's this:
SKKY (7,942 posts)
10. Sage observation right there...
...Chuck Todd was saying this morning (I podcast Maddow, but since I'm in Spain, my morning is last night for you guys in the states) that Romney won Cantor's district with 57%, so it is red, but not Kansas or Oklahoma red. I think the Dems like their chances of picking this guy off and they appear to have a strong candidate.
Which is it?
dirtydickcheney (6 posts)
11. According to this he didn't win strictly due to immigration reform but calling out GOP corruption
“All of the investment banks, up in New York and D.C., they should have gone to jail.â€
That isn’t a quote from an Occupy Wall Street protester or Senator Elizabeth Warren. That’s a common campaign slogan repeated by Dave Brat, the Virginia college professor who scored one of the biggest political upsets in over a century by defeating Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican primary last night.
The national media is buzzing about Brat’s victory, but for all of the wrong reasons.
Did the Tea Party swoop in and help Brat, as many in the Democratic Party are suggesting? Actually, the Wall Street Journal reports no major Tea Party or anti-establishment GOP group spent funds to defeat Cantor. Did Cantor, the only Jewish Republican in Congress, lose because of his religion, as some have suggested? There’s no evidence so far of anti-Semitism during the campaign. Was Cantor caught flatfooted? Nope; Cantor’s campaign spent close to $1 million on the race and several outside advocacy groups, including the National Rifle Association, the National Realtors Association and the American Chemistry Council (a chemical industry lobbying association) came in and poured money into the district to defeat Brat. The New York Times claims that Brat focused his campaign primarily on immigration reform. Brat certainly made immigration a visible topic in his race, but Republic Report listened to several hours of Brat stump speeches and radio appearances, and that issue came up far less what Brat called the main problem in government: corruption and cronyism.
- See more at: http://www.republicreport.org/2014/dave-brat-cantor/#sthash.7TTRE1Gn.dpuf
http://www.republicreport.org/2014/dave-brat-cantor/
whoops!
Historic NY (21,983 posts)
15. I have a feeling most regular GOP'ers won't vote for Brat....
mostly on principle, they will stay home rather than go full on teabagger. Brat also campaigned on guns its not yet evident to see what the domestic teabag terrorists have on regular GOP voters. I image a few reminders on the teabag flag on the bodies of dead cops will reinforce that it some mind. Cantors hubris and the desire to take him down by those in his own district is probably the biggest factor. Time will tell but Brat is not ready for primetime.
brooklynite (16,009 posts)
27. This is an R+10 "Safe Republican" district
Cantor didn't lose because he was too conservative for his district; he lost because he was too liberal. Brat's win might make make the odds marginally better since he won't have the same financial resources as Cantor...but apparently he didn't need them.
How many of Cantor's voters last night did so out of A) party loyalty or B) didn't see Brat as a viable contender? Those voters will easily transition to Brat and the rest won't vote for a Dem/socialist.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025080484
