Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest: Ken Cuccinelli plans to win by ignoring polls he doesn't like (43 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You are giving Jackson too much credit... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gtomkins, Aquarius40, stevenaxelrod

    Not sure if you are from Virginia, but his past statements are not playing well here with indies and moderates. Either Northam or Chopra will have an easy time with him.

    McAuliffe is using the Kaine/Warner strategy  of presenting himself as a  moderate problem solver. Against a partisan opposition that strategy works well for Democrats here.

    My take is McAuliffe is being viewed in an increasingly positive light..I know the polls don't quite show that yet, but many do not yet have an opinion about him...so I think you will see them move in his direction going forward.

    •  I live in Fairfax (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gygaxian

      The Rs were never going to win here anyway.  They could have chosen a revivified Abraham Lincoln to be their LG candidate, and just by having the R behind his name, the recent past statements and actions of their party would not play well with "indies and moderates".  Around here, that phrase means voters who actually always vote D, but want to maintain a contrarian and independent aura.

      My idea, of which there is no scientific proof, so feel free to disagree, is that among people really at all likely to swing both ways (politically!), the bishop gets a pass on anything he said before becoming a candidate, no matter how radical.  He's a bishop, and Americans take it for granted that really religious people tend to believe a whole lot of very extreme things that don't actually translate into radical or extreme action.  It is still the doctrine of the Catholic Church, for example, that Jews are all going to Hell.  That doesn't make Catholic candidates unelectable for their anti-Semitism, because even the most anti-anti-Semitic among us tend to give people a pass on purely theoretical theological beliefs, however ugly if translated into practice.

      So, sure, if the bishop starts saying similar to his past statements now that he's the R candidate, he makes people think this stuff is not just theoretical or theological to him, that he believes he needs to force this stuff in practice on the rest of us should the people of the Commonwealth be so unwise as to put him in a position of power.  But a white bread Catholic would get in just as much trouble for choosing his campaign for public office as the forum to discuss where people who reject Christ are going to end up in the afterlife.  The average Catholic politician manages to not excite people's fear that he or she doesn't recognize the difference between theology and public policy, and so far the bishop seems to be bright enough to emulate that approach.

      People like us who have already chosen sides tend to find even theoretical, theological expressions of the other side's views repellant.  But people who haven't chosen sides (and you have to be radically unwilling to pay attention to have not chosen sides by now), who might actually vote either way, tend to just tune out theology and theory altogether.  These people make a point of not paying attention to where ideas might lead.  

      The states must be abolished.

      by gtomkins on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:58:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site