Daily Kos

View Story | 57 comments

  •  The story today (9+ / 0-)

    is not about Lamont's win. It's about a surge in the national anti-incumbent mood.

    Up until today, no incumbent member of Congress (either Rep. or Senator) had lost so far this cycle. None. For the first time since 1946. Yet in one night, not one, not two, but THREE incumbents fall. THREE. Lieberman, McKinney, and Joe Schwarz.

    Unbelievable. What's next, does Chafee fall in Rhode Island?

    I sure hope so!

    The Republican Party is neither pro-republic nor pro-party. Discuss!

    by Nathaniel Ament Stone on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 11:02:15 PM PDT

    •  You can count on it (0+ / 0-)

      The mood of the country is pretty clear.

      The real people wants change, a MAJOR change.

      •  yep (4+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        pb, RaulVB, anthonyLA, blueoasis

        First a pro-war Dem loses his own party and is forced to run third-party (the first Senator to lose renomination since Bob Smith in 2002), then an anti-war but equally controversial Dem loses to a mainstream progressive, then a conservative GOP incumbent loses to a WAY-conservative GOPer.

        Three incumbents. One night. Coming to a district near you.

        The Republican Party is neither pro-republic nor pro-party. Discuss!

        by Nathaniel Ament Stone on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 11:07:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  what do you mean first time since 1946? (0+ / 0-)

      •  first time since 1946... (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        pb, RaulVB

        ...that no federal incumbent had lost their party primary this late in the cycle.

        Usually one or two incumbents lose their primaries per election year, and this was the first time since 1946 that we went as late as August without that happening.

        The Republican Party is neither pro-republic nor pro-party. Discuss!

        by Nathaniel Ament Stone on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 11:08:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Running toward policial Armageddon. (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          RaulVB, Webster
          it's judgement day fro the war mongers. Only we have a ballot instead of supernatural bullshit.  

          "It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08

          by Salo on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 11:12:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Didn't realize this (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          RaulVB

          I think this race has shades of the 1968 California GOP Senatorial Primary where "Mad" Max Rafferty, then our incompentent and destructive School Superintendent, upset Tom Kuchel who was a 16 year incumbent and the Republican Minority Whip.  I don't think this race is the same though.  It has some eerie similarities though.  

          Build the Wilshire Subway!

          by SoCalLiberal on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 11:23:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  DON'T MAKE THAT COMPARISON! (0+ / 0-)

            Rafferty went on to lose to Alan Cranston (D).

            Do NOT make that comparison.

            I'd prefer a comparison to the NY Senate race of 1980. Sen. Jake Javits was a moderate Republican, lost the primary to the more conservative Al D'Amato. Javits chose to run as a Liberal (a third party in New York) and was expected to best both D'Amato and the Democrat. Instead, D'Amato won.

            I hope the same is true for Lamont, with Lieberman the Javits of the race. However, I worry that if Republicans choose to abandon Schlessinger and back Lieberman (with strong Independent support as well), he will win.

            The Republican Party is neither pro-republic nor pro-party. Discuss!

            by Nathaniel Ament Stone on Wed Aug 09, 2006 at 08:28:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

View Story | 57 comments