Back in 1980, folks in Jimmy Carter’s campaign were salivating at the chance to take on Ronald Reagan in the fall.  They thought that he was so far to the right that they could easily dispatch the former Governor of the (then-)Golden State.  The Gipper won in a landslide, carrying all but six states.

Similarly, outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Mt. Crumpit) is salivating at the chance to take on Sharon Angle, the Tea Party-backed candidate who yesterday won the GOP primary in Nevada.  Portrayed as eccentric by some, the Republican nominee polls worse against Reid than did her major rivals for the party’s nod.  Still, despite spending millions of dollars in a state he has represented in the Senate for 24 years, Reid garners only about 40% of the vote in most surveys, not a good sign for a man with high name recognition.  

One thing we know about Angle is that she can rally her base.   That’s going to mean a lot of volunteers making phone calls and knocking on doors, generating enthusiasm for her candidacy and helping get people to the polls in November.

Reid may attack her eccentricities, but that could backfire given his unpopularity and the national mood.  And one thing we’ve learned from campaigns going as far back as the Gipper’s is that a candidate who can rally his base stands in good stead against an unpopular incumbent. (more…)

As an early supporter of the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in the (once-)Golden State, I’m feeling pretty good today.  Not only did my gal Carly win the Republican primary, but she also won more votes than all her opponents combined (including the no-names) and with a few tens of thousands of votes to spare.  

I was hoping Fiorina would break 50%, giving her a good head of steam into the contest against a partisan Democrat with a record of nasty campaigning.  Fiorina’s final tally was over 55%, clocking it at 56.2%.  She won every county in the state, save four in Barbara Boxer’s base, the San Francisco Bay Area.

Initially, she ran a few points behind Tom Campbell.  She beat him last night by nearly 35 points (more points than she tallied in early polling).

How’d she do it?

Money for one.  In a state like California, you’re gonna need a lot of money to get your message out.  With her big victory last night, she’s in a better position to raise money for the fall campaign.  She can impress donors with her ability to raise money and to pump her own funds into the campaign.  

New Media.  As I pointed out last night, Carly has been reaching out to bloggers since Day One.  And while I’ve long been bullish on this accomplished woman, her campaign came to me (and other bloggers) early on, promoting the campaign and soliciting our support.  They came to us.  (They have a savvy web person in regular contact with bloggers–one who is quick to respond to e-mails and otherwise respond to queries.) (more…)

At 11:40 EST, 8:40 PST, I am calling this race for Carly Fiorina.

I base this call on the county returns.  Carly is winning every county, though not all with over 50%.  It  seems she’s strong across all regions.  Should this patten hold, she will win the Republican nomination with just over 50% of the vote which should give her a good head of steam going into the fall election.

UPDATE:  With more returns in, Campbell leads in Santa Cruz County with just shy of 45% of the vote to 41% for Carly.  (Campbell also leads in San Francisco, but with less than 50%.)

UP-UPDATE:   Via FoxNews, AP now joins me in calling it for Carly.  (9:08 PM EST).

UP-UP-UPDATE:  Before I hike the Freedom Trail tomorrow, I hope to blog on the meaning of Carly’s victory.  Some quick points.  As Jim Geraghty reminds us, she’s has some pretty creative media, getting a lot of attention for web videos (at very little cost to the campaign).  That blogger quips, “I think it’s safe to say you have no idea what Carly Fiorina and her creative director David Lynch are going to throw at you.”

Carly understands the importance of new media, having reached out to bloggers early in the campaign.  I think that had a lot to do with her success.

With 7.4% of precincts reporting, she leads with 58.8% of the vote.  But, San Francisco’s not in yet.

Nor is Orange County.  Just checked the counties reporting and Carly leads everywhere with margins in the various counties ranging from mid-50s to mid-60s.  UPDATE:  Well not exactly, in some Bay Area Counties, she’s in the mid-40s, but still ahead of Tom Campbell in his neck of the woods.

Meg’s up too!

UPDATE:  I’m thinking about calling it for Carly.

Just watched Blanche Lambert Lincoln’s declaration of victory in the primary runoff for the U.S. Senate seat from Arkansas.  In the parts that I caught (all but the beginning), the incumbent Democrat didn’t once attack Republicans or name her GOP opponent.

Over at the Corner, Robert Costa joins me in wondering if Bill Clinton won it for Blanche:

Did Bubba save Blanche? Marc Ambinder says yes:

Even in a loss, Bill Clinton is Kingfish. The man has it. He did radio ads and robocalls and campaigned for Blanche Lincoln, and black voters turned out where Lincoln needed them to. (Remember just two years ago how Bill Clinton was in the doghouse? Short memories!).

Given how much the unions invested in the campaign of Lt. Gov. Bill Halter who sought to unseat the two-term Democrat.

“The lesson here,” Daniel Foster writes, “seems to be that Bill Clinton beats union money.”

Given the anti-incumbency mood in the country right now, with Lincoln as the nominee, Democrats are all but certain to lose this seat.  Put this one in the GOP column.

In a comment made to NBC’s Matt Lauer, President Obama offered a window into his worldview:

I was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the gulf. . . . I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they, potentially, have the best answers so I know whose ass to kick.

Wouldn’t he want to talk to those who have the best answers on how to stop the leak?

So it sounds like he’s talking to the experts to get the best answers or where to affix the blame.  Remember when this guy said he was going to change that kind of politics?

And one of the things that I’m trying to break is a pattern in Washington where everybody is always looking for somebody else to blame. And I think Geithner is doing an outstanding job. I think that we have a big mess on our hands. It’s not going to be solved immediately, but it is going to get solved. And the key thing is for everybody just to stay focused on doing the job instead of trying to figure out who you can pass blame on to.

Emphasis added.

In the Gulf, we do have a big mess on our hands.  And it won’t be solved immediately.  So, why is Obama eager to deploy experts find out whose ass he needs to kick?

Not very presidential, Mr. President.

It is with great sadness that I report that my friend Matthew Berry lost his primary to Patrick Murray.  Berry had 6,651 (48.25%) to Murray’s 7,133 (51.74%).

Noting that this “is the only district in Virginia that has had a contested Republican primary in the last three congressional elections“, Michael Barone finds that turnout was way up:

Turnout in 2006 was 4,409 and turnout in 2008 was 5,863. Turnout in Tuesday’s primary, with 2 of 156 precincts yet to report, was 13,531. In other words, more than double 2008 and triple 2006; and more than both put together. Another indicator of Republican enthusiasm this year.

One thing which may have helped Murray was that he had Mike Lane running his campaign.  Mike was the last Republican elected in Arlington County.  And his successful campaign was the last Virginia campaign I worked on.  We won a special for County Board in April 1999, largely on our Get Out the Vote (GOTV) operation.  Mike knows a lot about GOTV and my sense is that’s what put his candidate over the top.

While Matthew won Arlington and Alexandria, Murray racked up big margins in the Falls Church City and the Fairfax County portions of the district.  Murray may owe some of his margin to efforts in some socially conservative evangelical churches to encourage their parishioners to vote against the gay candidate.

Matthew did run a great campaign and it must be heartbreaking to lose so narrowly.  My thoughts are with that good man at this difficult time.

There are times when I encounter a segment of a cross country drive which makes me wonder why I do it.  The drive is, as long drives are to so many people, a chore, merely time spent in a car getting from Point A to Point B.   Such was my drive last Friday from Nashville to Cincinnati.  It was hot and humid.  And just as my thoughts were beginning to wander, traffic was stopped on I-65 and I had to take a detour through Cave City and Caverna.  By the time I got back on the freeway, I was unable to rediscover the rhythm I once had.

But, yesterday and today, the drives were wonderful.  The lecture on CD I was listening had just enough nuggets of wisdom to inspire some serious thought.  I recorded quite a few ideas into my pocket digital recorders.  And I stopped for a pleasant dinner with an engaging and attractive reader just outside of Cleveland.

Last night, so much did I enjoy being on the road, I decided to drive past Erie and made it into the Empire State.  Now, there the trouble arose.  I went to three separate hotels before settling on the least expensive.  It was kind of dingy, but the staff was polite and the bed was firm enough to allow a good night’s rest.  I regretted not choosing the Best Western because the woman was really quite friendly; she had put FoxNews on the television in the lobby (even before my arrival).  She had contacted the Days Inn to see if it was cheaper.  It was.   (more…)

As readers of this blog know, pro-life conservative (and openly-gay) Matthew Berry is running against pro-choice (and anti-gay) Patrick Murray in Virginia’s 8th Congressional District. With his campaign failing to gain traction, and with Berry becoming the consensus conservative choice to take on Jim Moran, Murray has in recent days decided to go negative with false claims about Matthew Berry’s positions on DADT and gay marriage. Murray has also attempted to flip-flop on abortion.

Indeed, Dave Weigel at the Washington Post covers the false anti-gay attacks today.

Whats most interesting is who is funding the campaign of the anti-gay Murray – none other than the national staff for the Log Cabin Republicans.

In fact, Log Cabin Republicans new executive director Clarke Cooper hosted a fundraiser for Murray at the end of March. Here is a video of the event. Clarke is introduced and he is standing by the other Log Cabin staffer Christian Berle.

An Open Secrets search also reveals that the newly minted Log Cabin ED also gave twice to Murray at the end of March.

Matthew Berry is the kind of candidate that all conservatives, but particularly gay conservatives, should be able to rally around. The decision by the national staff of Log Cabin to underwrite and support the campaign of his anti-gay opponent is outrageous. Maybe instead of writing PAC checks to support the campaigns of RINOs like Dede Scozzafava (the single largest recipient of Log Cabin’s PAC this year at $3,000), the national staff of this organization should support real conservatives like Matthew Berry.

One of the greatest things about this trip has been the change to meet our readers. I was delighted that in Atlanta when one of our left-of-center readers joined us, he found that he and the readers more in line with this blog’s point of view shared a fascination with cooking and TV food shows.

Right now, a good number have RSVPed for the Boston dinner, tomorrow Wednesday June 9 but we still need find a place. Drop me a note if you have any ideas.  Thanks to our wonderful readers, we have found a place. Contact me for details.

Also some readers who have busy schedules have asked if they can come late for an after-dinner drink.  Of course you can.  We’d be glad to see you whenever you can make it.  

Let me know if any of you are free during the day on June 9 and want to join me (and at least one other reader) in taking a walk along the Freedom Trail. Together, GayPatriot fans can help trace the path of the original American patriots.

And don’t forget Brattleboro, Vermont on Sunday, June 13.  Here at least, we seem to have settled on a place.

E-mail me to RSVP for either or both of those dinners (as well as the walk along Freedom Trail).

NB:  Bumped & Updated

Given the time difference, I doubt I’ll be able to follow the primary returns tonight in my adopted home state as closely as I would like.  And while the latest polls show my gal Carly is way up in the contest for the Republican nomination for the United States Senate seat from California, polls aren’t always accurate.  If either Chuck DeVore or Tom Campbell has a get Get Out the Vote (GOTV) machine, we could see a surprise tonight.

Barring such surprises, the real story of the last two weeks of the campaign has been the crumbling of Tom Campbell. He went from frontrunner to also-ran in no time.  Despite his appeal on the libertarian issues of the Tea Party movement (given his scholarly work), he just couldn’t generate enthusiasm on the campaign trail.

That could have something to do with his manner, more professorial than passionate.  Or with his failure to offer a convincing response to his associations with advocates of terrorism.  He just wasn’t able to raise much money–something essential in a state like California, especially when confronting a politician like Barbara Boxer bound and determined to do what it takes to keep her seat in the Senate.

Tomorrow, we’ll better be able to see just how poorly he has fared.

Should Carly prevail (as I anticipate), her work will have only just begun.  As hard as she has fought to win the GOP nomination, she’ll have to fight even harder to beat the relentless attacks from the well-funded Boxer and the Democratic attack machine.

The fact that she has come this far suggest she is up to the task.

UPDATE:  There are primaries today in other states.  And if I had time, I might be able to blog about them.  Just wanted to note what a stellar campaign my friend Matthew Berry has been running in Northern Virginia.  From his campaign, we learn about all the conservative support this openly gay Republican has attracted: (more…)

As I’ve been traveling cross country, I have not been able to address (or able to address only in a cursory manner) many of the stories which have set the blogosphere aflame.  From my readers, I learn that some left-wing gay bloggers have gotten their panties all in a bundle (apologies for the indecorous language) over the fact that Sir Elton John sang at Rush Limbaugh’s wedding.

Now, I’ve heard it said that the conservative talk show host is anti-gay, yet having listened to him on occasion for the past 18 years, I can’t recall hearing the talker toss one anti-gay barb.  Maybe I missed something, but have heard the accusation only from those whose credibility I question (i.e., liberals with an axe to grind or a narrative to peddle).

Citing Zev Chafets’s new book (of which I have a review copy which I’ve been trying to get to on this trip, Allapundit observes that “Limbaugh’s view on gays is a tad more nuanced than the left would like to believe.”  (Via Instapundit.)

Seems they’ve determined he must needs be anti-gay because he’s an outspoken conservative.  (To some on the left, the two (invariably) go hand in hand.)

The blogger offers:

Via Mediaite, a rebuttal to lefties and gay-rights activists speculating that the only reason a guy who’s in a civil union would play the wedding of an alleged neo-Hitlerian gay-hater is for a $1 million payday. (Sample quote: “Isn’t that a bit like Beyoncé entertaining at a KKK rally?”) Two things. First, Kelly quotes Elton as having said that he’s “all about tearing down walls and building bridges,” which is true to form. 

Emphasis added.  

Gay rights activists could benefit from this type of bridge building to the right.   After all, one of the greatest congregations of people who oppose increased social acceptance of gay people (not to mention the left-wing agenda of the national gay groups) is found on the right.

You can’t change minds unless you build bridges to them.

White House Mounts PR Blitz for Health Care Reform

Didn’t the Democrats’ health care overhaul pass Congress over two months ago?  Why then is the president still trying to sell it.

Because I delayed my departure from Cincinnati (so I could have a few extra minute talking to my Dad and so I could watch my nephew’s Tae-kwon-do practice–he won the “floppy fish” exercise), I did not get any news today until I checked my text messages while dining with a reader just outside of Cleveland.

From him, I learned what the rest of the world already knew, “After 50 years of her left wing babbling, Helen Thomas is gone.”

Later, caught this on Instapundit:  

MARK STEY[N] ON HELEN THOMAS: “A guy with a flip camera just took out one of the most storied names in American journalism. Presumably US newspaper managements have been assured by Obama, Pelosi, Frank et al that that bailout’s a-comin’ any day now. The alternative is that they’re inept timeserving mediocrities too dullwitted even to know they’re going over the falls.”

And now that I’ve posted on this, albeit a tad perfunctorily, I trust our readers to chime in with commentary appropriate for the occasion.

Perhaps the greatest evidence of contrast between the noble rhetoric of the Obama campaign and Obama’s record in office is how the Democrat repeatedly blames and/or attacks his Republican rivals while regularly vilifying the standard cast of characters from left-wing demonology.

The editorialists at the Washington Examiner observed that even in the wake of a national disaster, the president continued to play the politics of division:

Meanwhile, as Obama dawdled and oil appeared off Florida’s beaches, the president delivered a strident speech in Pittsburgh with a decidedly Nixonian twist. He should have been summoning political leaders across the spectrum to lay aside partisan concerns for the moment, but instead Obama asserted that Republicans believe that “If you’re a Wall Street bank or an insurance company or an oil company, you pretty much get to play by your own rules, regardless of the consequences for everybody else.” This libelous mischaracterization marks a new low even for a man so highly practiced in the ugly art of political demagoguery.

The art of political demagoguery?  Sounds like an accusation hurled against the president’s predecessor from his critics on the left.  And while that good man certainly had his flaws, he never practiced the rhetoric of blame in which the incumbent regularly engages.

Indeed, despite his scripted silver tongue, Obama possesses many of the qualities held by the George W. Bush of liberal imagination.

When Obama attacked Republicans in that Pittsburgh speech, he, well, was not being very honest, “And despite all their [Republicans'] current moralizing about the need to curb spending, this is the same crowd who took the record $237 billion surplus that President Clinton left them and turned it into a record $1.3 trillion deficit.”  Actually, it wasn’t President Clinton alone who left Republicans with a surplus, but President Clinton working with a Republican Congress.   (more…)

A friend who works for the federal government alerted me to a memo she received from the Office of Personnel Management informing federal employees about “the opportunity for same-sex domestic partners to apply for coverage under the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program (FLTCIP)”:

OPM issued a proposed regulation on September 14, 2009 to allow same-sex domestic partners to apply for coverage under the FLTCIP. The final regulation was published in the Federal Register today (June 1, 2010). The final regulation is unchanged from the proposed regulation. It adds a new section (5 CFR 875.213) expanding the definition of “qualified relative” to include same-sex domestic partners of eligible Federal and U.S. Postal Service employees and annuitants. Like all “qualified relatives,” same-sex domestic partners will be subject to full underwriting.

We believe allowing same-sex domestic partners to apply for FLTCIP coverage will help agencies address the family needs of a diverse workforce and enhance the Federal Government’s ability to compete with the private sector for talent.

Emphasis added.  Seems the government is following the lead of the private sector.  As we have often reported here, an increasing number of private corporations offer benefits to same-sex partners of employees.

The documentation requirements are pretty lax: “Eligible individuals will need to provide documentation (a ‘declaration’) that they  meet the definition of ‘domestic partnership.’”  This declaration is the only required documentation.   Now, to be sure, I think this is a pretty lax requirement, I understand that many states still do not recognize domestic partnerships (or civil unions) as I believe they should.  Perhaps, they should require proof of such registry for states which allow such registration.

That said, this is definitely a step in the right direction and commend the Administration for moving forward on this.

And this isn’t the only action the federal government is taking on behalf of same-sex couples.  Glenn Reynolds alerts us to this report, WSJ: IRS Grants Gay Couples Equal Tax Treatment Despite DOMA.

If you live in my congressional district, basically the only chance you have to meet our Congressman is to head to Washington watch a committee hearing and hope he deigns talk to the peons.  Well, it seems ol’ Henry’s setting a pattern for his Democratic colleagues to follow.

According to the New York Times, Democrats Are Skipping Town Halls to Avoid Voter Rage:

The sentiment that fueled the rage during those Congressional forums is still alive in the electorate. But the opportunities for voters to openly express their displeasure, or angrily vent as video cameras roll, have been harder to come by in this election year.

If the time-honored tradition of the political meeting is not quite dead, it seems to be teetering closer to extinction. Of the 255 Democrats who make up the majority in the House, only a handful held town-hall-style forums as legislators spent last week at home in their districts.

It was no scheduling accident.

With images of overheated, finger-waving crowds still seared into their minds from the discontent of last August, many Democrats heeded the advice of party leaders and tried to avoid unscripted question-and-answer sessions. The recommendations were clear: hold events in controlled settings — a bank or credit union, for example — or tour local businesses or participate in community service projects.

Emphasis added.  So, this is the new kind of politics?  Avoid the people whom you’re supposed to represent?

(H/t:   Washington Examiner).

In just a few days as soon as Republican voters in my adopted home town choose a candidate to run against 28-year Washington veteran Barbara Boxer, that hyperpartisan Democrat with few accomplishments for her near three-decade service in Congress will do what she always does, attack, attack, attack and then attack some more.

And she’s not alone.  The Democratic President of the United States continues to attack the GOP as if this party with barely enough votes to muster a filibuster in the Senate and fewer than 180 seats in the House has enough votes to block his initiatives and is responsible for the nation’s current woes.

Obama’s Democrats are still running against George W. Bush.  Guess they figure that what worked in the last two electoral cycles is certain to work in this one.  Michael Barone finds that well, these Democratic “tactics are predictable“:

Running against George W. Bush (who?) is not likely to get them very far, though Obama can’t resist attacking him wherever her goes. But emphasizing local issues (as in Pennsylvania 12), banking on intraparty Republican splits (as in New York 23) and disqualifying Republicans as wackos or on personal grounds can salvage some seats that otherwise seem lost.

Still, the fact that Democrats are reduced to such tactics underlines their problem: The policies of the Obama administration and congressional Democratic leaders are deeply unpopular. And those policies have swept into politics hundreds of thousands of previously apolitical citizens symbolized by but not limited to the Tea Party movement.

Given the fact the memories of the big-spending Republican Congresses are still fresh (even though the congressional Democrats’ current spending makes said GOP congressional sessions look parsimonious by comparison), Democrats may be able to score some points in their attacks on the GOP.  Some voters still don’t trust the GOP to hold true to its Reaganite principles.

That said, Barone gets at the real problem that ails the Democrats:  their policies aren’t popular with the American people.  If only Republicans could convince our fellow citizens that they learned the lesson of ’06 and ’08, ’10 and ’12 would be banner years for our party.

Gentle readers, PatriotPartner & I are on vacation for the next week — bound for the CMA MusicFest in Nashville, TN.  We leave Monday afternoon, with a stopover in Knoxville.  Who knows, maybe we’ll run into Instapundit?

Anyway, my blogging will be very slow during the CMA MusicFest.  I’m not bringing a computer — but will put up an occasional post from Nashville via my iPhone.

However, if you really want to know how CMA MusicFest is going from our perspective — well, you should be following me on Twitter!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from Dan):  Bruce, Nashville’s a great town.  Wish I could have stayed longer.   Should you get the chance, make sure to check out the Parthenon:

So, this morning as I’m scanning the news before heading out for some pool time with a niece and nephew, chanced upon an article that was almost balanced on the political theater of anti-Israel activists, including a number with ties to terrorist organizations.  The AP did note the allegations (actually more than allegations) that the ships included men eager to, um, well, provoke the Israelis to violent action:

Israel’s prime minister claimed Sunday that the Turkish activists who battled Israeli naval commandos in a deadly clash last week had prepared for the fight ahead of time — boarding the ship separately from other passengers after they organized and equipped themselves.

Without the slightest trace of irony, AP writer Joseph Federman reports that one of the organizers of the political stunt, er, flotilla, “Huwaida Arraf [is] a leader of the Free Gaza Movement”.  Free Gaza Movement, huh?  Hasn’t Gaza been free of Israeli occupation for five years now?  

Now, Israeli may prevent arms from reaching the terrorist-run enclave, but, they do allow humanitarian assistance in.  If Mr. Arraf favors a Free Gaza, shouldn’t he be registering opposition not to Israel, but to Hamas, the terrorist organization which runs the enclave?

But, Mr. Arraf’s operation has nothing to do with freeing Gaza, but instead with waging a propaganda campaign against Israel, or, as Roger Simon put it in a must-read peace on the Helen Thomas kerfuffle, it’s all about blaming the Jews.  We are, alas, entering a new era of anti-Semitism.

And the folks who hate the Jews tend not to have a high opinion of homosexuals.

The world, Jennifer Rubin, observes has “gone mad,” with the purveyors of proper opinion siding with the enemies of civilization (you know, enemies of those tolerant of religious and sexual difference).  ”If,” this sage blogress writes, “we cannot recognize the enemy, we cannot defeat him. And if we prevent clear-eyed allies from doing so, we lose allies, our moral standing, and the war on our civilization.”

It seems now that it’s better to blame the Jews than to make a stand for civilization.

Let me close by reiterating the point that this flotilla has nothing to do with humanitarian aid and everything to do with political theater.  As the indispensable Charles Krauthammer reminds us: (more…)