Brat campaigned door-to-door, spent little money on advertising -- little money period, for that matter -- and stayed on a simple message of returning the U.S. government to Judeo-Christian principles and getting government out of the way of a free market economy. The irony here is that the Tea Party came late to the table for Brat. They told him last year, "It's Eric Cantor. You haven't got a chance." But even though Cantor spent $5 million and Brat spent $100,000 -- that ain't no misprint -- Brat won.
I see three possible ways to interpret this:
- It marks the beginning of a true conservative revolution that "returns the country to Judeo-Christian and free market principles"
- It is a disaster for the country as a whole and Republicans in particular, as the general voting populace is not as conservative as candidates like Brat
- It is a local phenomenon that can't be duplicated anywhere else in the U.S.
Which do you think it is?
Here in the "
7th," there are two theories:
1. The Tea Party and true Conservatives simply had enough of Cantor, and enough of them did to fire him.
2. The primary was open, and as a result, many on the other side of the aisle took a page from Rush and implemented a version of Operation Chaos.
I am not a registered Republican but was still able to go in and cast my vote for Brat. Normally, I would be voting against Cantor, as I have done several times in the past. This time, however, I voted for Brat because I can see beyond the whole left/right thing, and actually went in to vote for him. Moreover, I will be going back to the booth in November to vote for him in the election.
Either way, turnout was VERY low, which usually works in the incumbant's favor. Not this time......
Regards,
BiR
