Skip to main content

The Delaware GOP: can you tell the difference between a corpse and a zombie?

Over at Delaware Politics, they are pursuing the electoral fantasy that Mitt Romney has some sort of chance of winning the state this year.  (He doesn't stand a chance in hell.)  Michael P. Borgia (Lucretia's longlost descendant, one supposes) confidently predicts a landslide.  Jonathan Moseley invokes God, some twit posting as Colonial Republican thinks everybody the GOP establishment has pissed off throughout the party will slap each other on the back and drink enough beers so that they'll start doing what they are told again.

Meanwhile, the natives--far from being ready to shoulder the GOP establishment's burden--are getting restless.


The Delaware Tea Party is reorganizing for action, and in the face of bad treatment by what passes for the GOP establishment here in the First State, at least a few of its members seem to be contemplating some sort of third-party option.


Primaries abound:  upstart Izzo versus Kovach.  Urquhart versus Lopez.  These guys should be so lucky as to have Ned Beattie's brother for comic relief.

Party registration in Delaware runs Dem over GOPer by something like 45-29.

And in the face of all this, the Delaware GOP has no plans to do anything but denigrate libertarians, alienate tea partyers, and ignore Ron Paul supporters, while pretending they still have a functional political party.

They don't.  And with a little luck, this year you're really going to see Delaware provide a test case for the final implosion of a once-major political party.

Speaking as a Libertarian--it can't happen soon enough.

Comments

tom said…
As of May 2012 it's 47% D, 29% R, and 24% "All Others", which is the Dept, of Elections' way of saying 3rd Parties & unaffiliated.

But if you break it down by General Assembly districts, the picture gets much more interesting in several ways that the DE GOP's so-called Leadership are unwilling to even acknowledge in public:

1. After the redistricting, there are 12 of 21 Senate seats and 19 of 41 House seats that Republicans can not win even if they get nearly all of the 3rd party votes and many of the Democrats stay home.

2. By contrast, there are no safe Republican seats, and only 3 Senate and 6 House seats that Republicans even have a chance of winning w/o substantial help from 3rd party & unaffiliated voters and or defection by Democrats.

3. There are 7 Senate districts and 12 House districts where "All Others" outnumber Republicans, and only a few districts where All Others does not constitute a very substantial swing vote.
June 1, 2012 at 7:32 PM
Will McVay said…
There's also an invasion on in the 32nd RD. The number of Republicans supporting it, it should be more accurately called a liberation.
June 15, 2012 at 2:23 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
31 comments
Read more