A few post-postmortems from Tuesday:
(1) Before Tuesday, the media hearted Rand Paul because he was sticking it to the DC/Lexington/Louisville blue blooded GOP establishment of a Mitch McConnell/Kentucky Leadership Academy (aka the University of Kentucky Law School). Now that Rand Paul has won, the media love has turned into media knives. Something which any dummy could have predicted.
I thought all along that the first knife to come out would have been Medicare. However, since Rand Paul is an eye surgeon, and supports the Doc Fix for Medicare (i.e. don’t reduce Medicare reimbursements to physicians), it would be hard to say that he wants to get rid of Medicare.
Guess what the stupid media are using as their first knives? Rand Paul’s libertarian-based opposition to parts of CRA ’64. As a historical aside, the two main pillars of opposition to CRA ’64 in 1964 came from southern seg racialists (hint: Richard Russell, Theodore Bilbo) and doctrinaire right-libertarians/states righters (Hint: Barry Goldwater). Some, like Wallace and Maddox, tried to fuse the two pillars together in their own opposition. Paul is clearly (but only partially) in the latter camp. However, the more the media portray his opposition as being motivated by the former, the more likely it is that poorer whites in mountainous parts of KY, the ones who might have been turned off by Rand Paul’s apparent libertarianism and its ramifications on welfare and transfer payments, will vote for him.
As if it matters anyway — Paul has a 25-point lead over his Democrat opponent in the polls, according to Rasmussen’s first polls after Tuesday’s primary.
Ironically, I’m linking to Assrick Assholrickson’s CrudState telling of this “controversy.” I don’t know what gives with him and a lot of other neo/lamer types like Mark Levin — as much as they love Rand, they hate Ron. While father and son are not carbon copies, they’re close enough, especially on issues important to neo chickenhawks, like Iraq.
In more Rand Paul news, whatever ill will there was among the Greyson constituency is now gone, such that 82% of KY GOPers will vote Paul. On the other hand, the Democrat that lost, Lt. Gov. Mongiardo, to AG Conway — Mongiardo’s people are the ones eating sour grapes — Conway only has 59% of KY Ds. AFAIK, Conway and Mongiardo were almost totally alike in ideology, substance and style, so, unlike some of Greyson’s people, whose sour grapes can be rationalized, Mongiardo’s people must be real tools.
The CW for the rest of the campaign is that Paul’s big lead won’t hold because he’ll make rookie mistakes, while Conway is a supposedly polished pro. First off, Paul is 47 years old, not 21. When Rand Paul was 21, back in 1984, he was more or less the proxy for his father’s Senate candidacy in Texas, when he lost to Phil Gramm in the primary, so Rand isn’t some wet-behind-the-ears noob. And even if Rand does make rookie mistakes, he’s got a 25-point pad — He can afford to make a lot of rookie mistakes.
(2) Ann Coulter pours cold water all over GOP hubris. She must be reading my mind.
(3) President Obama is trying to say that an election held in all of Pennsylvania should not be interpreted as a referendum on him, but an election held in one Pennsylvania Congressional District should.