Reason has a good piece up on the anti-discrimination measure recently approved by Michigan voters.  Here is a taste:

 The Michigan initiative prevailed even though its supporters were outspent 2 to 1, despite opposition from both Governor Jennifer Granholm and her Republican challenger, Dick DeVos. It won despite hysterical and deceptive ads that compared the proposal to Hurricane Katrina and Sept. 11, and despite false claims that the measure would end to public funding for breast cancer screenings.

The initiative’s opponents have depicted this victory as the result of white men fighting to retain their privilege. But maybe it’s really about Americans taking action to end a regrettable detour in the battle for true civil rights.

If you are conservative, what brand of conservative are you? Have we all become postmodern political mongrels that defy any of the classical labels? In this recent editorial, Rod Dreher examines the neocon thinking that may have been responsible for ‘06 Republican losses. It’s all worth mulling over. Dreher says in part….

You will search the conservative canon in vain looking for the principles that justify the corruption and incompetence that helped deliver the well-deserved thrashing to the GOP. The incorrigible spending that destroyed the GOP’s reputation for being trustworthy stewards of fiscal sanity was actually a violation of conservative principles. And as for the disastrous Iraq war, Jonah Goldberg writes, “it is not the conservative position to botch wars.”

Now wait a minute. If a liberal offered a defense of failed Great Society policies by saying, “It is not the liberal position to create a vast helpless underclass wholly dependent on the government,” conservatives wouldn’t let them get away with that. The obvious reply is that failed welfare-state policies grew out of flawed liberal ideas about human nature and society, not just bureaucrats who applied those policies ineptly. Ideas, as conservatives never tire of saying, have consequences.

I’m in Atlanta for Thanksgiving, preparing to eat as though I’ve been deprived of food for some time.  While perusing today’s AJC, I noticed that former Ala. Chief Justice Roy Moore has an op-ed providing the reasons why the GOP lost in the recent elections.  Enjoy.

Congratulations, Congressman Marshall. Although I did not vote for you, I seriously considered doing so.  Your voting record on “Culture of Life” issues is superb, even though you are personally pro-choice to some degree and not in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. If only there were more dems like you. You have also been a staunch supporter of our troops, and an effective congressman in many other respects. For all of these reasons, I was not at all disappointed to see you reelected, and wish you nothing but the best during your next term in office.

Thoughts?

Where did the revolution go astray? How did we go from the big ideas and vision of 1994 to the cheap political point-scoring on meaningless wedge issues of today – from passing welfare reform and limited government to banning horsemeat and same-sex marriage?

The answer is simple: Republican lawmakers forgot the party’s principles, became enamored with power and position, and began putting politics over policy. Now the Democrats are reaping the rewards of our neglect – and we have no one to blame but ourselves. ….

We will not find ourselves by conforming to the status quo, but by returning to our Reagan roots.

When we act like us, we win. When we act like them, we lose. Let’s win.

Dick Armey comments on the Republican rout and regaining lost ground.

Courtesy of my main man, Senator Rick Santorum.

Pat Toomey on the elections at NRO:

For years, Republicans had successfully branded themselves as the party that wanted smaller government, less spending, balanced budgets, and low taxes. The brand sold because most Americans understand that governments are inveterate money-wasters and because people naturally want to keep more of what they earn. Voters used to think that Republicans meant what they said when it came to limited government. They don’t any more.

*  Voters in ten states approved ballot proposals aimed at curbing the eminent domain powers of state and local governments.  (Voters in California and Idaho voted down such proposals.)

*  South Dakota voters overwhelmingly rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have fiddled with judicial immunity.  So now maybe Justice O’Connor can relax just a bit.

I know there’s a big push right now to figure out what this election means.

Is it a repudiation of Bill Kristol-esque American Greatness Conservatism? If so, how to explain the simultaneous idea of McCain as the last big man standing?

There are lots of grand themes we could discuss here and theorize about why the GOP lost and what it should do to regain its standing, but I think the real answer is fairly simple:

The President is incapable of promoting and defending his policies. I’m not one of those guys who thinks the president is dumb. I agree with Bill Whittle that you can’t fly a fighter jet and be dumb. However, he is one of the worst public speakers I have ever seen and he is terrible, TERRIBLE at thinking on his feet.

I had these concerns about him back in 2000 when I watched debates with Bush, McCain, and yes, Alan Keyes, in which Bush was an obvious and distant third at speaking his mind. During his presidency, I have been utterly unable to watch his speeches and debates. They are case studies in ineptitude, particularly for a generation schooled in Reagan and Clinton as effective communicators.

George W. Bush would never have been elected president if his father had not been president. I’m amazed his father was able to accomplish it, but he would never have done it without the aura of Reagan surrounding him. We have got to choose someone next time who is a great communicator and who could win the office even if they came from nothing as Reagan and Clinton did.  Is it any mistake that those two men rose to the office with nothing other than talent and indefatigueable work ethics to sustain them?
What lost on Nov. 7 was inarticulate conservatism and really no other kind.

Here is an interesting tib bit from The Volokh Conspiracy, essentially noting that the margin of victory for the Democractic Senate candidate in Montana was less than the total number of votes for the Libertarians. 

Here is the lesson for the GOP: If you really are the party of individual rights and limited government, then start acting like it.  Frustrated libertarians and conservatives might not find the need to vote for third parties to teach you a lesson. 

But don’t blame the Montana Libertarians for giving us a Democratic Senate.  Blame the GOP for becoming a “Democratic Lite” Party. 

Yes, apparently even an overwhelmingly pro-life state is willing to allow innocent children to be murdered if they have the misfortune of being conceived through a rape (which, while tragic, hardly justifies the taking of innocent life).

How pro-lifers morally justify such exceptions, I will never know.

In case you missed Ford’s speech, do yourself a favor and watch it.

This guy is far from done, folks.

A few random thoughts:

-First, there’s no sugarcoating the ass beating that took place last night. The Republicans got whupped Preston Brooks style, and quite frankly they deserved it. Republicans have spent the last 12 years running away from the very policy positions that got them elected in the first place, and adopting the corrupt habits of their dem predecessors. But for the judges issues (and the possibility of a Stevens retirement), I would fully embrace this devestating loss of power and prestige.

What will be interesting to see is how the dems interpret the ‘06 election results. If they view the results as anything other than a rejection of the president’s handling of the war in Iraq and the Republicans’ various and sundry missteps/acts of corruption, then they will be making a huge tactical mistake. In short, there is no reason to believe that the United States has suddenly lurched to the Daily-Kos left. Voters in seven states voted to ban gay marriage, and a number of the dems’ pickups in the House and Senate were candidates who professed to hold socially conservative views. I, for one, welcome the infusion of pro-life (”blue dog”) dems into the political process. We shall see whether they are willing to stand their ground against the radical proabort leadership in their party when push comes to shove.

-What if President Bush held a press conference today, and said the following:

My fellow Americans. The election results for the 2006 midterm elections are in, and they are unsettling, to say the least. i know of no other way to interpret such a devestating loss of power by my party as anything other than a complete rejection of my handling of the Iraq War and the overall War on Terror. The message sent to me by the American people last night was loud and clear: We no longer have confidence in you; and we trust the Democrats to do a better job of looking after this country’s national security interests. i disagree with this assessment, of coruse, but in a democracy the people have the right to be wrong.

In short, the Democrats have told the American people that there is a better way than the path I have chosen for this country, that they are ready to lead, and that I am a lame duck and no longer of any consequence.

So be it.

The Democrats have consistently undermined my efforts to protect this country in every conceivable way. They were never able to accept the election results in 2000 or 2004, and have politicized every national-security issue this country has faced during the past six years.

Well, now that they have control of the House and Senate, I refuse to respond in kind. It is the Democrats turn to lead. They now have an opportunity to demonstrate that they are indeed better equipped to protect this country, address the situation in Iraq, and prosecute the War on Terror. I encourage them to immediately draft legislation outlining exactly what should be done in Iraq, and I give my word that I will sign that legislation whatever form it takes. The American people have given the Democrats a license to “cut and run” from Iraq, damn the consequences. We will now see whether they have the stones to make good on their many threats. I am not pleased with the current political environment, but it is what it is. The people have spoken, and I am willing to honor the mandate they have given the Democrats. 

That having been said, I fear that the strategy contemplated by the Democrats, and endorsed by the American people, re: Iraq will ultimately result in great suffering for our country, and certainly be viewed by the Jihadists as a sign of profound weakness. But this is the path we have chosen as a country. I can only pray that my fear of such a strategy is misplaced.

I wish Speaker Pelosi and Senate majority Leader Reid the best of luck, and will do whatever I can to assist them in implementing the will of the American people. 

-Harold Ford, Jr.’s concession speech was the best I have ever had seen.

-I am ever so thankful that I live in Georgia.

-I could not agree more with this statement by The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL, president of Human Life International (HLI):

“The Giuliani-McCain-Romney wing of the Republican Party is responsible for this overwhelming defeat…the GOP…must [now] look to leaders like Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.)—who has never wavered on his principles or his defense of the innocent unborn—as their model.”

(more to come)

I think it somewhat certain that, although this election was a big victory for the Democrats, it had very little to do with them.  I have yet to hear anything from the Democrats or their supporters other than Anti-Bush, Anti-Republican fervor (some of this criticism comes from Republicans as well, and some is deserved).  Pure criticism might get you elected (once), but at some point to have to take the stage and lead with a substantive plan for the future.  I still wonder what will that be for the Democrats with regard to, for example, the War on Terror? 

I remember with fondness a home-made video (probably on the net somewhere) where a young man with a microphone and a cameraman interviewed various anti-Bush marchers on the streets of New York around the start of the Iraq war.  They were going down the usual list: we are there for oil and money, Bush is Hitler, etc.  The young man did not attack them, he just asked them simple questions like “How would you deal with Saddam/the terrorists?”  In every single case, there was no real response.  One said something like “Talk to them” or “Leave them alone,” some were simply stumped (probably because their worldview nixed the possibility of war in a priori fashion).  This is the Democrats’ real problem, and it has been acknowledged by some of them.  What is your agenda?  The economy?  It is going through the roof.  The War on Terror?  How would you fight it differently but effectively? It will be interesting to watch, because the voters will not stand for continued Bush-bashing in lieu of a plan.        

Greg Pollowitz has it right:

1.  FIND veto stamp

2.  BUY ink for veto stamp

3.  ASK Alberto how Executive Privilege works again

Local Dallas politics has long been dominated by the GOP, especially at the courthouse. Last night the Dems surprised the pundits and even themselves by blowing away the Republican slate…….including my D.A. candidate. The county has been in the process of swinging liberal and we were prepared to take some serious hits in 2008, but not now. In one night we lost many experienced Republican criminal court judges–this included several African-American judges, one Asian-American and Hispanic-American. Our GOP national candidates did fine. Their good fortune did not trickle down to our local candidates who, for the most part, lost by razor-thin margins. I suppose our D.A.’s office will hemorrhage some of its best legal talent. Law and order in my community will likely take a sad turn as a criminal-coddling policy will certainly replace our current tough-on-crime approach.  This election marks the end of an era in Dallas.

I’d say the people are against it. From what we know now, Democrats will take control of the House of Representatives for the first time since the 1994 and the Senate hinges on races in Montana and Virginia. 

Just a week before the election, polls indicated that 61 percent of Americans oppose the War.  Now, they have spoken at the ballot box.  I remain doubtful Dubya will listen to the voices of the people. 

Here is a good link for the breakdown on the SC state races.

that I no longer adamantly believe that George Allen will be the next president of the United States…oops!

The Sunshine State is promising more of the same following these Midterm Elections. Here’s a rundown as things stand late Tuesday:

US Senate: Bill Nelson (D) horsewhips Katherine Harris (R) - Last I checked Nelson had something like 60% to just 38% for Harris. I’m sure Florida’s best and brightest didn’t want to jump into a dogfight with Nelson only to get pasted, but when Harris won this primary everyone knew Nelson would be back. Harris scares the heck out of way too many voters, and the Florida GOP knew that. This one was lost months if not years ago. (more…)

I don’t know what the national picture is going to be, but my review of the Georgia elections page looks pretty good for the state party.  Once Georgia turned red, it got serious about it.

I figured I would join in with my fellow co-bloggers and make my predictions before it was too late.

Senate:

RI: Whitehouse (D) over Chafee (R): Good riddance.

CT: Lieberman over Lamont (D) and Schlesinger (R): The “net-roots” proves to be no match against incumbency, Republican support for Lieberman, and, of course, “Joementum!”

PA: Casey (D) over Santorum (R): This will be the heart breaker of the evening for conservatives. I hope I’m wrong on this one.

NJ: Menendez (D) over Kean (R): Menendez has a scent of corruption about him which made this a competitive race, but Kean is a fairly unexciting plain-jane moderate GOP-er who mainly known for being son of former Gov. Tom Kean, Sr.

(Interesting juxtaposition: Casey and Kean share the same names respectively as their fathers who are former governors and both Senatorial candidates are running on the strength of their fathers’ names.)

MD: Steele (R) over Cardin (D): Upset of the evening.

OH: Brown (D) over DeWine (R):The Rust-Belt Protectionist Extraordinaire defeats the Extreme Moderate GOP Squish. Ohio ain’t looking good for Republicans (thanks Bob Taft and Bob Ney!).

VA: Allen (R) over Webb (R): Despite an underwhelming campaign and the Washington Post’s acting like the press office of the Virginia Democratic Party, Allen ekes out a win over Buchanan-alicious Webb.

TN: Corker (R) over Ford (D): Ford will benefit from a high black voter turnout and the faux-conservatism of his campaign, but TN leans a bit too much Republican for him to pull it off.

MO: Talent (R) over McCaskill (D): The nail-biter of nail-biters. Talent will squeak through, MO has trended ever so slightly trended Republican as of late.

MI: Debbie Stabenow (D) over Mike Bouchard (R): In a better GOP year, Bouchard could have beat Stabenow, who barely won her first Senate race in 2000.

MN: Klobuchar (D) over Mark Kennedy (R): Again, another race that could have been winnable for the GOP in a better political climate.

MT: Tester (D) over Burns (R): In 2000, Burns won with an lackluster 51% in a state that voted for Bush 63%. Given Burns’ connection with the Abramoff scandal and Tester’s “I’m a gun-loving manly man Democrat” persona, the Democrat will narrowly win.

WA: Cantwell (D) over McGavick (R): Cantwell won narrowly in 2000 against incumbent Slade Gorton and had been vulnerable for a while in her re-election, but yet again the political fortunes are against the GOP in this slightly Democratic state.

If I did my figurin’ co-rrectly, that gives us a total of 52 R, 47 D (including Lieberman), 1 I (socialist Bernie Sanders).

House:

The Democrats will pick up around 20 seats. Hello Speaker Pelosi. [/Sideshow Bob-esque shudder].

Disenfranchisement is not only for the huddled masses yearning to vote Democrat.  My wife ventured forth to our designated polling place to cast her GOP vote and one for independent E.H. Culpepper and was TURNED AWAY.

Although we both told the DMV we wanted to register to vote back in summer 2005, only mine worked out.  She was told they still had her in Jonesboro, GA and she couldn’t vote in Athens.  We’re waiting for a promised call from someone who will work it out, but I don’t think we’re going to get that call.

By golly if any of my favorites lose by one point I’ll be hiring the Southern Appeal legal strike force!

I am expecting a victory for my local Republican D.A. candidate (and new boss). He has benefited from an army of supporters willing to give up numerous weekends since the Spring primary to do neighborhood campaign walks. Many people were polite to us and some were jerks…..but, personal contact with voters makes the difference. Oh, and not to mention the evenings of campaign sign assembly and deployment. I’m off now to work a suburban polling place as my last official act of this campaign. None of this was especially fun–it was simply necessary. Tonight you’ll find me at the D.A. watch party……decompressing.

Whether a serious candidate or shrewd self-promoter, Kinky will not be the governor of Texas. But, just in time for Christmas, you can order your Kinky action figure as a reminder of this silly time in Texas history.

We were talking about whether it is worth voting GOP just for the judges.  Here’s a resounding yes from Paul Mirengoff at Powerline:

Thus, I disagree with conservatives who claim that it’s a matter of indifference what happens tomorrow or that a victory by the Democrats somehow would be a good thing. This is something that disgruntled conservatives said in 1986 too. But the Democratic takeover of the Senate that year caused Robert Bork not to be confirmed, and for Anthony Kennedy to join the Supreme Court instead. Twenty years later, we are still paying for that one. And some of the loudest complaints about the Supreme Court seem to come from “teach the Republicans a lesson” conservatives.

For what they’re worth…  While the futures markets (and several polls) have Dems leading all the close Senate races, I predict the end result will be 50-50 (by caucus, Lieberman wins).  If, somehow, the Dems do wind up in the majority, look for Rumsfeld to step down, Lieberman to come in and the Republican Gov of CT to name a GOP Senator.

 For the House, I think the two big surprises will be a GOP meltdown in Arizona and Colorado over the Senate immigration plan.  Also, Negron will win Foley’s seat thanks in small part to the ingenious “punch Mark for Joe” slogan.  228-207 Dem.

 UPDATE:  Matt Continetti over at the Weekly Standard made the same Lieberman call.  I wrote it separately but wanted to acknowledge.

Here’s the day-time version.

Real Clear Politics

Barone

Weekly Standard

Robert Novak

C-SPAN