Reap The Whirlwind

"For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind" Hosea 8:7


If you read this blog enough, you already know that I am, quite possibly, the least religious person in the world. I couldn't believe in god less. I like the bible though. It's well written and contains some of my favorite quotes, including this one from the book of Hosea.

Hosea, by the way, is apparently one of the minor prophets. Tough break there. God talks to you, you're a prophet, seems like a pretty sweet deal. Then, somewhere along the way, you find out you're just a minor prophet. What a slap in the face. Why even bother being a prophet at all? I think the old testament prophets needed a union, so they could collectively bargain for equatable treatment of all prophets.

Anyway, I've been trying to keep up with the midterm elections. It isn't an easy task. Midterms can get pretty boring. First of all, who the hell are these people? Secondly, even when we have a supposedly huge change election, an overwhelming majority of Congress stays the same. For example, 1994 is basically the modern standard for a big change election. 1994 saw a 54 seat swing to the Republican side out of 435 House seats, or about 12%, which means 88% basically stayed the same. In the Senate, the Republicans picked up 8 seats out of 100, I don't really need to do the math for you there.

Boring or not, elections are important, especially Senate elections. The Senate holds the real power when it comes to making our laws. The House passes laws all the time with simple majority votes, but the Senate has all kinds of wacky rules and legislation generally goes there to die. So, if some dumbass state elects some dumbass Senator (I'm looking at you Pennsylvania. Rick Santorum? What were you thinking?) that dumbass is immediately 1% of the major governing body of our country for six long stupid years. Now, imagine what happens if dumbasses all over the country unite to elect a series of dumbass Senators.

In Nevada, the Republicans have nominated Sharron Angle, who, among other things, once suggested that ammunition shortages at sporting goods stores might be evidence that the nation is arming for a revolution against the federal government. Not crazy enough for you? How about this? In discussing her opposition to abortion in the case of rape or incest, Sharron suggested telling the hypothetically impregnated rape victim to turn what was really a lemon of a situation into lemonade.

You might think Angle couldn't possibly win an election, but Ms. Angle is running against Harry Reid, who is as charismatic is he is competent. The real clear politics average currently has Reid ahead of this lunatic by a whopping half a point. If you've ever seen Harry Reid talk, you can understand why I'm not optimistic about him being able to win over voters and take a real lead. If Sharron Angle can manage to avoid committing a felony in the next month and a half, I think she's got a very good shot.

In Kentucky, the Republicans nominated Rand Paul. Rand thinks the President shouldn't have been so hard on BP for filling the Gulf of Mexico with oil. Rand also would have voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The latest poll in Kentucky has Rand Paul up by 7. Two earlier polls had him up 15. Get ready for Senator Paul (who promises he won't actually try to repeal the Civil Rights Act, seeing as it's already been passed and all. How sporting of him).

Recently, Delaware Republicans nominated Christine O'Donnell. Christine actually seems like a nice person and I think the media has been a little tough on her. First of all, I didn't dabble in witchcraft when I was in high school, but if you had asked 15 year old me if I wanted to go see the satanic altar with the blood on it, I would have said "of course, I'm 15, what about me being 15 would suggest to you that I wouldn't want to see that?".

They're also all over her about her opposition to masturbation. I don't know what to say about that. She was a young Catholic and she was saying what the priests told her to say. I'm less worried about O'Donnell than some of these other people because early polls have her way down and, considering how late her primary was, I'm not sure she has time to recover. However, being that she's wildly unqualified to be a Senator and got nominated over a solid moderate candidate, she's another example of what we're talking about today.

I could on and on like this. Alaska Republicans nominated a guy named Joe Miller instead of re-nominating Republican incumbent, and seemingly non-crazy person, Lisa Murkowski. I don't really know what Joe stands for other than not shaving and not wearing a tie (but if you want to know what Joe stands for, just ask Sarah Palin, because that's who Joe asks when he wants to know what he stands for).

I've already talked about Florida empty vessel Marco Rubio. If Rubio wins it'll be the first time exit polls show a candidate won a Senate seat because of his "great hair" and "winning smile". He and Sarah Palin would make an excellent weekend news team.

New York Republicans nominated some guy named Joe DioGuardi to challenge Kirsten Gillibrand. Senator Gillibrand isn't exactly a political dynamo, Republicans could have stolen that seat by nominating a moderate that people have actually heard of instead of some guy who has run for Congress four times and only even managed to get nominated once.

The far right wing of the Republican party and the tea people have sown the wind. This is why I'm not a Republican anymore, the party is now routinely passing on qualified, reasonable people in favor of crazy, unqualified super-duper conservatives. Ideally, we'll watch them reap the whirlwind when they blow a chance to take back Congress from the consistently hapless Democrats. But what happens if all these crazy people ride an anti-incumbent wave to victory on November 2nd? Then, we all have to deal with the whirlwind.

The New Center

I have a theory. Now, I watch Glenn Beck at least a couple of times a week. Glenn has a lot of theories, I think the last one involved Woodrow Wilson secretly traveling back in time to start the slave trade. My theory isn't a Beck-style, category five crazy theory. I'm a bit more of a moderate, and that's sort of my point, this is a theory about moderation.

I've been trying my best to get engaged with the 2010 midterm elections, my efforts are meeting with limited success. The Democrats are undisciplined, somewhat cowardly and really failing to zero in on a message. Ya know, they're acting like Democrats. I can't imagine a way a party could more thoroughly squander a huge majority, but I'm sure the Democrats can.

Meanwhile, the Republican party seems to have been taken over by crazy people. Their nominee in Nevada, Sharron Angle, can generously be described as totally insane. Of course, she still has a decent chance of winning because she's running against Harry Reid's politically dynamic combination of unspeakably boring and unimaginably ineffective. Should be a real barn burner out there.

The Republicans in my current (but, thankfully, soon to be former) state have nominated Linda McMahon. Seriously, the wrestling lady. I swear I'm not joking. But she also still has a decent chance because she's got about a trillion dollars and she's running against a Democrat who kept telling people he served in Vietnam even though he didn't.

I've also noticed the Florida Senate race. Florida has the rare three-way race going. Independent and former Republican Charlie Crist vs. tea party Republican and former hair model Marco Rubio vs. a couple of Democrats who can't even poll at 20% in a pretty 50/50 state. Crist leads the real clear politics average of polls no matter which Democrat you plug in. This brings us to my theory. I think Crist is the leading edge of a big wave of successful independent candidates.

Look at where we are right now. People are rightfully fed up with both parties. The imagineers at Fox News keep telling me the Republican party will win back a majority in the house and maybe the Senate in November. How many times do you think people will go back and forth like this before they realize nothing ever changes? I think Crist wins by double digits in November, partially because he won't be weighed down by the stupidity of either party. That's why I think he should change his campaign slogan to "I'm Charlie Crist, and I don't like either of these guys". I also like that slogan because it's a little punchier than Marco Rubio's "I'm Marco Rubio, and I'll say whatever Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin tell me to say".

In the past, independents struggled because they couldn't raise any real money and they didn't have enough name recognition. Next time you go vote, take a look at the candidates on your ballot after the two major parties. It's a veritable who's who of who the f*ck are these guys. People generally aren't fans of voting for people they've never heard of, or giving them money.

But Sean, you protest, Ross Perot had money and everyone knew who he was, and he still only got just under 19% in the 1992 election. I can't argue with you there. Sure, part of what Perot was known for was his trademark bat-shit insanity, but still, he was well known. So what's different now?

As usual, part of the problem is the internets. An independent candidate doesn't need the party establishment to raise big money anymore. Even major party candidates do a decent amount of fundraising on the internet. I'm not saying an independent can get even with the big parties on money, but I think they can get close enough, if people know who they are. That brings us to culprit number two.

Cable news. People are more well informed about politics now than ever before. Well, maybe I wouldn't say we're well informed, but we're certainly more informed. I live in Connecticut and know who Marco Rubio and Sharron Angle are. Do you think I would have known who they were in 1992? Probably not.

So, here are the factors:
1) People are genuinely fed up with both parties
2) Fundraising is way easier now than it was even 10 years ago
3) Name recognition in politics is almost universal at this point
4) I say an independent is about to destroy both big party candidates in a pretty visible Senate race in Florida

Over the next five/ten years, I think we'll see a wave of moderate, reasonable politicians running for office as independents, and winning. I wouldn't be surprised if the 2020 Senate looked something like 43 Republicans, 41 Democrats and 16 independents. Of course, this means Congress will do even less than it does now. Impossible, you say? That sounds like a challenge.

Further down the road, maybe this even gets us a new third party, which will inevitably become just as corrupt and ineffective as the current two parties. I said I had a theory, I didn't say it was a good thing.