Soros has nothing to do with immigration. He is a boogey man of the right. Which shows how low they can go.

what did George Soros have to do with the election?

You really don't know?

Millionaires buying elections is all they understand.

That why they want soft money back so bad.

It never occurs to them that they could get serious coin asking normal Joe Sixpacks or Sam the Plumber Apprentices for 5 or 10 bucks a crack.

Therefore, they can't believe that's how Obama did it.

Doesn't the GOP at this moment remind you of a drunk stumbling out his trailer in a wife beater and sobbing that about his woman leaving him, "But, but,but...bu..but, I don't uner'stan...maybe I shudda called her brother a fag more ofen'..."

McCain, who is proponent of campaign finance reform that weakened party organizations and basically put George Soros in the driver's seat," DeMint said.

We all know this isn't true. Does DeMent actually believe this when he says it, or is he so addicted to archaic talking points that he can't help himself? If the GOP wants to know why it got its ass kicked, they should look at their tired, irrelevant framing. Reagan/Gingrich rhetoric is so 20th century.

here's my proxy: we know that obama had more or less the same number of votes in ohio as kerry, but whereas bush won the state by 100,000, mccain lost it by 200,000.

so the maximum number of ohio voters who thought mccain wasn't right wing enough was 300K out of 5.2M votes. the two other possible reasons those people didn't show up was that they came out for the anti-gay marriage vote in 2004 but weren't motivated this time and they disliked the republican brand this go round but couldn't bring themselves to vote for obama.

but let's ignore those latter 2; in that case, the maximum is 6% of the voting public thought mccain wasn't right wing enough.

What can we do to encourage them in their belief that they lost because they just weren't radically right-wing enough? Sign me up to help.

As for Soros, I'd say Warren Buffett had even more to do with the election than Soros did. Soros has a lot of money, but Buffett has a whole lot more than Soros does. But that's not how Buffett influenced the election - he did that by stating pretty consistently for the past 8 years that Republican ideas on taxation were lunacy, and by endorsing Obama's ideas. They're hauling Soros out of the closet because he's kind of their all-purpose bogeyman. Never mind that he didn't finance the campaign - hard core rightwingers are stupid and they won't look it up - they'll believe whatever they are told.

It never occurs to them that they could get serious coin asking normal Joe Sixpacks or Sam the Plumber Apprentices for 5 or 10 bucks a crack.

To be fair, they wouldn't get that much from the normal "Joe Sixpacks" or "Sam the Plumber Apprentices" who vote Republican. These kind of guys vote Republican because Republicans promise them that they can keep their money. They also vote Republican because they're staunch individualists who think collective action is a scam designed to get their money (the "government isn't the solution, government is the problem" crowd). If the politicians come around with their hands out asking for small dollar donations, these guys would say no.

The small dollar donors would pretty much be restricted to the evangelical wing. These folks do believe in collective action. Unfortunately most of them are already making those small dollar donations - to their churches. And they don't have a lot leftover to fork over to candidates and political parties. Which is why those evangelical churches are pushing so hard to get those pesky IRS rules about not treating your church coffers like a PAC thrown out as unconstitutional violations of their freedom of speech.

I agree with Howard that gay marriage & similar social conservative initiatives have pulled many Repub voters to the polls in the Rove era but that most of those voters are not so motivated in other elections. But it's a strategy that seems to me to be past it's prime. The California Prop 8 is having some serious blow-back at present. And here in Florida the 'Marriage Sanctity' amendment passed but the Obama won fairly handily.

The David Frum line on how the loss will be taken by the hard right keeps running through my head: "if the voters turned down ham and eggs, it’s because they wanted double ham and double eggs." I hope Jim DeMint decides to offer the electorate triple ham and triple eggs.

"Americans do prefer a traditional conservative government"

hahahahahahahaha

hahahahahahaha

A line of reasoning straight out of bizarro land.

McCain deftly accepted blame for his defeat during his concession speech. Any like talk after the fact is drivel, and Sen. DeMint is simply being snarky for what he thinks will be political points for his constituents.

As for the Soros reference, from Burke to Gringrich the conservative intellectual paradigm works more efficiently when an external factor can best explain why their ideas may have been rejected.

An external negative, preferably an uncontrollable behemoth, allows these conservative thinkers to deny themselves the fact their views of what is and what should be lie far outside the common experiences among the majority of their fellow Americans; and that is exactly why a scapegoat (Soros as caricature in this instance) is needed to explain what to them could never be their own failure! -Kevo

the maximum is 6% of the voting public thought mccain wasn't right wing enough. - howard

I understand that CW has it that Republicans didn't come out to vote, but it seems that there are also polls that suggest that a lot of people stopped identifying themselves as Reps, and of course many changed parties during the primaries. By relying more on that data, you could easily conclude that many decided that even the "centrist" McCain was too right-wing this year.

The fact that DeMint doesn't get it should help ensure that Republicans wander way out in the wilderness for a long time before they rejoin the ranks of civilized society. Culture wars are a luxury that can be exercised only in flush times, and these ain't them.

Saying McCain wasn't right wing enough is akin to saying John wasn't for corporate deregulation enough. And we are seeing where that got us. Republicans are in a hole and still digging. Anyone good at writing epitaphs?

I'll just note that the one time in ancient history that people listened to a bush, they ended up wandering in a desert for 40 years.

Let's hope the people who took the advice of this Bush end up doing the same, now that we've ensured that the desert they wander in won't be Iraq.

Yeah, most people were unhappy that the Republicans weren't conservative enough so they took it out on them by voting for the more liberal Democrats?

Seems like DeMento should blame GOP primary voters. Why did they choose McCain when they had even more conservative alternatives?
Republitards.

Steve, I don't think you're parsing this correctly.

There is a substantive political complaint in here regarding the bailout, namely, that McCain should have continued the Republican tradition of creating big messes and then leaving Democrats with the political burden of cleaning them up. That's why the Democrats insisted that the bailout bill be bipartisan -- although the Republicans in the House still managed to welsh on their promise to deliver a majority of their side.

Then there's the dogwhistle component. George Soros is not only a financier, he's Jewish. That's why you keep hearing about Barney Frank in regards to the bailout as well.

It's fun -- and I mean it, I'm enjoying it as much as the rest of you -- to listen to the lunacy of the far right crowd, including Mr. DeMint. And Steve is correct: the longer the GOP buys into these idiotic ideas, the longer it'll wander in the desert. Except ...

What if things go badly for President Obama? I love the guy, and am impressed almost beyond words by the mastery he seems to have with his political instincts AND over administrative matters (two skills which, combined, are the core of a successful presidency). Still, what if things don't go well? What if he stumbles, or matters beyond his control -- economic forces, foreign policy developments, scandals involving individuals in his administration, or manufactured filth from the rightwing that takes root in the all-too-easily-bored media -- smash his popularity down around about the 2012 election?

These frothing crazies, like DeMint, could hand us a President Palin. Arguably, they have done just that in the past, with Ronnie Reagan and -- especially -- still-president GWB. Can we really handle any more of that?

That's why as much as it pleases me to see the GOP flopping around in the deathly embrace of the wacko right, it ultimately worries me. I'd so much rather see a moderately-conservative Republican Party loaded with Eisenhower-like guys. A loyal opposition that you can at least vaguely respect (and trust not to do patently stupid things). Yes, such a Party would have a rather better chance at unseating us next time around. On the other hand, we and the country would be a whole lot safer than having the current load of dimwits anywhere within shouting range of real power.

I've discovered personally that I'm a revisionist on drugs for suggesting that the Bushies were conservatives or that McCain was running on a conservative platform. They were liberal neo-cons who took over the Republican Party and instituted liberal policies, I've been assured by many people. But despite all the attacks on me for suggesting otherwise, I've still seen no explanation for why moderates would be wooed by ultra-conservativism.

That the wingnuts are starting to believe their own scurrilous rumors demonstrates how utterly inbred, uninformed and ignorant they are.

Give DeMint credit for stating that Alaska's Senator Stevens should be shunned by the Republicans now, and expelled if he wins re-election. BUT, realize that a country who would re-elect Bush-Cheney in 2004 is probably capable of electing another horrible rightwing ticket in the future. If Palin gets a tutor and starts reading some newspapers, who knows? Don't underestimate the laziness of the American public - many of them won't read anything, they are content to wallow in their prejudices and listen to Rush. Maybe we need Rachel Maddow on the radio 3 hours a day to provide an alternative - there's a project for George Soros.

Also remember that DeMint is from South Carolina aka Thurmondia.

Steve,

This was also put up at Daily Kos, and frankly, Jim DeMint just doesn't get it.

Soros? Soros may have been the financial savior that led to the 2006 victories for Democrats, but he's small potatoes this time compared to the tremendous net outreach that brought millions of small donors to the Democrats.

Conservatism. Has. Failed. Period.

DeMint should remember his Shakespeare when Brutus and Cassius are talking..."The problem is not in our stars, but in ourselves."

Hi I'm Jim DeMint.
Not to be confused with Creme DeMenthe.

I'm the rootinest, tootinest, shotgun shootinest,roughest, toughest, tobacco wad stuffinest, leanest, meanest name calling machinest sumbitch South of the Rio Grand and West of the Mason Dixon line. I speak loudly and the South Carolina National Guard carries a big stick.

-- Winkandanod

The irony of DeMint's statement is that if McCain hadn't sold his soul to the far-right conservatives, and had remained the McCain of 2000, whom everyone respected, he would have been a much stronger candidate.

He still would have lost, but the race would not have been called for Obama at 8:00 p.m. sharp Pacific Time, as it had.

Embracing the right-wingers after the eight years of proof from coast to coast that this brand of conservatism is incapable of governance, was McCain's guarantee of remaining in the U.S. Senate.

I told ya DeMint was a tool.

Steve, do you have any contacts with expertise in South Carolina politics? I suspect DeMint's real target is McCain's BFF and SC's senior senator, Lindsey Graham.

Graham is deeply distrusted by the extreme right of the SC Republican Party; DeMint is de facto leader of that crowd. Graham recently has made some conciliatory moves toward Obama, making nice with Rahm Emanuel and helping to set up Monday's Obama-McCain meeting. Graham has not stuck faithfully to the GOP script over interrogation/torture of GWOT detainees, and, as a military lawyer (Air Force JAG), he could give the Obama administration some cover in closing Guantanamo and reforming trial procedures.

DeMint's statement looks like a preemptive strike at Graham.

George Soros = fever swamp for "The Jews", who are fine in Israel, paving the way for The Rapture, but no place else. They just want our white women and our infant's blood.

(The rats in the cage have begun to notice that there's no food, and are looking for the weaker ones among them. Won't be pretty.)

This column reminded me of a thought I had while watching Boogie Man (about Lee Atwater): I was stunned first to see how much dirty tricks had to do with the elections of both Bushes and Reagan (at least one of the terms -- I tuned in kinda late).

This in turn made me think: We've heard for so long -- and not just from Republicans, from so-called moderates too (Jon Meacham comes to mind) -- that we're a center right country. And one of the main pieces of evidence marshalled in support of that claim is ... the elections of Reagan, Bush I and Bush II.

So, discount that piece of evidence and what do you have?

Allbetsare off - excellent point about a possible target in SC is Lindsay Graham by these far-right guys. Compared to them, he's a liberal, when he's actually a moderate Republican who is also a hawk. DeMint says Americans want a "traditional conservative" government, but he doesn't define that. If the last almost 8 years are an example, I think it's obvious the country doesn't want any part of that anymore. I suspect we are going to see at least an attempt to reconstitute the Republican party that winds up much further on the right. Whether or not the moderates in that party fight back and block the crazies is another question.

just for giggles...i'm on the rnc email list...and they trot out soros as an all-purpose boogyman regularly saying, for example, that he would be setting up a west wing office in an obama administration without bothering to explain why that would be bad.....

Sometimes one can say that a candidate wasn't extremist enough to win, but one usually looks for evidence that he's been outflanked by a serious third-party campaign, or at least a serious challenge from the right within his own party that has left bitterness behind. Ford in 1976, Carter in 1980, Bush in 1992, Gore in 2000 might meet some of those criteria. McCain in 2008, I don't buy it. Obama won a comfortable majority, there were no vigorous challenges from the right (McCain had co-opted them by moving to the right), Palin is a virulent rightist. Where's the challenge?

McCain always supported open borders and amnesty. McCain refused to allow immigration to be addressed during the Republican convention. McCAin is too stupid to understand that putting milions of poor Hispanic illegal aliens on the path to citizenship will create millions of automatic Democratic voters. The right, correctly, suspected that if McAin was elected, the amensty bill would come back.

Jim DeMint is an idiot, and South Carolina should still be under military rule as its price for secession.

I encourage the GOP to go further to the right. That way we Democrats can just keep on winning and stay in the drivers seat for a long time.

This is a stupid question, but why does the right hate George Soros so much? He really is public enemy No.1 in their eyes. I never undersood that. It can't just be his support for MoveOn.

Soros is Jewish. This is nothing more than coded antisemitism. It's the 21st century, so it's unfashionable to say "McCain handed the country back to the Jewish moneyed interests," but believe me DeMint's target audience understood perfectly. More politics of division.

DeMint can blather all he wants, & yes, it will raise his profile even further over Graham in South Carolina, but if Jimbo is doing this with any manner of vision of a 2012 primary run, he's delusional. Outside the Senators from Oklahoma, I don't think they come any crazier, so no way he could pull thru & win the nom. He'd be '12's answer to Duncan Hunter.

[...] if McAin was elected, the amensty bill would come back. -- superdestroyer, @15:33

Ordinarily, I don't pay much attention to little typos (except to note that, for some obscure reason, they happen more often to the fRighties than to us) but, when they stray into the Freudian Field of Slips...

"Amensty"? Amen-sty? What is that? The place where the right-wing nuts meet to receive their talking points?

I love to watch Sen. DeMint and his ilk a) Insist that the GOP move further to the right while b) Extending a big FU to Republican voters. They picked McCain over several other contenders but according to DeMinted, they picked the guy who didn't represent their interests.

So according to DeMint the Republican candidate wasn't conservative enough, so the public chose the moderately liberal candidate because they really wanted a more conservative candidate. Makes as much sense as anything else the conservatives have said over the last 30 years.

Damn I hope they keep making as much sense.

Well as a resident of SC and knowing the number of delusional idiots that also reside in our state, Demints also delusional rantings will play well here as far as keeping him in office and lets face it for Repubs that is far more important than actually accomplishing something that is beneficial to their constituents.
But in terms of national politics , yeah keep on spouting that not conservative enough bullshit that hopefully will, like Moses, keep them wandering in the wilderness for 40 years.

I'm not sure how seriously to take this. First, you have to recognize that this is self-serving for DeMint. It casts blame away from himself and conservatives in general. Moreover, if this becomes the accepted meme, then it assures that the right wing conservative policies will continue to be pushed by republicans. From the standpoint of his own agenda, he almost has to say things like this.

Second, DeMint has the right wing to thank for his political career and probably lives in a right-wing bubble, where everyone reinforces their own world-view.

In fact, to me the more surprising post-election development has been the push-back from the other Republicans--I never would have thought that David Frum's or to a lesser extent David Brooks' of the world would be speaking out the way they have. Unfortunately for the Republicans, and really the country as a whole, I'm afraid that reasonable-rational conservatives will lose this battle.