Politico is at it again, posting more half-assed, barely considered crap that is supposed to pass for political analysis. This stuff may make for good headlines and clicks, but it's far from "journalism"...
This time it's "Centrists' Return Good News For GOP" ... I am reposting (with slight revisions) my comment from the Politico website.
http://www.politico.com/...
more below...
If you don't care to read the article, it basically says that centrists are making a comeback in the GOP and that this development improves their chances in the midterms... as examples, the author cites Scott Brown, Kirk, and Linda McMahon.
Let's take Scott Brown. He is supposed to be a centrist? Standing opposed to a fairly centrist health care bill? Or campaigning on torturing the living daylights out of suspected terrorists? How about co-sponsoring Lieberman's idiotic bill to strip citizenship from Americans before they've been convicted of anything - presumably so that we could then torture them to death? What a centrist that Scott Brown is! Only, of course, if the wings are defined by Anarchy and Totalitarian Communism.
Don't forget Linda McMahon who, even in the wake of the Vietnam flap, is still trailing Blumenthal by 20+ points. The Democrats have barely even begun to highlight the fact that all of her money has come from running one of the trashiest entertainment rackets in the nation (along with a massive steroid ring). She's not quite "poised" to take that Senate seat - not just yet.
The story of this cycle is the fact that "centrists" are the least desired of all candidates this time out. Hence Specter's loss, Blanche Lincoln's impending defeat, Crist's ship-jumping, Rand Paul's triumph, and the Tea Party bidding war going on in Nevada.
But I shouldn't have expected Politico to think about the article before posting it. As long as the headline gets you to click, who cares if the content is imbecilic or not?