"I published the post below in 2011. It seems to have been prescient. I wrote that the existing 7th District was a bad fit for Cantor. Whoever gerrymandered the district into its present shape missed the fact that all those yeoman type Virginians living along the corridor NW from Ashland to Warrenton to Page County would inevitably start to "smell a rat" in terms of having Cantor as their rep in Washington. All you had to do to learn the truth was to "hang out" in local places like Clark Brothers, "BBQ Country" across the road and all down along the road toward Richmond. Cantor lost because he was perceived to be "not from here."" pl
*******************
"Do people in Eric Cantor's district really want him as their congressman? It seems like a mis-match. Cantor is a very smooth Richmond lawyer type. As the saying goes, "butter wouldn't melt in his mouth." He is always well spoken and elequent, well dressed and is well heeled.
The district is not like that. It stretches from the northern and western exurbs of Richmond far to the northwest through farm country, up through the Piedmont and over the Blue Ridge to include Page County in the Luray arm of the Shenandoah Valley. If I am not mistaken, Clark Brothers is in Cantor's district. The district is 80% white. Incomes are modest. The population is mainly people whose ancestors have lived there for a long time. Typically, they live in small, well kept houses sited for a view of the countryside. The houses average around $130,000 in price. This is the heartland of the country of Jefferson's Virginia yeomen.
How does Eric Cantor fit into this? Is this story altogether about a Richmond machine politician holding office because the voters can't accept the idea of voting for a Democrat? Perhaps it is.
Cantor is now engaged in an attempt to unseat John Boehner from his place as Speaker of the House of Representatives. He is doing this by a maximum display of obstructionism in the process of reaching an agreement on revenues and spending. This is an agreement sorely needed to keep the federal government from going 'belly up." Cantor evidently believes that if Boehner and Obama are blocked from reaching an agreement, then the 'tea party" wing of the House Republicans will propel him into the Speaker's chair in 2012.
Is that what the people of the Seventh District want in their representative? We Virginians have a hard earned reputation for moderation, consideration for others and common sense. We do not elect extremists or people like Pat Robertson's candidates to major public office. Is the game that Cantor is playing compatible with that tradition? Is not the greater good the principle that should be followed in this crisis?
I suppose that the game is rigged in the Virginia Republican Party so that Cantor is assured of the nomination for this "Safe Seat."
In my opinion, an independent should seek to be elected to this seat. A well to do conservative farmer or a businessman from one of the towns, someone with solid Virginia credentials, U.VA, Virginia Tech, William and Mary, millitary service in his or her background, someone like that could take the seat.
Cantor should be sent home to practise law. " pl
Perhaps the rise in populist activity has to do with the middle classes in both countries slowly dawning realization.
They are in the process of being well and royally economically screwed by the reigning elites.
There will be an unprecedented explosion in the United States,if it continues. The Brits will just probably go silently into the night with the rest of Europe.
Posted by: Highlander | 11 June 2014 at 02:20 PM
To pl and other Virginians:
There's a map of who voted for whom in Virginia 7 at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/va-7th-district/
Looks like Brat won huge in Hanover County and that may have tipped the election. I lack the knowledge of the area to extract deep insights from it, but would appreciate comments from those here who do know the area.
Posted by: Allen Thomson | 11 June 2014 at 02:44 PM
Richard: I set next to an elderly Evangelical woman on a plane yesterday who informed me real Americans had a duty to support Israel. I politely informed her that I'm a real American and my only duty is to support the USA.
Posted by: Matthew | 11 June 2014 at 04:04 PM
I have to wonder though if the "Big NO" from the 7th District's Republicans didn't apply to more than just Cantor. What do you think?
Frankly, I am hoping it did. I do not see the change we need happening until a lot of silent Americans to start saying NO to a lot of things. As someone who is not Republican or conservative, I can say I was truly shocked and delighted by Prof. Brat's success last night.
Posted by: jerseycityjoan | 11 June 2014 at 04:14 PM
Highlander:. The difficulty is technology is eating jobs faster than they are being created. There is no easy fix to this problem.
Posted by: Matthew | 11 June 2014 at 04:14 PM
There's equal amounts of gnashing and wailing on the Right and Left. The liberal elite, Silicon Valley, the Chamber of Commerce, and the establishment won't get their immigration reform through the House and the right will remain powerless to stop the influx of illegal migrants and demographic change.
Blue-collar workers will continue to get screwed.
Posted by: Will Reks | 11 June 2014 at 04:15 PM
Tyler,
The situation on the southern border seems more like a massive influx of refugees than an importation of people. Just like Jordan and Lebanon are being swamped by refugees from Syria, we will be facing a tsunami of refugees from Central America and Mexico. What you see now is only the beginning.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 11 June 2014 at 04:28 PM
I think anything is possible.
Today's working age population has been stuck in a mostly puzzled passivity for a long time. They got sold the bill of goods about globalization, computerization and the loss of manufacturing jobs starting the 1990s, all of which ended with the line "and there's nothing you can do about it." They and the ones after them until the Great Recession soldiered on with less -- but they didn't do too badly, most of them.
But there's no way to do well working a part time job for $10 an hour or less, but that's the biggest number of jobs out there. I do not see any major new source of new middle class private sector jobs in our future.
When the people coming after us realize just how screwed they -- how royally screwed -- and just how indifferent the people in charge are to their situation -- we may see lightening quick and shocking change in many places.
My sense is that if in 2030 or 2050 it's fight or lose your First World way of life, many will chose to fight. I cannot even believe I am typing these words, but they must be true. If the conditions that lead to social unrest and perhaps even revolution are present, surely then we should expect them to occur, should we?
Posted by: jerseycityjoan | 11 June 2014 at 04:39 PM
Will, don't make the mistake of thinking that things will always continue on a linear pattern. We are heading towards a Yugoslavia style situation if we don't wrap our arms around the illegal immigrant issue and start enforcing our laws.
Posted by: Tyler | 11 June 2014 at 05:37 PM
Why can't it be both? Holder is appointing lawyers to defend the "rights" of these illegals to stay in the US, as if staying here was a human right!
This is the same DOJ that regularly declines prosecution on dirt bags I arrest because of "lack of resources"! The decadent "elite" of this country regularly put the rights of Mexicans and other illegals ahead of their own citizenry. And they're "clueless" why the illegals keep coming.
Posted by: Tyler | 11 June 2014 at 05:40 PM
FWIKW, another possible reason why things changed:
Sroll down here:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/?src=soc_fcbk
to the post “The Friends of Dave Brat.”
Excerpt:
"The most revelatory piece about how Dave Brat came to be the likely new congressman from the Seventh Congressional District of the Commonwealth of Virginia ran in Politico back on April 17:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/tea-party-radio-network-105774.html
It also undermines the emerging character of Dave Brat, Ordinary Joe. A lot of the credit for [Brat’s] upset is going (rightly) to various radio hosts who took the payola from wingnut sugar daddies as described by Ken Vogel and MacKenzie Weinger [in the Politico article linked to above].. Mark Levin took almost $800,000 from Americans For Prosperity. Laura Ingraham was on the arm, too. Brat also seems to owe his job to Cato Institute president John Allison”:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/367690/eric-cantors-challenger-right-betsy-woodruff
Posted by: Larry Kart | 11 June 2014 at 06:16 PM
Larry Kart
It sounds as though you are displeased with Brat's win. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 11 June 2014 at 06:44 PM
pl and gentle correspondents,
I cannot recover from the massive dose of Schadenfreude since hearing the good news last night that Cantor got tossed out on his ear by the gentle rustics in "his" district. I believe they finally had enough of his BS. He did not represent their interests. Period. He represented the unholy cabal of Wall Street and the U. S. Chamber of Commerce. I also think he was an unregistered agent of Israel, but that did not count for much with the "home folks."
While I am not a fan of the Tea Party, it does appear Mr. Brat will be a more honest representative of the 7th District than that carpetbagger opportunist Cantor. I look forward to following that race. I also look forward to watching the Republicans go through another round of witch hunts and soul searching. Maybe they can start by recognizing they have a problem with their message and movement. The answer is not going to be even more strident conservatism, but they will have to figure that out for themselves.
Finally, I must confess to having a morbid fascination with people from Richmond. I grew up an Army Brat, bounced around this nation, as well as two foreign countries. My family lived in Fairfax County the most amount of time in any one place. I attended Our Beloved Alma Mater, where I met this fascinating species of young men from "The Holy City." Richmond, to them, was/is the Center of the Universe; the axis upon which the world (or at the very least, the Commonwealth)turns. Most of these misguided souls are very nice, but sorely narrow-minded and severely provincial. Perhaps Mr. Cantor, now chastised and worldly wise, can use his new found free time to be a beacon of humility and gentility in that benighted city. For surely he will not wish to settle down with the shit kickers who so casually kicked him to the curb.
Posted by: B. D. Warbucks | 11 June 2014 at 07:11 PM
I listened to a political pundit on the radio say that immigration had nothing to do with it, but he wouldn't say what?
You're not going to hear a discussion of this on the MSM, but it must count for something. Just because you live in a $130,000 house, it doesn't make you stupid about foreign policy and interference. Or a hayseed.
Eric Cantor Takes Steps to Give Netanyahu Power Over American Middle East Policy
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/12/10/eric-cantor-takes-steps-give-netanyahu-power-american-middle-east-policy.html
US House Majority Leader Eric Cantor to Peres: GOP Leaders Came to Show Strength of American Support for Israel
http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/08/13/us-house-majority-leader-eric-cantor-to-peres-gop-leaders-came-to-show-strength-of-american-support-for-israel/
In ‘Time,’ Cantor joins himself at the hip with Netanyahu in defiance of Obama
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/04/in-time-cantor-joins-himself-at-the-hip-with-netanyahu-in-defiance-of-obama.html/comment-page-1
Post details: "I'm with you, not my president," Eric Cantor told Israel's Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu: Zionist Republican Cantor recants on Israel.
"Incoming House Majority Leader tries to explain why he pledged allegiance to Israel's leader over the US President.”
http://www.thecornerreport.com/index.php?title=lstrongglemg_i_m_with_you_not_my_preside&more=1&c=1&tb=1
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2010/11/20101116121343388841.html
Posted by: MRW | 11 June 2014 at 07:32 PM
Don't know much about Brat yet, have always regarded Cantor with some fear and much disgust -- a weasel, par excellence. My post was merely to point out that if that Politico article is to be trusted, Brat's upset win was not entirely a grass-roots, "he spent very little money on his campaign" phenomenon but rather that a good deal of money was spent indirectly on Brat's behalf by outside-the-district forces.
Posted by: Larry Kart | 11 June 2014 at 07:37 PM
Dave Brat knows how to spin the tacit to the explicit.
Nothing in the national press gives any real explanation about how Brat won. If you listen to his speech, it is easy to understand how he did it. Like a witch doctor spinning a charm, Brat knows how to use the mythical political phrases to do his own magic. While I have deep philosophical and political differences and with his politics, I have to give him credit on his mastery of words and his sensitivity to the tacit assumptions of current, southern, conservative ideology and sensibilities.
I have often written on this blog about the use of myth and its effect on politics. A listening to Dave Brat’s stump speech is a great example of a speaker with a broad understanding of the myth words. The speech is a brilliant creation of short quips to bring the tacit knowledge of his constituency to the spoken word to give them hope and good feeling and word tools to overtly express their tacit knowledge of their own reality. (Note that his audience is almost all well-to-do educated older whites.)
These videos are an ad free hour of great entertainment watching a speaker master his audience through creative use of myth words and magical thinking.
Dave Brat at Life Church Part I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfPJdBnbheE
Dave Brat at Life Church Part II http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzL211DjoWc
Of special note is the way Brat uses a theme of brokenness of the government and turns it to use the six principles of the Republican Credo as tools to give the audience tools with which they can think they understand what is going on. He uses wonderful phrases throughout to frame a solid argument against Cantor to create a sense that he will do what is fair when he gets to Congress and will not stay too long. The question and answer session is especially interesting as the audience takes up his phrases and makes questions and conversations.
Apparently, enough of the yeomen in his district heard about him or heard him. Mastering political language a wonderful trade and those who know how often get elected on long odds.
Posted by: WP | 11 June 2014 at 07:45 PM
Allen,
I googled the source of the WAPO data: 65,008 votes cast. Turnout was 12.8%.
Twelve years in office his integrity and principled efforts at the United States Representative for Virginia's 7th congressional district can't ensure that 35,000 primary voters will vote for him? I'm sure that political scientists and professional campaign staff will not mention that particular requirement for reelection.
Posted by: Fred | 11 June 2014 at 08:03 PM
"Politico"
"Trusted."
Pick one.
I mean you can knock me down with a feather that a left wing organization instantly moves to paint a Republican who opposes amnesty as a nutbat right winger.
Really. Seriously. Wow. Shocked.
Posted by: Tyler | 11 June 2014 at 08:05 PM
You make it sound more like he suckered a bunch of yokels who didn't know that amnesty is actually super doubleplus good for them versus the reality that the voters knew that the amnesty treason Cantor wanted is a poison pill for the Republic.
Posted by: Tyler | 11 June 2014 at 08:07 PM
WP
I find it surprising that you criticize Brat for having an effective stump speech that communicates with campaign rally attendees. I also find it surprising that you adopt a tone that is so condescending toward people who chose to vote for Brat. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 11 June 2014 at 08:08 PM
Tyler,
Ground zero. That's a perfect analogy. I was at my local gym in Ann Arbor yesterday and saw a graduate student wearing a "There is no such thing as illegal immigration" T-shirt. Yes, I thought, they are called refugees. Most from the failed states of Mexico. Liberal Ann Arbor has a few - a token few. I'm sure if Uncle Sam took over 'The Big House" and put even as few as 1,000 in temporary housing there, 'temporarily' of course, you wouldn't need to wait until the first day of football season to hear the explosion of outrage.
Posted by: Fred | 11 June 2014 at 08:23 PM
After a decade plus in office Cantor is beaten by myth words and magical thinking? I think the voters had something to do with it. Cantor couldn't reliably identify 35,000 Virginians who would vote for him and a) go to the poll on election day or b) cast an absentee ballot? Yep, some stump speech.
Posted by: Fred | 11 June 2014 at 08:28 PM
Tyler -- You think that Politico is a left-wing publication? You could have fooled me. It's stance, FWIW, is highly anti-Obama by and large, albeit from a Washington insiders' perspective. That group is its real constituency, and those folks havn't been left-wing since the dawn of the Bush era, perhaps not since the early days of the New Deal.
Posted by: Larry Kart | 11 June 2014 at 08:47 PM
True, Laura, but Cantor was in a sense hoisted by his own petard. There was a time when he fed off Tea Party energy, but in his quest to become Speaker he had been shifting to the center somewhat (still solidly conservative, but not enough for some). The district was redrawn after 2010 with the intent of making it more intensely conservative and thus an even safer Republican seat, but unintentionally it made the district riskier, not safer, for the New Cantor.
As the Col. points out, Cantor was in many ways not a good fit for the district, which in ordinary circumstances isn't always that big a deal for a rich incumbent. But he has been too busy attending Davos to pay attention to his district. The saying "all politics is local," isn't always true, but it certainly applies here.
Posted by: Stephanie | 11 June 2014 at 09:22 PM
Also, Tyler, about "instantly moves to paint" etc., it wasn't instantly nor after the fact. That Politico piece ran back on 4/17 and didn't even mention Brat. Rather, it described the mechanism whereby right-inclined radio hosts were being funded through so-called “sponsorship” advertising agreements by Tea Party-oriented nonprofit groups like FreedomWorks in order to promote their causes and candidates (e.g. "$6 million in recent years [from FreedomWorks] to [Glen] Beck.”) One assumes that Brat wasn’t mentioned in the Politico article (several other Tea Party favored candidates were) because back in mid-April few suspected that Brat was going to be the viable candidate he turned out to be.
Posted by: Larry Kart | 11 June 2014 at 09:40 PM