For some reason, there is a reluctance on the part of many of our political observers to consider the effectiveness in a campaign of issues that act as what the folks on the arson squad call an "accelerant." Pour gasoline down a hallway and walk away, and nothing happens. Pour gasoline down a hallway and drop a match on it and, if you're lucky, you'll be collecting the insurance within a couple of months, and, if you're not lucky, you'll soon be embarking on a study of institutional dining for the next five to 15 years. But the gasoline didn't cause the fire.It needed someone to drop the match.

...

Certainly, Cantor was one of the more unpleasant stalks of stinkweed in the conservative terrarium, and I have no doubt that a great number of people agree. But, seriously, the issue in the election was not "immigration reform." It was "AMNESTY!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!!! AIEEEEEEE!!!!11111!!!!!!!!!!!!!" That was the central point of all the free media on talk radio that was Brat's only way of countering the massive financial advantage Cantor had. That was the issue that was the accelerant that produced the conflagration that consumed Cantor's career. Just being a dick wasn't enough to beat Cantor. (It never was before.) But being a dick who was believed to be in favor of "AMNESTY!!!!!111!!!!!! AIEEEEE!!!!!11111!!!!!" was more than enough. Cantor's absence from the district undoubtedly made it easier to position him that way. But it simply isn't possible to imagine an 11-point margin of victory over a prominent member of the Republican leadership in 2014 that didn't involve something that engaged The Base's Id in some way.

Elsewhere, there is the rosy speculation that Brat's victory somehow can be the transitional event that brings together anti-corporate, Elizabeth Warren liberals and the allegedly anti-bailout populist wing of the Tea Party right. The usually invaluable Lee Fang is out there hunting this particular unicorn.

...

Warren believes in stringent Wall Street reform in the context of an expanded social safety net for the relief of the beleaguered middle class. Brat thinks Wall Street crooks should "go to jail." OK, then what? Can you imagine Brat voting for Warren's student-loan reform bill that the Republicans refused even to bring to a vote yesterday? (The example of Congressman Justin Amash, to whom Fang hopefully compares Brat, on this topic is not a promising one.) Brat believes in free-markets as run by some curious amalgam of Presbyterian theology and Ayn Rand's economic sociopathy. And that, alas, is indeed "basic conservative boilerplate." Warren is opposed to the marriage of corporations and government because of the effect corporations have on government. Brat is opposed to the marriage of corporations and government because of government's effect on corporations, or so his basic political philosophy should lead us to believe. Forgive me if I am not encouraged.


http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/Lessons_We_Should_Unlearn