By Paul Goldman
Could the 2012 Senate race be over before it officially starts?
The geniuses behind the Senate campaign of George Cantor, aka George Allen, apparently believe they can win in 2012 by running as a statewide version of Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. The problem is, Cantor plays House of Representatives’ politics, and nothing else. What succeeds at that level may be a stone cold loser at a different level. Along those lines, in 2012, we may be about to witness a case study of how not to run a Senate race, just as the Allen campaign demonstrated in 2006.
The other day, Eric Cantor took a shot at the state’s soon-to-be Senior Senator, Mark Warner, over the tax issue. Both George and Eric, of course, are against either raising taxes directly (e.g., increasing rates or extending them to higher levels of income) or indirectly (e.g., by eliminating certain deductions, as both Reagan and Clinton did). In political parlance, George Cantor Allen, eye on the Tea Party, is taking a pure “No New Taxes” period pledge. Warner totally rejects this view.
Instead, Warner believes that solving the deficit issue will require a mix of new taxes and spending reductions, with his so-called “Gang of Six” expected to announce the precise mix soon. When conservative Republican President Ronald Reagan did this, I believe he used a ratio of $2 in cuts to every $1 in new revenue.
My gut says we need to cut more and tax less. But in wartime, we have previously used temporary revenue measures to keep us strong. Wake up folks: right now, we have unilaterally disarmed, sending trillions to China, Saudi Arabia, etc. It makes no financial sense. That’s the real threat to America’s future. We need to fund and fight this war. Bush spent trillions on the wrong wars. I thought we learned that.
[Fill in your name] Warner vs. George Cantor is an easy call. The Timster’s advantage is that he is odds-on to win the nomination. But Warner has already taken over the Senate race.