So far the main media narrative for the wonderful destruction of Eric Cantor’s time in political office, and the victory of Dave Brat has been nativism. Brat hates immigration reform (if not immigrants, as far as many in the media are concerned) and Cantor was a champion for it.
Of course, that only works if Cantor was going to comfortably win until the very last days of the race when that issue came up. Under that theory, a boatload of Cantor-supporters suddenly switched sides at the last minute.
Many are admitting that the mainstay of Brat’s campaign was against crony capitalism where big business gets in bed with big government to gain subsidies and protection from competition in the marketplace. He was described in Slate by Dave Weigel, “half Elizabeth Warren,” and “half Ludwig von Mises.”
Notably, Brat not only went up against the Republican establishment with this message, but he got zero support from the Tea Party machine. As Justin Raimondo writes at AntiWar.com, “the leader of Tea Party Patriots, one of the biggest national groups, wouldn’t even take his phone calls.” (Now, of course, all those Tea Party organizations are using Brat’s success to raise more funds. My advice would be to give directly to candidates and not support the incredibly lavish pay packages of the chiefs in these organizations.)
So far so good, but what if there is more to Cantor’s defeat?
Justin Raimondo points out something I had completely missed. While Cantor was a champion of the NSA domestic spying and of wars, voting to bomb Syria on the pretext of the chemical weapons attack, Brat campaigned as a foe of Big Brother, a champion of the Fourth Amendment along with the rest of the Constitution, and an opponent to “police actions” by our military as well as all foreign aid!
Why is Justin Raimondo the only one I have seen mention this aspect of the Cantor defeat? I am embarrassed that I didn’t notice it earlier. The people of Virginia voted against the NSA and against our empire abroad. Since Brat barely campaigned compared to Cantor (at least as measured by money) we have every reason to believe that voters saw what Cantor represented… and hated it.
A pro-war, pro-security-state, well-financed career Republican politician was defeated by a pro-constitution, anti-surveillance, unfinanced, media nobody.
That is an earthquake of greater magnitude than any other aspect of this revolutionary election.