Chait’s perspective on midterm elections
Jonathan Chait compares Europe during World War I with the 2006 midterm elections (Current, Sept. 3). He’s more familiar with Great War battlegrounds than Pennsylvania’s senatorial history, though.
Six years ago, Democrats tried to “win back working-class voters who may be attracted to the party’s economic platform but abhor the Democratic cultural agenda” with an anti-choice candidate. But Sen. Rick Santorum won while pro-choice Democrats stayed home and liberal Republicans stayed with their party because they saw no difference between the candidates. We can only hope that Santorum has become so ludicrous and offensive that the strategy will work this time.
JOY MATKOWSKI
Enola, Penn.
*
Chait writes that in the 2000 election, President Bush “got half a million fewer votes than his opponent but won because of poorly designed ballots and voting machines in Florida.” The real question Chait should ask is why Al Gore couldn’t win his home state of Tennessee, with its 11 electoral votes that would have given him the presidency.
JANET POLAK
Beverly Hills
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
