I had hoped that, with the election finally over, I’d stop getting my daily dose of multiple Christine O’Donnell emails. Not so. I just got her summation of the election.
This is fair enough. Every losing candidate deserves to present his or her take, and the much-maligned O’Donnell, who spiritedly carried the banner of conservatism in hostile territory, is certainly no exception.
Unfortunately, part of her take is well wide of the mark. She says:
The full weight of the White House, DNC, DSCC, and Delaware Democratic Party were brought in to secure this seat to further the liberal agenda. It’s disheartening that we did not have the same support of the Delaware Republican Party and NRSC.
If O’Donnell is serious enough to run for office, she should be serious enough to realize that the NRSC has limited resources and that these resouces need to be dedicated disproportionately to races where the Republican candidate has a decent chance of winning. (The Delaware Republican Party is a different story)
From the time she was nominated forward, the polls in Delaware consistently showed that O’Donnell was a no-hoper. In the end, she lost by 17 points.
Should the NRSC have diverted money from tight races in states like Pennsylvania, Illinois, Colorado, and Nevada to provide extra support for O’Donnell? I don’t think so.
UPDATE: The O’Donnell campaign relies on one Rasmussen poll from the early summer in which she had a small lead over Coons. It does not acknowledge that the next poll, taken in August, well before the September primary, showed Coons 10 points ahead of her. The O’Donnell campaign’s claim that “had the NRSC and State GOP backed O’Donnell after the primary, like Sen. McConnell did with Rand Paul Kentucky’s Senator-elect, we may have seen the victory that the poll predicted” is ridiculous.