Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

"Worst Week in Washington" Winnner

Drumroll please....

Alan Mollohan!

Yes, the West Virginia Democratic Congressman is our inaugural winner thanks to his double-digit loss at the hands of a little known state senator in Tuesday's primary.

In awarding Mollohan this "honor", we wrote:

Mollohan had held his state's 1st District since 1982 -- you read that right -- and his father had represented it for the 14 years prior to that, all the way back to 1968. Ah, dynasties. But a lingering whiff of ethics issues had weakened Mollohan's standing, and the bitter anti-incumbent sentiment pulsating throughout the country didn't help.

You can read the full "Worst Week in Washington" in the Outlook section either here or in the regular old newspaper on Sunday.

And, you can email your nominations for "WWW" to any time.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 14, 2010; 10:47 AM ET
Categories:  Worst Week in Washington  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: President Obama scolds GOP, touts Democratic accomplishments
Next: Whither the GOP kingmakers?


I as in agreement until the last paragraph, fairfax. As a regular feature this is just snarky and nasty, but then CC is so obviously a Republican anyway.

But I though "most important number" was dumb, and half the columns were seriously contrived and silly. I think this blog should do away with all regular feature crap like that, especially the online polls. Live Fix I personally don't have any use for but it's not too dumb. I dislike trivializing matters that affect lives. We have homeless people in the streets, soldiers dying in unmotivated wars, sea turtles dead on the beach. This is serious stuff and it's facetious to make happy banter over it.

And oh, if y ou're reading CC, please drop "political junkies." That isn't funny. Addiction is serious stuff and shouldn't be made light of, especially given that someone always gets jumped on for referring to something as "retarded."

Posted by: Noacoler | May 14, 2010 6:56 PM | Report abuse


Thank you.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 14, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

So the idea of this new "feature" is to find the most miserable, defeated person in Washington in a given week and then... taunt them in a way that repeats what all other pundits have already said, and kick them when they're down?

Sorry I think this is a really stupid idea.

I was hanging in there with you on Mouthpiece Theater. This is much worse. It is mean-spirited and hostile and by definition means taking the nastiest line of tired conventional wisdom about the last week (so and so is such a loser!) and then adding your comment to the already tired overblown heap. This is NOT the Fix.

Please bring back the most important number of the day feature. That took cleverness and originality and made you stand out from the crowd rather than simply echoing it.

Posted by: fairfaxvoter | May 14, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

CC made me smile. I'm thinking back to the whole decade argument that periodically rears its head. Is the 90's a decade (1990 - 1999) or must it be 1991 - 2000? Both events occurred within one week of another, though not in the same week. Definitionally speaking, Sunday is the first day of the week and Saturday the last, so a period starting Sunday 12:00 a.m. and running to Saturday 11:59 p.m. But I digress.

I suggested McConnell as a possible loser in a strategic sense. The KY primary is beginning to shape up as a referendum on Mitch, or at least it seems that's what Paul is trying to make it. Bennett alone losing isn't enough. If Paul loses, that suggests trouble for Mitch even if they were to retake the Senate. The Republican caucus has been extremely disciplined. I love that old line--I'm not a member of an organized party, I'm a Democrat. Some of the new noses under the tent won't play well with others.

One might argue Deeds or Corzine as biggest losers last year. It did, however, spin into a broader Republican rising narrative and so one might argue that Obama had the worst week in Washington (the other two not being in Washington).


Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | May 14, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse


URGENT TO THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.; A.G. HOLDER (staffs, please forward):

Our prayers are with Beau and the family, and I wish him a speedy recovery. But it also would be prudent to heed the words of TV's N.C.I.S. Special Agent LeRoy Jethro Gibbs: "I don't believe in coincidences."

So-called "targeted individuals" -- perhaps including some of the nation's political leaders -- may be unwitting victims of an awesome, silent, invisible and little known microwave/laser radio frequency weapon system that has been installed on cell towers in every neighborhood in America (U.S. Patent No. 7629918) -- a precision-targeted weapon that apparently has been franchised out to various authorities, commands and operatives, and, a preponderance of evidence shows, is being used for nefarious purposes.

Please read these articles by a veteran journalist -- and question key security and intel officials under oath about the deployment of Homeland Security's cellular "torture towers." OR (see "stories").

Posted by: scrivener50 | May 14, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

If this wasn't the first ever issue of WWW, I'd be more apt to buy the Sunday-Sunday thing. I'd probably make a one day leeway exception if it were me.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Why say "all the way back to 1968" after "the 14 years prior to that" with that refering to 1982? Is there an assumption that some here don't know how to subtract?

That's insulting. Just because they think there is a bias doesn't mean they can't subtract. You owe these conspiratists an apology!

Posted by: prokaryote | May 14, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

While it is obviously easier to allege bias when there is none


Oh, hahhahahhahah heee hee *gasp* hahhahhahaha

good one, Chris.

Now see if you can catch up to Tpaw and Undertaker Thune with that bouquet of roses and box of chocolates.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 14, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

fairlingtonblade writes
"Although I would have picked Bennett, losing in a primary is a much broader slice of the electorate than at a convention."

That's a reasonable argument for losing via a primary vs. convention; though it also depends on rating which is more harsh: getting smacked down by party insiders or primary voters. I thought your argument for McConnell was a close 2nd to AndyR3's argument for Cornyn.

CC: thanks for the explanation on Bennett. Its weak, mind you, but its an explanation.

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 14, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse


While it is obviously easier to allege bias when there is none, it might be worth revisiting the concept: Worst WEEK in Washington.

Since the feature runs on Sunday, the week goes from Sunday to Sunday -- making Bennett ineligible.


Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | May 14, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Some folks appear to be confused. A Democrat losing in a primary is not a "Republican Rising" column. Although I would have picked Bennett, losing in a primary is a much broader slice of the electorate than at a convention. Hence, a greater repudiation. This can be seen from the fact that many politicians have lost at their convention and gone on to win the primary.


Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | May 14, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

The difference between the Republican shifts and the democrats shifts is this -

much more of the democratic shifts will lead to Republican take-overs in the fall -

the Republican shifts for the most part reflect seats which more conservative Republicans will take over from moderate Republicans AND hold the seat for the party.

That is the difference

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 14, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Two years ago this blog sounded like Democrats Rising -

and the Obama campaign had paid staffers on here posting in shifts, commenting on everything everyone said - basically mocking everyone for not supporting the fantasy world of Obama's platform

Well that fantasy world is what Obama is being measured against now.

The blog reflects the facts out there, not a slant.


Posted by: 37thand0street | May 14, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Powerful well known Republican Senator loses to Tea Party wing of party vs little known Democratic congressman loses to little known state senator. Natch Chris goes with the Dem goin' down!

Posted by: BobSanderson | May 14, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Please everyone stop complaining about our Republican Rising! blog. It is what it is, it isn't going to change. Good news for Democrats! is readily available on the World Wide Web.

Besides, the Republican Rising! slant is kind of funny, it is part of the appeal for me anyway. When Cillizza dishes up love for people Tpaw, Thune, Palin and Gingrich, I feel reassured, even smug, which is bad I know, but its all those Republican losers fault.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 14, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

This is too funny! The Fix is so predictable that even before I clicked it I knew it would be -- 'Bad News for Democrats.'

Hey -- why not just make that the official new name for this space, since that's what is every single day.

And bsimon is right. And that Utah's Bennett is not even mentioned when he lost under the same circumstances is ludicrous.

Posted by: drindl | May 14, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

I thought AndyR3's argument for Cornyn was far more compelling. In selecting Mollohan, you do a disservice to the Fix community by not explaining why he was selected over similarly primaried Sen Bennett.

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 14, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company