- ‹ previous
- 104 of 2794
- next ›
Throwing the Bums Out
The electorate was pretty tough on incumbents tonight. Democrats got kicked out in Virginia and New Jersey, Republicans got kicked out in NY-23, and Michael Bloomberg, who was expected to win reelection in a rout, only barely squeaked by. John Garamendi won in CA-10, but that was hardly a race in the first place.
I guess that's not too big a surprise considering the lousy economy and the generally sour mood of the voters. Unfortunately, it looks like the Maine referendum on same-sex marriage got caught up in the sour mood too, losing by 52-48, the same as California last year. From a purely practical political perspective it's easy to understand why Obama didn't want to get involved in this, but it might have made a difference. I don't have any doubt that California and Maine will both flip within a few years anyway, but sooner sure would have been better than later.
UPDATE: More here on the NY-23 race from David Corn.
I think Corn
way overdoes Palin's influence both in NY 23 and in the GOP in general. It's not as if the GOP national party was a bunch of pantywaist moderates until Palin showed up. Corn et al also underestimate her political common sense. They prefer to see her as this maddened, out-of-control monster because it's so much easier and more pleasing. As Corn himself says, it's one thing to jump into an obscure upstate NY congressional district, another thing altogether to charge after a Charlie Crist in Florida. Does he imagine she doesn't know that? Please.
A very great deal of Palin's influence is a result of liberal hyperventilating, IMHO.
National implications
NY-23 is the only race that will matter in weeks and months to come because of the fault line in the GOP, not between conservatives and moderates, because the GOP no longer has moderates, but between zealots (Palin) and pragmatists (Gingrich).
Regardless of the outcome, this race was close enough to encourage the zealots to try elsewhere. With the credibility of a GOP label, they probably would have won this one. In any event, they sure as hell have reason to think they can win any GOP primary they choose to run in.
The immediate result: The House majority got bigger and the minority has a fight on its hands within its own party so severe as to keep them from the 2010 gains that, on the natural, should be theirs almost by historical right.
Let's hope, anyway
"the minority has a fight on its hands within its own party so severe as to keep them from the 2010 gains that, on the natural, should be theirs almost by historical right."
Neighboring VT was rock-ribbed solid Republican forever until the only moderately crazy took over the Republican Party in the '80s, and the generally live-and-let-live Vermonters literally recoiled in horror. (I've seen 'em do it!) NY 23 is just across the lake, a very similar kind of place in many ways. They voted for Obama in '08 and this time overcame their distaste for Dems. in Congress, though this Dem is a DINO and less liberal than the GOP nominee who dropped out, truth be told. Still.
Sarah Palin is a grifter,
Sarah Palin is a grifter, not a political operative.
She inserts herself into wingnut causes celebres because it helps her book sales and gets her more paid speaking appearances.
If Rubio continues to improve his polling numbers, she'll start going after Crist.
She doesn't care whether Rubio is electable in a general election. She cares about being a conservative icon.
Hopefully VA and NJ send a
Hopefully VA and NJ send a shiver up the legs of every Blue Dog and they kill ObamamCare- not healthcare reform- but ObamaCare.
NY-23
NY-23 is the big news here. Va and NJ always flip the year after the White House flips.
For the past two decades, the Achilles heel of the Republicans at the state level has been their own primaries. A wingnut runs against a moderate in the primary, the wingnut wins, then flames out in the general election.
NY-23 tells us that that phenomenon has gone national and that the electorate won't stand for it - even if it must elect its first Democrat since the Civil War. If the teabaggers have their way, 2010 is going to have a motley crew of Republicans on the ballot, and NY-23 is telling us how those guys will be received.
Nice spin, but I don't buy it
Sorry, guys. These results are good for the GOP, no two ways about it.
Virginia is a true swing state, and it went Republican.
New Jersey, for God's sake, went Republican. It was definitely a rejection of Corzine, who is a particularly crappy politico, but still: NJ is a blue state that now has as GOP governor. Not good if you're a Democrat.
And the whole NY-23 thing basically is a rebuke to the right-wing-nutball wing of the GOP. Party operatives will be able to use it as a tool to help keep the right wing loonies in line during the mid-term election. "You want to send a message to Obama? Well, we need to elect Republicans. Let's not repeat what happened in NY-23, OK?" It's worked before, it'll work again.
Agreed.
NJ and Virginia governorships traditionally flip to the party that just lost the White House. It's been going on since 1977. Hard to read a lot into that.
I agree that eventually the right will have the discipline to select the most electable candidate, but in NY-23, they did just the opposite. And the whole theme of the teabaggers is that ideology trumps practical politics. They'll figure things out, but it will take about 5-10 years, and Democrats will benefit that long.
Does that mean the Democrats will gain seats in 2010? I'd really really doubt it. The party in power traditionally suffers in midterms, particularly in a bad economy. And these Democrats have aligned themselves really closely with big bankers. However, they are catching a break with the teabagger phenomenon, which will help stem their losses.
However, if economic anxiety doesn't fade by next November, things could get really, really ugly. Then the wingnut nominees would start winning, because we're so locked into the two party system. In really bad times, people will seek any alternative, no matter how nutty, and these guys will have the alternative position locked up.
Speaking as a Virginia
Speaking as a Virginia voter... McDonnell, a right-winger, ran as a moderate, and the Independents believed the story. This allowed the outside groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce, to run the hit ads against Deeds, who didn't have the money to return the favor. To me, this is the scary part. How many other campaigns will be run on this ploy?
Virginia was not a blue state when this election began. It was a purple state. Republicans were mad that Obama won in 2008 and that Democrats had won the last two gubernatorial elections. The Republican Party was better organized and recognized that a lot of people that voted for Obama last year would not return to the polls this year -- simply because the turnout for state elections is usually low. Republicans got out the vote; Democrats didn't.
From my view, the Democrats in the state were just as unorganized as usual.
Not quite...
I think New Jersey is more of a problem for the Democrats than most want to admit. The state has been trending Blue strongly for a while; it went for Obama by 15 points. Corzine outspent his opponent by something like a 3:1 ratio. Even with Corzine's unpopularity, it's a bad sign that he was solidly defeated by a Republican who is at best an OK campaigner. Not a critical defeat, but a significant one.
As to the Republicans, they're undergoing a standard problem for a party that's been in power for a while and gets thrown out. They're disorganized and undisciplined. We'll disagree on this, but I think the party guys in the GOP are glad Hoffman lost. Restraining the nutty base has always been a problem for them. I remember Jerry Fallwell saying (on national TV), in the middle of the first Dubya campaign, that, "Our job is to keep our mouths shut." Hoffman losing will help the GOP drive this point home to the religious conservatives.
over the top
I'm shocked at how close the NYC race was. I think Bloomberg oversaturated the market with robocalls, TV ads, and junk mail. That just pissed people off. Also, that created an aura of inevitability that voters protested against by pulling the lever for Thompson.
Thrilled that NY-23 ended up the way it did.
I'm really disappointed
I'm really disappointed about Maine. They have voted themselves into the bigot-state list.
Not surprised by the Owen victory in NY-23, but elated by it. The pundits were mostly calling it wrong, underestimating the effects of the (1) wingnut carpetbagger aspect (2) republican candidate endorsement (3) fact that the district voted big for Obama.
I'm disappointed in Maine,
I'm disappointed in Maine, too.
However, the rest of the election results provide a handy way to guage the sentiment of others depending on how they view the results.
Lefties interpret the results as voter frustration with the failure of the Obama Admin to shake things up and start fulfilling election promises.
Righties interpret the results as a voter rebuke that the Admin is forcing health care down throats.
How people see the results is very revealing.
Personally, I hope a message got sent that it's time to get off the policy pot and get some things done.
Couldn't Bloomberg just have
Couldn't Bloomberg just have donated 160 million to a NYC charity or something.
"NY-23 is the only race that
"NY-23 is the only race that will matter in weeks and months to come because of the fault line in the GOP, not between conservatives and moderates, because the GOP no longer has moderates, but between zealots (Palin) and pragmatists (Gingrich)."
The MSM is also parroting your analysis, such as it is. But let's not forget that the Democrats are dealing with a problem between their moderates and liberals: MoveOn.org has issued a call to take down any Democrat who doesn't vote for health care reform. In other words, it's time to get rid of the Blue Dogs.
But the MSM will only talk about the "civil war" within the GOP and sashay right past the same thing happening in the Democratic party.
The view from NYC
What happened here in New York City was more than anti-incumbent fever. The New York City Charter has (had?) term limits, backed by two referendums. Bloomberg and the Council did an end-run around the Charter without even putting it to the voters. Many of those who voted for Thompson (like me) were voting for the rule of law and against a power grab.
No wonder Bloomberg spent nearly $100 million of his own money. He needed every dime of it in order to bury the opposition.
Minor Correction
There was no incumbent running for gov in VA, as it limits its govs to one term.
So voters in NJ got rid of a really unpopular governor and a lousy VA demo candidate and campaigner lost. I think those who contend the few elections yesterday portend a nation trend are jumping the gun in their conclusion.
Strive For The Ideal, But Deal With What's Real
Obama stumped for Corzine.
Obama stumped for Corzine. Corzine lost.
Obama stumped for Deeds. Deeds lost.
Obama did not stump for Owens. Owens won.
Maybe there's something behind that. Maybe not.
Both parties had better be damn worried that Hoffman could garner so many votes, even though both parties trashed him nonstop. May that be a warning shot across the bows of both parties...
um, definitely not
Exit polling in both VA & NJ indicated that Obama's popularity in those states is 51% & 57%, respectively, which kills any idea that this was some sort of a referendum on the President. The take away, if there's any to be had, is that popularity isn't transferable to shitty candidates.
It's nothing short of hilarious, though, to watch you & other wingers spin Hoffman's defeat as a threat to anything other than teabaggers or know-nothing carpetbaggers.
Minor Correction
There was no incumbent running for gov in VA, as it limits its govs to one term.
So voters in NJ got rid of a really unpopular governor and a lousy VA demo candidate and campaigner lost. I think those who contend the few elections yesterday portend a nation trend are jumping the gun in their conclusion.
Strive For The Ideal, But Deal With What's Real