none of these races really mean anything in terms of national politics. VA was expected, NJ was too close to call, though IMO it's further evidence that the voters there are not any smarter than FL voters, and NY 23 was just too odd. the only thing NY 23 proves is that there's no secret army of conservatives out there waiting for Palin et al.
the more relevant point is that these results will embolden the yahoos behind Rubio and scare Crist some more. look for a drilling program soon.
New York is special because they haven't had a Democrat since about 1856, that says something. Also the Conservative was a wing-nut supported by Palin which adds to it's significance.
New York is actually extremely important in terms of being a rejection of the hard-right tact that the National Republican Party is trying to go to. When you force the moderates to either accept your hard-right candidate, who knows NOTHING about their own local area (and admitted so in his editorial board interviews, referring to them as "parochial concerns"), or not vote, you find out what they do, not vote! This isn't good news for the GOP in terms of appealing to their ever-more-wingnutty base while trying to win elections. It appears more and more like you can't do one or the other.
As far as the governorships, Deeds ran a GOD-awful campaign, had some terrible staffers on that one, especially in the last few days. And as for Corzine, he was an extremely unpopular Governor dealing with rough economic times, so that loss, narrow as it was expected to be, doesn't surprise me as a political operative. Once you get below the governorships, down to the local races around the country, politics is local, so those mean little in terms of the national picture.
I am a moderate for those who don't remember my full moniker. But I would call the New York results a "rejection" of the hard right.
The difference was 1,600 votes. Not a lot. Especially given the strange circumstances of the past week.
Whether you're a liberal, or a moderate, it would be foolish to believe that there is not something to the galvanization of the conservatives (especially the far right).
There are going to be some "Blue Dog" Democrats that look at this and rethink their stance on the Healthcare issue. It is obvious in Va. and NJ that moderates and Independants broke right, even though they seemed to break left last year.
If you're going to call the Republican wins a "rebuke" of the Obama administration, when every single exit poll showed that it was state, not national conditions, causing those votes (very few people said Obama was even a minute factor in their decisions), then you have to pay attention to the Congressionals as well where the GOP doesn't fare well. Particularly NY-23, where the wingnuts pushed out a candidate who, without the inter-party fractioning, WOULD HAVE WON. When your own base is working against somebody with the name Republican, I don't care how you want to spin it, but you have problems. There's the 30% of people who will ALWAYS vote Democrat, the 30% who will ALWAYS vote Republican, and then the leaners and independents. The problem is, the GOP is focusing on ONLY those 30%, to the detriment of building winning coalitions. Now for me, this is a good problem, but as a political operative, they need to get their sh#t together.
The Democratic candidate there failed to receive a majority and almost lost to a 3rd party candidate. If I were a Democrat, I wouldn't be crowing too loudly about that win.
11 comments:
Yet you say nothing about Virginia and New Jersey.
Good luck to Scozzafava. It seems her loyalists tipped the scales for the Democrat she endorsed in that race.
m
none of these races really mean anything in terms of national politics. VA was expected, NJ was too close to call, though IMO it's further evidence that the voters there are not any smarter than FL voters, and NY 23 was just too odd. the only thing NY 23 proves is that there's no secret army of conservatives out there waiting for Palin et al.
the more relevant point is that these results will embolden the yahoos behind Rubio and scare Crist some more. look for a drilling program soon.
I'll compare NY 23 to Homestead - irrelevant when it comes to elections.
New York is special because they haven't had a Democrat since about 1856, that says something. Also the Conservative was a wing-nut supported by Palin which adds to it's significance.
New York is actually extremely important in terms of being a rejection of the hard-right tact that the National Republican Party is trying to go to. When you force the moderates to either accept your hard-right candidate, who knows NOTHING about their own local area (and admitted so in his editorial board interviews, referring to them as "parochial concerns"), or not vote, you find out what they do, not vote! This isn't good news for the GOP in terms of appealing to their ever-more-wingnutty base while trying to win elections. It appears more and more like you can't do one or the other.
As far as the governorships, Deeds ran a GOD-awful campaign, had some terrible staffers on that one, especially in the last few days. And as for Corzine, he was an extremely unpopular Governor dealing with rough economic times, so that loss, narrow as it was expected to be, doesn't surprise me as a political operative. Once you get below the governorships, down to the local races around the country, politics is local, so those mean little in terms of the national picture.
I am a moderate for those who don't remember my full moniker. But I would call the New York results a "rejection" of the hard right.
The difference was 1,600 votes. Not a lot. Especially given the strange circumstances of the past week.
Whether you're a liberal, or a moderate, it would be foolish to believe that there is not something to the galvanization of the conservatives (especially the far right).
There are going to be some "Blue Dog" Democrats that look at this and rethink their stance on the Healthcare issue. It is obvious in Va. and NJ that moderates and Independants broke right, even though they seemed to break left last year.
m
soory: would "not" call the NY race a "rejection".
m
For the last time: You are not a moderate.
If you're going to call the Republican wins a "rebuke" of the Obama administration, when every single exit poll showed that it was state, not national conditions, causing those votes (very few people said Obama was even a minute factor in their decisions), then you have to pay attention to the Congressionals as well where the GOP doesn't fare well. Particularly NY-23, where the wingnuts pushed out a candidate who, without the inter-party fractioning, WOULD HAVE WON. When your own base is working against somebody with the name Republican, I don't care how you want to spin it, but you have problems. There's the 30% of people who will ALWAYS vote Democrat, the 30% who will ALWAYS vote Republican, and then the leaners and independents. The problem is, the GOP is focusing on ONLY those 30%, to the detriment of building winning coalitions. Now for me, this is a good problem, but as a political operative, they need to get their sh#t together.
When your own base is working against someone with your own party affiliation after their name, you have problems?
Oh, like Joe Lieberman?
Ah, now I get it.
m
The Democratic candidate there failed to receive a majority and almost lost to a 3rd party candidate. If I were a Democrat, I wouldn't be crowing too loudly about that win.
Post a Comment