Democrats win big last night...

[headscratcher4]

Democrats win big! Ok, more than a little overstatement, but why is that not the headline?

In the only race for a national office (Congress) the Democrat won – the first time in over 100 years that has happened. They took what had been as safe a GOP seat as imaginable and turned it into a Democrat seat (albeit “conservative” Democrat). This, in spite of national attention and the endorsement of the Conservative candidate by Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, Army and a host of other teabag luminaries.

Bottom line: Democratic majority in Congress expands.

At the same time, in Virginia, McDonald the Republican won (interestingly, the party out of power has won the VA governorship in the off year election the last 5 or so outings). McDonald won because a). The Democrat ran a horrible campaign (polls show that Obama is even more popular in Virginia than he was when the state went for him last year, and more popular in Virginia than nationally, BTW. He is polling at about 58% approval vs. 55% nationally). McDonald spent the better part of his campaign running away from his core conservative beliefs – beliefs honed at Pat Robertson’s University and which he wrote extensively about 20 year ago.

McDonald’s beliefs of 20 years ago mirror those of the conservative/teabag movement today. McDonald ran on fiscal restraint and solutions for Northern Virginia transportation and explicitly said that he has grown and matured as a person over the last 20 years and that his view on, for example, the role of women in society, had changed.

In short, he ran appealing to moderates and independents worried about the economy and the cost of state government, but not as a hard right conservative on social issues. Hard to see this as a “victory” for the right wing or the GOP national strategy.

I know little of the New Jersey race, but I do know that Corzine has been unpopular for a long time. He was unpopular last year when Obama won the state. His demise as governor has been predicted for the last year, so it is no surprise. The only surprise there would have been if Corzine had pulled it out – which would have been a reflection on the quality of the GOP’s candidate, not a positive referendum on Corzine, in my opinion.

Bottom line? The analysis that will be trumpeted around today – GOP wins at expense of Obama – is wrong. This doesn’t mean that Obama or the Democrats won’t have problems down the road; merely that conventional inside-the-beltway MSM analysis is facile in the extreme.

What will count for Obama and the Democrats in 2010 is where the economy is and where unemployment is. If the recession is over and unemployment is creeping down, the Democrats will likely lose some seats but not the Congress. If unemployment is high, Congress could flip. Last night was pretty much a wash and meaningless – the state elections being really about the quality of government in those states – and the Democrats won the one national seat that everyone was focused on.

[wastepanel]

Again, the Republican dropped out of the New York race.

Flawed logic.

[MattusMaximus]

The Republican dropped out because of the intra-party warfare within the GOP: pragmatic moderates vs. the wingnut Tea Party types.

Expect more of the same in 2010

[TexasJack]

The loss in NJ, after the Obama visits, wasn't a good sign. But, politics is funny thing, if unemployment begins to drop, the Dems will have nothing to worry about.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by TexasJack

The loss in NJ, after the Obama visits, wasn't a good sign. But, politics is funny thing, if unempolyment begins to drop, the Dems will have nothing to worry about.

Yup.

Quote:

It's the economy, stupid

[joobz]

On NPR they described in exit polls that 25% of those who support Obama didn't vote for Corzine. Given the close nature of the race, that's a hugely significant number.

RNC may wish to pretend that it's a national referendum, but clearly there are local issues that dominated the NJ election.

[headscratcher4]

The Republican (who probably would have won) dropped out of the race because of the pressure from her wing-nut right wing. The Conservative candidate essentially became the GOP candidate...not only prominent GOP endorsements but last minute efforts to switch votes to the Conservative. The end result was an election which delivered another Democratic caucus member instead of a sure-thing GOP caucus member or a likely conservative indipendent who would have caucused with the GOP. AND, the conservative element flooded a lot of money and resources into the race to overthrow the GOP's candidate.

It spells huge problems for the GOP down the road in that "conservatives" will be very emboldened to go after otherwise moderate/conservative GOPers. It suggests to me, at least, that the wipe-out of the GOP in New England/the Northeast is here to stay. AND, lest we forget, there was another Congressional election in California yesterday, that the Democrat won in a cake-walk. That means -- in national elections yesterday, elections that maintained or expanded Democrat majority in the House -- the Democrats were two for two.

Listen, I'm not really arguing that it was a "big" win for the Democrats. What I am arguing is the "spin" that it was a bad day for Obama. I don't think any of the elections had much to do with Obama...and the two that had a chance to show that Obama/Democrats were in trouble in the House, proved to be overstated.

I heard NPR this morning reporting big Democrat losses. What I see is an expansion of the Democrat majority in the House, and at least one GOP governor that had to run away (to the middle) from his more conservative stances to win. That doesn't spell Democrat wipe out to me...it spells pretty indeterminate wash.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by joobz

On NPR they described in exit polls that 25% of those who support Obama didn't vote for Corzine. Given the close nature of the race, that's a hugely significant number.

RNC may wish to pretend that it's a national referendum, but clearly there are local issues that dominated the NJ election.

Yes, there was also similar exit poll data in VA pointing to the same conclusion.

A "national referendum on Obama" this was not. And the GOP is deluding itself into thinking so, to their peril I think.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

I heard NPR this morning reporting big Democrat losses. What I see is an expansion of the Democrat majority in the House, and at least one GOP governor that had to run away (to the middle) from his more conservative stances to win. That doesn't spell Democrat wipe out to me...it spells pretty indeterminate wash.

That's because such reporting makes headlines. Meh.

[headscratcher4]

A headline from the Dem. Partisan Talking Points Memo....like it because it reflects the point I am trying to make:

Victorious Day For GOP Gives House Dems Two More Health Care Reform Votes

[joobz]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

That's because such reporting makes headlines. Meh.

I think it's a valid, defendable statement. Sum up the number of democrat wins to republican wins, and you get a big win for Republicans.


and again, as wastepanel mentioned, the republican dropped out of the election.

So, really, the DNC would be fools to claim any big win. They won by default. that's not very impressive.

[headscratcher4]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2....php?ref=fpblg

[headscratcher4]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_345103.html

John Stewart -- nails it, per usual.

[joobz]

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_345103.html

John Stewart -- nails it, per usual.

Priceless!
Stewart "Might the media, with really very few other elections to cover, be stuffing one hundred thousand pounds of their bull**** into District 23's five-pound bag"