November 3, 2009

"[H]alting a decade of Democratic advances in the critical swing state..."

"... Virginians elected Republican Robert F. McDonnell the Commonwealth's 71st governor Tuesday...."

160 comments:

blake said...

Hope! Change!

Lem said...

and according to the latest numbers we a predicting, again we are predicting the lieutenant governor of Virginia is going to be a republican..

From my easy pundit chair I can say categorically this will not vode well for the president.

what do you say Jim?

ricpic said...

Now if New Jerseyites will only kick Corzine to the curb.

rhhardin said...

The people have spoken, the bastards.

Florida said...

[H]alting a decade of minutes of Obama's 15 minutes.

Lem said...

Jim I have Virginias incumbent trailing 43 to 52.... too close call.

(it's like Bob Uecker calling it from the nose bleeds) ... he missed the tag, he missed the tag.

Synova said...

So!

Is this an indication of the overwhelming conservative sensibility of the nation OR simply the normal fluctuations of political fortune?

Synova said...

Not finished then?

Well anything could happen.

John said...

Synova,

It is an indication that 2008 was the high water mark of Democrats. The stars alligned for them. The Republicans were a spent force who ran a weak candidate and the banks crashed two months before the election. That combined with a good dose of white I want to vote for a black man guilt set it up for them to win in places they had no business winning.

In 2010, there will be no Obamamania at the top of the ticket. Just Dem incumbant left alone with a 10% unemployment rate and a motivated Republican base.

Dudley Do-right said...

No, no, this isn't about climate.

This is only weather.

vw = hedsad: There will be plenty of sad heds before the evening's over.

traditionalguy said...

The Virginians who know them the best understand that Regents University graduates make the best Governors.

The Drill SGT said...

Is this an indication of the overwhelming conservative sensibility of the nation OR simply the normal fluctuations of political fortune?

I voted for McDonnell today. Short answer is a part Obama hangover, and more than a bit of fatigue with 12 years of Dem Governors. The current guy Kaine, is so unpopular, he spent his time campaigning in NJ for Corzine instead of Deeds. Also Deeds, who I liked better than his 2 Dem primary opponents, was gutless on road construction, which is a big issue in vote rich Northern VA. We think we get robbed of gas tax revenues for the rural parts, e.g. Deeds country. Deeds transportation plan as he described it in the WaPo amounted to, Get elected, and on his first day in office, appoint a blue ribbon commission to tell him what to do. The voters didn't appreciate his wisdom much.

Synova said...

John, I wouldn't discount a huge portion of war fatigue. Even before the economy crashed and even before Obama was the Democratic candidate the common wisdom was that it would be near impossible for a Republican to win. I said it. I heard it.

Lem said...

Fox had Charles Krauthammer attempting to talk to Oreilly..

Charles has the patience of Job go critical.

John said...

Good point synova. But even with all that Obama won by a smaller margin than George Bush I and a much smaller margin than Reagan in 84. And if the banks hadn't crashed and Palin gave better interviews, McCain still might have won. It shows what a weak candidate Obama was. He definitely didn't beat the spread.

Lem said...

OT..

hey guys there is a Phillies fan that painted the Phillies jersey on her.

I wanted to link to it but.. I dont know if its in good taste .. you know. I dont want to get flamed.

She did a wonderful job though.

Pogo said...

One swallow does not make a spring.

Florida said...

The problem with Democrats is once they get elected, they start doing things.

Then the electorate begins to understand what a horrible, horrible thing they did letting these complete morons control the levers of power.

So, the pendulum swings back from the idiots to the adults.

Obama got the benefit of a lot of Republican scandal in order to get elected; plus he had no record to criticize so he could make up positions as needed.

There were the pedophile's like Florida's Mark Foley, airport bathroom blowjob devotee's like Larry Craig, and corrupt Republicans like Alaska's Ted Stevens and bribe-taker Duke Cunningham and his buddies.

Republicans needed to be fired in large numbers and Obama, a political neophyte metrosexual who, as Joe Biden said, was a "clean" black guy ... he benefitted.

But then he started opening his mouth and spending our tax dollars buying cars and shit for people. I mean WTF?

Conservative America has awakened from its slumber. These morons are going to be fired, along with all the fat RINO broads who are merely Democrats in disguise stealing conservative campaign donations.

Good riddance.

John said...

Lem,

Is she built? If she is, post the link. If she is not, then don't scare anyone.

Greg Hlatky said...

On Thursday, 15 million ballots will be "found" in the trunk of an election official's car. 14,998,128 of them will be for Deeds.

Stephen Snell said...

Lem: No. Just no.

Seems to be a great night for a liberty loving people.

Florida said...

One swallow does not make a spring.

Don't tell that to Andrew Sullivan.

Michael Hasenstab said...

Fox had Charles Krauthammer attempting to talk to Oreilly..

Bill O'Reilly is Ted Baxter.

Penny said...

"No, no, this isn't about climate.

This is only weather."

Dudley Do-right is spot on.

Stephen Snell said...

Someone should offer Bill $50 to say Kawasaki.

mariner said...

Florida, FTW!!

edutcher said...

What Pogo said.

If all reports are correct, turnout is light in Demo districts in NJ and high in districts McCain carried. If Christie does well with independents, this may be an election ACORN and SEIU can't steal.

Long way till daylight, though.

Penny said...

Although I fear we will not much like the "climate" as the front of these key elections moves on through.

Chase said...

John, I agree with you completely.

This makes me sad though: the first black President will surely be seen, by this time next year, to be clearly in over his head. It should not mean anything regarding race - just that Obama was a poorly chosen, not-ready-for-prime-time politician, regardless of his race. Sadly, though, the President's race will be played up in even bigger ways than it is today - you can already imagine the articles and pundits. If you think accusations of Obama not being able to succeed because of (choose as many as you like)white racism, angry white men, conservatives, Republicans, etc. are ridiculous and over the top now, just wait until this time next year!



C'mon 2010!!!!!

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Re Trying to have a conversation with O'Reilly:

Lem said: "Charles has the patience of Job go critical."

Amen!! I would have to stuff something in O'Reilly's face to make him shut up.

The election in Virginia is just things getting back to normal. The all out ACORN push to elect Obama, white guilt and disgust with the Bush later years put the Dems over the top.

The lash back now is that the Dems and Obama in particular have spectacularly lied to the people. They pretended to be moderate left leaning when they turned out to be out and out socialists Hell bent on destroying the U.S.

People woke up. Also the bus loads of ACORN voters just aren't that motivated right now. Short term goals and short term attention spans without the inducement of pay for voting.

Balfegor said...

Deeds seized on the thesis, making it the centerpiece of an advertising campaign designed to convince voters that McDonnell was a right-wing extremist who had undergone a disingenuous campaign-year makeover.

This seems like a somewhat irresponsible thing for the Washington Post to write. Did Deeds seize on the thesis? Or did the Washington Post? I kind of thing WaPo scored an own goal by pushing Deeds to run on wedge social issues. In all honesty, I think Deeds would have been a better (and more moderate) governor than you'd think from his campaign.

But I did my duty, and voted against him this morning.

Penny said...

You know, I don't watch O'Reilly regularly, but each time I do, I am impressed with him.

Would that make me Mary Tyler Moore?

He asks tough, well reasoned questions that are not old as shoe leather, and he calls Mary Katherine Ham on her answers, as much as he calls Juan Williams on his.

I particularly like him best when he hounds either one for avoiding his question with media speak.

John said...

Chase,

Obama is going to set race relations back. His failure is going to lead to the kind of finger pointing you describe. It is sad that the first black President had to be someone so unqualified and out of the mainstream.

Bruce Hayden said...

Obama is going to set race relations back. His failure is going to lead to the kind of finger pointing you describe. It is sad that the first black President had to be someone so unqualified and out of the mainstream.

I agree. Far better, for race relations, if the first Black President had been Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Michael Steele, etc.

Greybeard said...

We are openly discussing "White guilt".
We are openly discussing the fact the man was not vetted for the position, partly because of the "history" of his campaign.
We are discussing the fact you cannot continually use the race card.

Would these topics have been on the front burner had he not been elected?
I didn't vote for him and I think his tenure so far has been a disaster because he's never done anything of import in his life.
But can anyone doubt his election put many previously uncomfortable topics out in the light for discussion?

Chef Mojo said...

It's a good evening to be a Virginian.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

But can anyone doubt his election put many previously uncomfortable topics out in the light for discussion?

Sunlight IS a good disinfectant.

However, excising a festering boil can be painful... at first and most people are afraid of the pain.

edutcher said...

Chef Mojo said...

It's a good evening to be a Virginian.

Obviously a bad night to be Trampas ;)

Jerseyans and New Yorkers should feel as good as you.

WV "ditzxtel" spreadsheet for intellectually challenged woman

Alex said...

HuffPo-ers are spinning it like GOP winning Jersey is no big deal:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/03/virginia-governors-race-2_n_344576.html

Chase said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chase said...

It's 7:23 pm here on the left coast and the AP declared Republican Christie the winner in New Jersey 10 minutes ago.

The New York Times has nothing on it at this moment - they hate that the corrupt Democrat Corzine couldn't pull out a win for Obama.

Looking forward to the NYT editorial on how it really wasn't an important election, and doesn't mean anything about the underlying anger that voters feel about the way Democrats are treating this country.



C'mon, 2010!!!!!

Alex said...

Alas it looks like Hoffman is going to lose in NY-23.

AJ Lynch said...

DBQ:

It was similar to backlash but don't forget we heard it here first when Seven Machos coined the term "blacklash".

jayne_cobb said...

If Hoffman loses in NY does that mean that Biden is more influential than Obama?

edutcher said...

Fox has also called Jersey for Christie

David said...

DBQ" "The election in Virginia is just things getting back to normal."

That's about right.

Republican state (still).
Poor Democratic candidate.
Lousy economy.

I don't think Obama should worry too much about this.

NJ is a little more interesting, but Corzine proved to have feet of clay once he had bottom line responsibility for running a government. It's easy to be a Senator, much harder to govern, as Obama is learning daily.

miller said...

So where are the garages and the MULs now?

Chase said...

They'll be here soon enough.

Come the day after election night 2010, THAT'S when it will be interesting to see what they have to say.

Chase said...

If the night continues to go ill for the Democrats after so much personal investment from the president, what will be the explanation?

Or rather what cannot be the explanations? It cannot be a biased media that misrepresented the issues; it cannot be that liberals were overwhelmed and outspent by right-wing big money; it cannot be that third-party liberals drew votes from mainstream Democrats; it cannot be that we are watching red-state returns from a Mississippi or Texas; it cannot be that mysteriously all three candidates were weak and their campaigns uniformly poorly managed; and it cannot be that race was the issue, given there were only so-called white candidates. Yet I doubt news reports will focus on a grass-roots backlash against Obama's disingenuous health care plan, or unprimed economy, or mega-deficits, or squandered government stimuli, or promised higher taxes, or the nexus between big money and big liberalism, or partisan us/them politics, or serial apologetics abroad.

Tonight for the White House, after 10 rather than 24 months, it is a question of adopting either the model of Clinton triangulation or of Carter's sanctimonous finger-wagging path to irrelevance.


Victor Davis Hanson

avwh said...

VA wasn't so surprising: weak Dem candidate, still mostly a red/purple state, all the polls had this margin at double-digits for quite a while.

NJ, OTOH: Corzine outspent his opponent 3:1; Obama carried this dark blue state by 15 pts. So Christie's win is almost a 20-pt swing from last year, in a deep blue state. THAT has to wake up a lot of Dems who won on Obama's coattails in '08, but aren't in "safe" districts for 2010.

LonewackoDotCom said...

The line appears to be that voters are responding to BHO's economic efforts and worries about the economy. Maybe those voters would care to explain why - at least in the case of NY and probably in the case of NJ - they're voting for Republicans who support MassiveImmigration, something that will make their situation worse. They're running from one group that's willing to screw them to another group that's also willing to screw them.

Here's something you won't hear from almost anyone else: since the stimulus started, hundreds of thousands more foreign citizens got work permits than the number of jobs supposedly saved or created. The newly ascendent tea party loons and the like would actually make that worse; for instance, Hoffman was supporting MassiveImmigration even as millions of Americans don't have jobs.

If that concerns you, hold accountable those who provide you with information, whether cable TV or bloggers.

Balfegor said...

So Christie's win is almost a 20-pt swing from last year, in a deep blue state. THAT has to wake up a lot of Dems who won on Obama's coattails in '08, but aren't in "safe" districts for 2010.

I'm not sure that's the case. It's certainly a humiliation for Obama, but I don't know that there's a direct inference that can be drawn for Democrats up for re-election in 2010. First, given Obama's margin in NJ, you'd think, a priori, that NJ was about as safe a seat as they come.

Second, and more importantly, Corzine was extremely unpopular, and -- with the late-breaking revelation that the Democratic Party in NJ was bankrolling advertisements for the third party spoiler candidate -- his strategy seems to have been to run up a third party candidate to lure anti-Corzine voters who just couldn't bring themselves to vote Republican. To the extent Christie succeeded, I don't think he succeeded by making the case against Corzine (or Obama) -- Corzine made that case himself, with his performance in office. Christie just needed to persuade people it was okay for NJ voters to vote for a Republican. Evidently he succeeded, but that dynamic doesn't look all that close to what we can expect to see in 2010.

Virginia -- a closely divided state that went for Obama by a respectable margin in 2008 -- actually looks like a better guide, except that most Democratic candidates (particularly after watching Deeds crumple) will probably know better than to try to run on wedge social issues. The Washington Post obviously thinks social issues are big winners for Democrats, but they're obviously wrong.

Lem said...

I'm calling NJ for FOX.

I think thats an easy one.

Fred4Pres said...

Corzine even hugged and rubbed Obama.

That is supposed to be good luck.

Lem said...

I'm sorry.. I mean NJ is republican.

This is a very bad for NJ ... I mean this is very bad for the president as he had campained for NJ's incumbent....

bla bla bla

NJ Rules tonight ;)

Lem said...

The elections appear to be a repudiation of the president...

will people be told this?

NIET!

avwh said...

How many Blue Dog Dems, or other Dems in contested districts (meaning they won by less than Obama's 57-42 margin in NJ in '08) are going to commit political suicide and vote for healthcare reform that raises the deficit by well over $1 trillion, if unemployment is still 9-10% and deficits are still running well over $1 trillion a year??

That's definitely committing political suicide - and for what?

Lem said...

People have clearly said NO to Obama care tonight!

Lem said...

Its such a good thing that Obama will listen to the will of the people..

We are so fortunate.

William said...

What are the odds that Obama will read this as a call to tack to the center? My guess is nil. Like Bush authorizing the surge in Iraq, he will double down on his principles. He will probably now call for government takeover of MacDonald's. "The diet of our children is too important to be left in the hands of greedy capitalists."

Quayle said...

Obama needs to get out his mop and start cleaning up the mess that is the Democratic Party tonight.

And I'm not going to say a word about how he holds the mop.

Just mop, dude! Get Joe in there to mop with you.

America, I love you.

1jpb said...

"Obama carried this dark blue state by 15 pts. So Christie's win is almost a 20-pt swing from last year, in a deep blue state."

Is the implication that twenty percent of BHO voters would now vote for McCain if they could re-vote today. Do you need to have a math/science background to think that this sort of logic is stupid (for a variety of reasons)? Just askin'.

Speaking of right wing logic; has the right settled on an explanation for NY-23 if this seat is taken by a D for the first time since the nineteenth century? Hopefully, the explanation demonstrates how BHO is bad and the Barracuda is good, otherwise I'll feel let down (and much less amused.)

Maybe outsider-zealot-know-it-alls on both sides should think about Freudenthal before they get too excited about overruling locals w/ "wisdom" and litmus tests from outsiders.

IMHO, and unquestionably confirmed by all exit polling today, the biggest message sent is that all politics is local. But, I would love for the Rs to think that the clear message is that following the Barracuda and Glenn is the secret to success in the future.

Balfegor said...

What are the odds that Obama will read this as a call to tack to the center? My guess is nil. Like Bush authorizing the surge in Iraq, he will double down on his principles.

I think there's two reasons he'd reject it. One is that healthcare is probably the biggest item motivating opposition to the Democrats' agenda right now. But if he backs down on healthcare, he won't win back voters for the Democrats -- he'll just persuade everyone he's even more of a wimp than they thought and alienate friendly voters too. Getting some kind of health insurance "reform" in place is kind of a do-or-die issue for him now. It's been thoroughly personalised, and has his name all over it. Obama can't afford to back down on "Obamacare" at this point.

And the second is that I'm sure he's got advisers telling him, in all sincerity, that they think he's lagging in the polls because he's not being left-wing enough.

Synova said...

"And the second is that I'm sure he's got advisers telling him, in all sincerity, that they think he's lagging in the polls because he's not being left-wing enough."

That's what comes from believing your own spin... mainly that BusHitler was scary fringe uber conservative.

Lose track of where center is that way.

Balfegor said...

Speaking of right wing logic; has the right settled on an explanation for NY-23 if this seat is taken by a D for the first time since the nineteenth century? Hopefully, the explanation demonstrates how BHO is bad and the Barracuda is good, otherwise I'll feel let down (and much less amused.)

I think the explanation is simply that the Republican leaders in the district badly misread voter mood in the district. Their handpicked candidate imploded in the face of a third party challenger from the Right. And then the weekend before the election, the Republican candidate endorsed the Democratic candidate. Who won.

It was an eminently winnable race for the Republicans, if they had picked a better, centre-right candidate, more like the outgoing Republican congressman. But the local leadership screwed up, ceded most of their base voters to a third party challenger, and then had their candidate turn on them and push voters towards the Democrat.

LoafingOaf said...

HA HA! So much for Sarah Palin's man, Doug Hoffman!


Of course he's whining that the election was "Stolen":

“There are reports that they’re bringing in the troops and they’re bringing in ACORN,” said Hoffman. “I think the Democrats are doing anything they possibly can to steal this election away from the 23rd district.”

Pathetic.

DOUG HOFFMAN LOST!!! Sarah Palin lost! Stick it in your pipes and smoke it.

Balfegor said...

To explain further, I'd guess local Republican leaders in NY-23 thought they had the Republican vote locked up, so they could make a play for running up their numbers by winning over wavering liberals with a liberal candidate like Scozzafava. They were wrong, and Hoffman drank their milkshake.

1jpb said...

Balfegor,

The district has been R for congress for(basically)ever. But, these are not hard core R candidates (or candidate, since that last guy was there for almost two decades). Look at the districts voting history for P.

The point is that this is not the seat that needs to filled by The Club For Growth, The Barracuda, and The Beckinator. Would Dkos choose Freudenthal?

LoafingOaf said...

MASSIVE DEFEAT FOR THE CHRISTIANIST WING OF THE GOP, WHO HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PURGE ALL MODERATES FROM THE PARTY!!!

HOFFMAN HAS LOST!!

And now the jack-ass is saying the election was "stolen" by ACORN! HAHAHAHA!

“There are reports that they’re bringing in the troops and they’re bringing in ACORN,” said Hoffman. “I think the Democrats are doing anything they possibly can to steal this election away from the 23rd district.”

The right-wing blogosphere is busy working on their spin for tomorrow in the wake of this defeat.

Freeman Hunt said...

LoafingOaf, you are aware that many, including Club for Growth which has zero interest in social issues, endorsed Hoffman due to fiscal conservatism, right?

LoafingOaf said...

The out-of-towners who made up 95% of Hoffman's campaign donations have been kicked to the curb in the NY-23 race. THEY LOST! Hoffman is a loser. The Religious Right failed. Sarah Palin failed. It will be an all-spin-zone on the right-wing blogosphere tomorrow on this race.

Balfegor said...

Re: 1jpb:

Re: the district being R since forever (mid 19th c.), I was trying to check up on that, and discovered I have no idea how to do that. When I look on wikipedia, it's clear that there was a Democratic congressman representing NY-23 as late as 1993. But the boundaries of the district seem to change regularly with redistricting.

David said...

Republicans lost NY 23 because they put up a crappy candidate of little distinction with mediocre voter appeal. She was unable to defend her turf on the left or the right. She wasn't forced out by right wingers, she was rejected by voters of all types and quit.

Dems lost in Va. in part because they had a bad candidate. They won recently with good ones. Corzine lost in NY because he has been a lousy governor.

Republicans are not well known for candidate recruitment expertise, especially at the local level.

We are still a middle of the road nation. In most places a competent and attractive middle of the roader can win in either party.

daubiere said...

wow. hang on to what you can, I guess, loaf. myself, i dont get so... excited about trivial politics but i have, you know, other things in my life. did you jizz in your pants a little? what does this have to do with sarah palin? it seems like you have some sort of... problem.

cnn hasn't called the ny 23rd election yet. so far the liberal democrat dropout scozzafava has received 6654 votes. how does that happen? who votes for a dropout? i never understand that. but since shes got an R after her name, ill count those votes as going toward the conservative side, therefore hoffman wins.

David said...

Correction: Corzine lost in NJ. In NY he might have won. Who knows?

LoafingOaf said...

Freeman Hunt: I'm aware that the right-wing blogosphere and the social conervatives have been focusing on the Hoffman race to tell the "RINOS" that they are "radical leftists" who are not welcome in the big tent of the GOP. But the voters rejected Doug Hoffman. He lost and is now whining about how the election was "stolen."

daubiere said...

"In most places a competent and attractive middle of the roader can win in either party."

so can incompetent radicals who pretend to be competent attractive middle of the roaders.

hence, president obama!

daubiere said...

"He lost and is now whining about how the election was "stolen."

hey, we learned that little trick by listening to your party whine about stolen elections from 2000-2006.

daubiere said...

and the gop deserved to lose ny23 for the crappy liberal democrat they tried to foist on the voters.

Synova said...

As far as those supporting Hoffman go... they'd have liked if he won, but have been saying over and over and over that there was no difference between the Democrat and the official Republican candidate. There was no *win* if she won because she'd be voting for all the Dem bills anyway, given her voting record, and give the Democrats "bi-partisan" coverage besides. Owen wins and the Dems own his votes, which is better than nothing.

People are highly annoyed at Republicans and the Republican party... and it is not because Republicans aren't liberal enough or don't spend enough or aren't in favor of card check.

1jpb said...

Balfegor,

The R history isn't in dispute. That mess of redistricting in your link is the cause for confusion. But, apples to apples, nobody disputes that Rs have dominated this seat since the nineteenth century.

Here's an AP link via the google. But, I've also read the same thing in other places.

Bruce Hayden said...

I don't see President Obama really changing his tune, though I think that he should. It may take the 2010 elections for that.

BUT, the place where I expect to see some movement is with the Blue Dog Democrats, many of whom are probably second guessing their marching orders to sacrifice their newly acquired seats for the good of Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid, and their ObamaCare and Cap and Trade initiatives. Pelosi has stated that she was willing to sacrifice some of those seats for her legislative agenda. The question is whether the occupants of those seats are as enthusiastic as she is for that sacrifice.

There is some indication that the voting on those measures may be put off for a bit. We shall see.

LoafingOaf said...

daubiere said...
wow. hang on to what you can, I guess, loaf. myself, i dont get so... excited about trivial politics but i have, you know, other things in my life. did you jizz in your pants a little? what does this have to do with sarah palin? it seems like you have some sort of... problem.

HAHA! You lost and are now trying to act like you don't care that you lost. Nice try. But had Hoffman won, we'd never hear the end of it. Well, congrats, you just lost a seat in a Republican stronghold because of your jihad against moderates.

Balfegor said...

Here's an AP link via the google. But, I've also read the same thing in other places.

I've seen the factoid in a zillion places too -- just never seen anyone explain to me how they've put together a meaningful apples-to-apples comparison. McHugh's old district, before he got redistricted into NY-23, was NY-24, which turned Democrat in 2006 (McHugh and another Republican congressman seem to have switched district numbers in 2003, and the components of their districts all jumbled. Or something).

Cedarford said...

Hoffman's loss does indicate the night is not all Republican. Dems added to their Congressional plurality by poaching a seat that was traditionally (for almost 5 decades) a moderate Republican seat.

It is also a telling moment for those who want "movement conservatives of utmost ideological purity" running instead of "lowlife RINOS".

Sorry, true believers, The Goddess of the Right, Palin, had voters as impressed with what she thought as seeing Obama being kissy-kissy with John Corzine.

The "pure movement conservatives" are not electable outside regions of the country that do not believe in evolution.
They try, and they can be like as the smart, gay, Jewish and quite corrupt Barney Frank said of Ralph Nader: "Luxuriating in the purity of his irrelevance"

Freeman Hunt said...

Well, congrats, you just lost a seat in a Republican stronghold because of your jihad against moderates.

Except that she wasn't a moderate. She was a liberal. What good would it have done conservatives or libertarians to elect a liberal with an (R) by her name?

1jpb said...

Loafing is right, when the Conservatives lose NY-23 their night is going to be seriously diminished. VA was certain. Corzine had an approval in the thirties. But, in NY the Rs always win, and The Barracuda was spreading her starbursts at the same time Glenn was 9/12ing. And, that was the race that the Rs lost.

The R explanations will be awesome.

Yes, the Ds lost VA and NJ, but the BHO folks must love the R clusterfuck they created by taking McHugh.

daubiere said...

"HAHA! You lost and are now trying to act like you don't care that you lost. Nice try. But had Hoffman won, we'd never hear the end of it. Well, congrats, you just lost a seat in a Republican stronghold because of your jihad against moderates."

i didnt lose, buddy. I dont live in ny. i dont care that much, except i do think its a valuable lesson for the gop not to run liberal democrats for republican seats. theres a difference between a moderate republican and a democrat. id be happier if there were more socially moderate republicans, but it wasnt scozzafavas social moderate beliefs that turned me off of her.

but again, it was a local race and the locals decided it. not in my hands.

Balfegor said...

It is also a telling moment for those who want "movement conservatives of utmost ideological purity" running instead of "lowlife RINOS".

There are people on the Right who want utmost ideological purity sure. But there wouldn't have been space for a challenger on the Right had the local party bosses nominated someone broadly acceptable to the Republican base. Instead, they flubbed their choice, and nominated a woman who (a) was considerably more liberal than the Republicans in the district, and (b) was a terrible campaigner besides. I mean, Owens and Hoffman weren't brilliant campaigners, from what little I could see (on, uh, youtube), but neither called the police just because a reporter was asking them questions. Republicans lost the election the moment they nominated Scozzafava.

daubiere said...

"The R explanations will be awesome. "

whatever helps you sleep at night :)

you lost new jersey. hahaha.

Synova said...

"Well, congrats, you just lost a seat in a Republican stronghold because of your jihad against moderates."

How?

How did we (for sake of argument, we) lose a seat?

The Republicans did not have a seat there to lose.

daubiere said...

"Republicans lost the election the moment they nominated Scozzafava."

exactly! the gop deserved to lose that seat and they deserve to suffer for it. and nothing spells suffering like having a democrat running things.

the gop needs to learn that when they abandon their principles for political expediency, pain will result. obama and a democrat legislature should have taught them that. maybe ny23 will.

Balfegor said...

The Republicans did not have a seat there to lose.

Yes they did. But they nominated Scozzafava. The Conservative party nominated Hoffman in response. Even without massive out-of-district support, Hoffman would probably have bled 20% of Scozzafava's support -- I think that's about where he was polling before Palin et al. intervened, his numbers shot up, and Scozzafava's numbers shot down. Given Scozzafava's poor performance at basic campaigning, it's hard to imagine she would have been able to beat Owens once the Conservative Party named Hoffman, to challenge her from the right.

Methadras said...

I'm not going to gloat because all I have to say is that these fuckers better not fuck it up. If this is meant to be a referendum on Obama politics, leftist politics, leftism in general, then these conservatives better govern like conservatives and show how conservative principals will be effective in creating real prosperity with as much limits on government as possible. If they don't then the conservative movement will suffer a severe setback and frankly one which I think will be irreparable. You got what you wanted conservatives, now go lead and live by your conservative principals and lets see what can be done.

Balfegor said...

You got what you wanted conservatives, now go lead and live by your conservative principals and lets see what can be done.

haha. Yeah, unfortunately, Christie's kind of screwed, with the political state NJ is in. But McDonnell might be able to pull something out for Virginia.

1jpb said...

Conservatives,

Now it's time to regroup. Get rid of Crist!!!! Get rid of Crist!!!! Get rid of Crist!!!! Get rid of Crist!!!!

Go Marco!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

daubiere said...

jesus what is with the embarrassingly excitable democrats around here?!?

LoafingOaf said...

daubiere said...
i didnt lose, buddy. I dont live in ny. i dont care that much, except i do think its a valuable lesson for the gop not to run liberal democrats for republican seats.

Both parties pushed moderates in that race because they knew that's what the people in that district favored.

but again, it was a local race and the locals decided it. not in my hands.

95% of Hoffman's money came from out of town!! National figures of the religious-right endorsed Hoffman, and were using the race to send a message to "RINO"/moderate Republicans.

Well, here's a message to the hard right social conservatives. You ain't gonna win jack squat if you take down the "big tent" and tell the moderates of your party that they are not welcome.

Limbaugh, Palin Urge Right to Purge Moderates From Republican Party

Right wing purists egged on by Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin fought to capture an upstate House seat Monday and electrify their drive to purge moderates from the Republican Party.

With Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman jumping to the lead in a new poll, the hard-core right smelled a chance to remold the GOP in the image of raucous town hall protests and "tea party" rallies of the summer.

"Moderates by definition have no principles," Limbaugh huffed on his radio show yesterday. He predicted that "RINOs" - a putdown acronym of "Republicans In Name Only" - "may become extinct."

***

Democrats, led by the Obama White House, aimed to exploit the turmoil by winning a district their party hasn't held since the 19th century.

Way to go Rush, Palin, and the rest of those on the purge of the moderates......

"The most extreme wing of the Republican Party made it clear in this campaign that they're not going to tolerate any dissent," Vice President Biden said as he stumped in Watertown, near the Canadian border, for Democratic candidate Bill Owens.

Biden was right. Althouse - who used to claim she was a moderate voice - was quite excited by Hoffman, Palin, Rush, and the purge of moderates from the GOP. Maybe she's been listening to Rush too much....

Biden urged centrists to vote for Owens to "teach a lesson" to the right.

And that's what they did. :)

Balfegor said...

jesus what is with the embarrassingly excitable democrats around here?!?

They lost two governorships. But hey, they captured an historically Republican congressional seat! It's a fair trade.

Alex said...

Wait, the GOP wins 2 blue states(VA & NJ) and Loafing Oaf is giddy with excitement? Tell me I'm missing something...

Freeman Hunt said...

LoafingOaf, again, do you not realize that a huge amount of Hoffman support had absolutely nothing to do with social conservatism?

gk1 said...

Our excitable democrats have little to cheer about other than the 23rd dist. Virginia was a slaughter. Even the down ticket races bled red. New Jersey an incumbent democratic millionaire spent 40 million dollars of his own money in one of the bluest states and still lost. Hey, why not talk about Palin?

Balfegor said...

Biden was right. Althouse - who used to claim she was a moderate voice - was quite excited by Hoffman, Palin, Rush, and the purge of moderates from the GOP.

This has been her thing for a while, though -- recall that back during the 2008 election, she opposed McCain, not on the issues per se, but apparently because, as a moderate Republican who regularly sold out conservative principles to get deals done in the Senate, he was an insufficiently conservative flagbearer for the GOP. She seems to want, structurally, two parties with two distinct ideologies. Republicans nominating candidates like Scozzafava, who are basically Democrats (DS was socially liberal, and supported the stimulus and various other legislation that Republicans almost uniformly opposed) doesn't help draw those distinctions at all.

On the other hand, I do vaguely recall her being in favour of adding conservative Democrats, like Sen. Webb in VA, to the Democratic party. So maybe she is a closet conservative. Heh.

Cedarford said...

I wouldn't call either Christie or McDonnell "conservative litmus test passers".

McDonnell refused to accept the "conservative values" bait and ran as a pragmatic man who first and foremost cared about jobs, the economy, and local Virginia issues.

Christie is a pro gay rights, pro gun control moderate who says that he is personally pro life, but abortion law is settled law.

AS Haley Barbour said, better a RINO any day in the North than the Joe Lieberman movement conservatives in thrall of the Neocons profess to love. "Better a so-called RINO that sides with Republican issues and votes 80% of the time than a Lieberman that votes with liberal Democrats 95% of the time".

Alex said...

Meanwhile in liberal Seattle, an initiative that would have cut property taxes went down in flames. I swear the people here drink kool-aid all the time no matter WHAT is happening. The good news is that sooner or later the leftist chickens come home to roost.

Freeman Hunt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Balfegor said...

Christie is a pro gay rights, pro gun control moderate who says that he is personally pro life, but abortion law is settled law.

Depends what you mean by "pro gay rights." Nowadays, that usually means gay marriage. And Christie is pretty clearly against that. He's actually quite right-wing on social issues.

And re: McDonnell, he may not have run on social issues himself, but they were certainly aired widely in the campaign. That's basically the only concrete thing Deeds campaigned on -- how right-wing McDonnell is, on social issues.

LoafingOaf said...

The first Democrat victory in NY-23 in over a century!! Brought to you by Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Glenn Beck. Start spinning it, Instapundit!

Freeman Hunt said...

On the upside of Hoffman losing, people will see how tough it is to go third party. Had he won, there may have been third party split-offs all over the place next election cycle, and the GOP would have lost a bunch of races to liberal Democrats that it could have won.

gk1 said...

Maybe I missed something but have the called the 23rd dist race yet? I just read Owen's is only 2,500 votes ahead and there are 11,000 absentee ballots to count still. Is this old news? Is is over?

1jpb said...

Conservatives,

Other than Crist, who else should be targeted for a purge?

Snowe seems really bad.

Look here we have dozen ready to go.

Let's think of another dozen.

9/12ers in the comment folks?

Freeman Hunt said...

Bunch of news stations have called it for Owens.

LoafingOaf said...

Alex said...
Wait, the GOP wins 2 blue states(VA & NJ) and Loafing Oaf is giddy with excitement? Tell me I'm missing something...

I ain't a Democrat. I'm quite happy that Corzine lost. And, in general, I don't like that the Democrats have such un-checked power at the moment. I like checks and balances. But NY-23 was being used by the hard right to help them "purify" the GOP, so I'm glad the social conservatives were defeated there.

LoafingOaf said...

IMO, it would be nice if the GOP took back the House and/or Senate in 2010. Lots of good things happened for America when Clinton was in the White House and the GOP took Congress. That got us much-needed welfare reform, for example.

Balfegor said...

On the upside of Hoffman losing, people will see how tough it is to go third party. Had he won, there may have been third party split-offs all over the place next election cycle, and the GOP would have lost a bunch of races to liberal Democrats that it could have won.

I think this fear is overblown. Hoffman ran, initially, with the support of the Conservative Party of New York, which has been around for decades. It's not some new start-up. It's even fielded a few candidates who won with just a Conservative nomination, rather than with cross-nominations from the Republicans or Democrats. Other, newer third parties won't have that same institutional heft.

I think the broader point to be drawn is that the Conservative Party of New York fulfilled its traditional role, which is to pull the Republican Party in New York to the Right by pulling votes away from candidates who are too far to the left. Other local party bosses in NY will hesitate to nominate candidates like Scozzafava, now that their vulnerability on the Right has been made so painfully clear. Obviously, on a national level, Republican leaders would have preferred that Hoffman win and caucus with the Republicans (given that their alternatives were Scozzafava and Owens). But they'd probably have preferred local Republicans to nominate a centre-right Republican instead. Then the Conservative Party wouldn't have kicked in a third party challenge, national Republicans wouldn't have had to choose between a liberal Republican and a conservative Conservative party candidate, and we'd probably still have a Republican congressman in NY-23.

Alex said...

LoafingOaf - IF NY-23 was a rejection of social conservatives and not just a messed up election where 7000 votes went to the dropped-out candidate, then sure I'll agree with you. But I would hardly make too much out of such a close result. However, an 18-point trouncing in Virginia and 5-6 point win in Jersey should scare blue dog Dems shitless of following the most left-wing of Obama/Pelosi agenda. No public option!

LoafingOaf said...

Freeman Hunt said...
LoafingOaf, again, do you not realize that a huge amount of Hoffman support had absolutely nothing to do with social conservatism?

I think, amongst those outside of that district who were all worked up and sending money to Hoffman, it was mostly about social issues.

Synova said...

"Better a so-called RINO that sides with Republican issues and votes 80% of the time than a Lieberman that votes with liberal Democrats 95% of the time".

Well, sure, C4.

But I'm pretty sure that voting with your party 80% of the time isn't what we're talking about. Being called a RINO is one thing. Voting *left* of the Democrats is another.

The thing is that the Republicans we're talking about who *won* and even Hoffman who didn't, aren't super-duper ulta-scary conservatives by any *objective* measure. That they are vilified as such is politics, nothing more.

This entire "purity" thing is one huge Straw Man set up in order to make the claim that, well, that Tea Partiers are somehow radical and can be ignored and that there are NO NO NO Republicans right of Scozzafava that aren't dangerous radicals and that they can be ignored, too.

That's just a bunch of BS. There ought to be a discernible difference... not *purity*... just enough difference so a person can distinguish between those running for each party.

Alex said...

LoafingOaf - do you have any evidence that Palin is pushing mostly social conservatism? Because I've heard mostly fiscal stuff from her in the last 6 months. Now if the MSM wants to continue painting her in a religious nutbag way that is their bias and dysfunction.

Alex said...

You can always count on C4 to go after the Jewish angle. I seriously hope nobody he does business knows he's a raging Jew-hater.

Synova said...

"I think, amongst those outside of that district who were all worked up and sending money to Hoffman, it was mostly about social issues."

That's because that is the answer that conforms to YOUR world view.

A person can say, "I care about government spending, the gawd aweful stimulous, government take over and dictation to private companies and how creating jobs seems not to be on the radar of anyone in Washington", and you will hear it and translate it to, "I hate gays."

Alex said...

LoafingOaf - stop reading too much into the NY-23 and calm down. I give the chances of the GOP regaining Congress in 2010 as much higher now then 24 hours ago. Which you just said would be a good thing for America.

Synova said...

"LoafingOaf - do you have any evidence that Palin is pushing mostly social conservatism? Because I've heard mostly fiscal stuff from her in the last 6 months."

And her public record shows that she doesn't and *hasn't* pushed social conservatism in the past. The facts are actually the opposite of Oaf's opinions.

LoafingOaf has a faith based belief system.

Alex said...

More evidence NY-23 is not a disaster:

http://volokh.com/2009/11/04/another-good-night-for-the-second-amendment/

Apparently Owens is very strong on the 2nd amendment. So why would HuffPo-types be glad about this result if Owens is just another blue dog?

Balfegor said...

Apparently Owens is very strong on the 2nd amendment. So why would HuffPo-types be glad about this result if Owens is just another blue dog?

Every incremental Democratic House member is a Democratic House member Pelosi can try to bully into supporting the health care reform bill.

Synova said...

I wonder how he is on Card Check.

Alex said...

Every incremental Democratic House member is a Democratic House member Pelosi can try to bully into supporting the health care reform bill.

That makes no sense. Did Owens campaign on being pro-public option? If anything the results today in VA & NJ should indicate that public option is DEAD.

avwh said...

Funny how much attention the NY-23 race got, as though this was a "purity test" or Civil War of some sort, when local Republican committee chairs essentially nominated a Dem (as her positions showed, and her endorsement of the Dem in the end confirmed).

Yet, MoveOn.org is actively campaigning to defeat any Democratic senator who does not fully support Obamacare. And MoveOn is already planning radio ads targeting Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu and Arkansas Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln over the health care issue.

As Powerline reported, "Somehow, though, the fact that the far left is raising millions to defeat center-left Democrats, in what could be a reprise of the suicidal Ned Lamont campaign that was mounted by the same people, doesn't even register on the media radar screen."

Alex said...

avwh - who are these people giving money to MoveOn.org to defeat moderate Dems? Aren't we in a recession? I haven't given any money to the GOP in over a year.

avwh said...

I don't know who they are - maybe a mix of well-heeled Hollywood types and small donors cultivated from the anti-war movement email lists MoveOn gathered since 2002?

MoveOn claimed to have raised $2M in 24 hours to specifically target the Dem Senators I mentioned earlier.

LoafingOaf said...

Ohhh, so now that the hard right's candidate was kicked to the curb in NY-23, we're not supposed to read anything into that race. Had Hoffman won, of course, we'd be hearing - endlessly - from the hard right about its importance.

This is the first time a Democrat has won that district in over a century. Another defeat for the Palin crowd.

Alex said...

LoafingOaf - I know you hate the hard right, but do you hate the hard left too?

LoafingOaf said...

Apparently Owens is very strong on the 2nd amendment.

Owens is a centrist Democrat. Michelle Malkin and all the others in the right-wing blogosphere labeled the Republican candidate in that race - Scozzafava - a "radical leftist" (Malkin had that label for Scozzafava as part of a headline the other day). Neither Scozzafava nor Owens are "radical leftists", of course. They're perfectly mainstream Americans. Hoffman, however, IS a hardcore right-wing ideologue, on the fringe.

Strange that so-called moderate Althouse was so into Hoffman. One of the main reasons Hoffman was getting lots of money from social conservatives around the country was because Scozzafava doesn't hate gay people -- that was one of the main reasons she was labeled a "radical leftist" by the hard right.

reader_iam said...

OK, I get it.

1) Hoffman was in the mainstream for the specific race in which he was competing.

2) Christie was out of the mainstream for the specific race in which he was competing.

3) I'm a complete idiot, as always I have been, in addition to being uninformed, unaware, stupid and naive--just for starters.

OK. I get it.

reader_iam said...

I do, emphatically, as always I have, oppose "card check." FWIW.

LoafingOaf said...

Alex said...
LoafingOaf - I know you hate the hard right, but do you hate the hard left too?

Yes. As far as I can tell, the hard left not only opposed taking down that genocidal maniac in Iraq, but they also opposed us going into Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11! And, usually when I discuss 9/11 with someone on the hard left, they try and tell me it was an inside job.

They also seem gung-ho about universal health care and the global warming thing because they see both as an opportunity to control us and advance some "progressive"/socialist re-making of the USA. Look how they went after the SuperFreakonomics authors because they couldn't stand the idea that there may be solutions to global warming that don't let them dictate our lifestyles.

reader_iam said...

So far as I am concerned, regardless of this piddling election,I think the ongoing cooperation to screw the pooch of limited government will march onward. People of all stripes say and even often think they're against that.

They're wrong. They aren't.

Alex said...

reader - I am for limited government. I say slash welfare, Medicare and SocSec 50%! End public education. Abolish 50% of the Federal government right away.

LoafingOaf said...

And, btw, no one knows more about how terrible Democrat rule can be than someone - like myself - who lives in the industrial midwest. I live in Cleveland. We have had mostly single-party Democrat rule for my whole life. And it is so sad what has happened and is happening in this city. I despair at what I see every day! So, no, I'm no fan of Democrats.

But I don't like this demonization of centrists. I wanna see the federal government return to a situation where the there is a lot of checks and balances going on and centrism carries the day. America seems to do best when that is the situation in Washington.

reader_iam said...

Alex: You're a piker. There's no chance you and I will engage.

former law student said...

Except that [Scozzafava] wasn't a moderate. She was a liberal.

Except to liberals she wasn't a liberal. To liberals she was center-right.

People on the fringes think they're mainstream.

As far as governors go, I support split government. Having a Democratic legislature with a Democratic governor was disastrous for California. Not even the moderate Schwarzenegger -- a man who never would have been nominated in the prevailing anti-RINO climate -- could find a sense of reason to appeal to.

Even more, I support throwing the rascals out. Although broke-ass Virginia seems to have elected a fantasist who thinks he can raise money for roads without raising taxes. Let them take up the challenges they were eager to tackle.

Donal said...

I'm puzzled over the reaction of those who think the NY 23 race was some huge defeat for conservatism. Scozzafava got 6,600 votes, and Hoffman lost by 4800 votes. The most likely reason someone who dropped out of the race would get votes is because the voters voted a straight Republican ticket. So logically if the Republican party had nominated someone like Hoffman they likely would have won NY 23.

This defeat is one for the Republican party that thinks they can nominate someone more to the left then a blue dog Democrat and still get the conservative vote. It's a victory for those who want a more conservative Republican party. Now the question is can that party win independent votes and that remains to be seen.

LoafingOaf said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LoafingOaf said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LoafingOaf said...

Comment from above: It's a victory for those who want a more conservative Republican party.

That is the spin going out on the right-wing blogosphere, now entering the comments of the Althouse blog.

The hard right creamed all over Hoffman, sent him hella money, and held this race up as how they will send a message to "RINO"/moderate Republicans. Now they are spinning that their DEFEAT is really a VICTORY. LOLOL!! Get a load of these people. They get sillier by the day. Althouse will probably do some variation on that spin tomorrow, btw.

Facts are facts. Or, as a former Althouse blogger (Simon) titled his blog: stubborn facts. NY-23 has gone Republican for over a century, until Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh meddled - trying to use the race as an opportuity to send a message to RINO/moderate Republicans across the country - and handed it to the Democrat.

But the spin is going out to all the hard right bloggers. Here, from Redstate's Erick Erickson: "The race has now been called for Democrat Bill Owens. This is a huge win for conservatives."

ROFL!!!! Watch as all the right-wing bloggers echo this ridiculous claim tomorrow.

Michael McNeil said...

LoafingOaf sez:
Start spinning it, Instapundit!

What nonsense. Rather, Reynolds well before the election, in a piece in the Washington Examiner datelined Oct. 31, foresaw much this result:

“[I]in fact, what happens Tuesday is the least important thing about NY-23.

“Whether it's the official Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava (whom many Republicans find too liberal), the insurgent Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, or the Democrat, Bill Owens, Tuesday's victor will have to face another election in just a year. A Democrat won't expand Nancy Pelosi's majority significantly, and a Republican or Conservative won't diminish it enough to matter. For all practical purposes, it won't change Congress.

“The real game changer, if any, will be what comes after the election. […]

“Though the media and the Democratic Party tried to portray the Tea Party movement as Republican-organized ‘astroturf,’ the GOP only wishes that were the case. Tea Partiers are still reachable by the GOP, but if the GOP mishandles things, a Perot-style challenge is very possible.

“If Hoffman wins, or even hands the election to Democrat Bill Owens, the grass-roots activists will feel that they've sent a message, and will watch to see if the GOP establishment responds. If the GOP plays its cards right, and indicates that it's received the message that people want a hard line on spending and corruption and smaller government, that energy can be harnessed and put toward the 2010 elections. If it seems, on the other hand, that the GOP still doesn't get it, and if the response is condescending or dismissive, then, well, anything can happen. […]

“Likewise, if Tea Partiers get too carried away and full of themselves — like the Nader Democrats of 2000 — they will wind up handing the elections to people they really don't want running the country. The third-party threat is a good way to get the GOP establishment's attention, but, as they say, the value of the sword of Damocles is that it hangs, not that it falls. Like a nuclear deterrent, it's a threat that's best not employed.”

miller said...

I think the real lesson here is that when Obama campaigns for something it loses.

Obama campaiged for Deeds. Deeds lost.
Obama campaigned for Corzine. Corzine lost.
Obama campaigned for the Chicago Olympics. Chicago lost.

Obama did NOT campaign for Owens. Owens has [apparently] won.

See the trend here?

Obama is radioactive for Democrats. Time to dump him!

miller said...

Oh, and Obama is campaigning for socialized health care.

I'd predict that will lose, too, but then I'm such a negative guy who isn't charmed by the glow of the Man-child President.

Slow Joe said...

I see that democrats only want to talk about NY 23, instead of the huge races in Virginia, which was not what the democrats initially expected, or New Jersey, which is stunning altogether.

The states Obama will have to campaign in are many. It'll be interesting to watch.

Hoffman is called an 'extreme extreme far right winger' by the democrats. It's stunning how they have to throw that in. Well, if that's the case, then a very moderate Owens only slightly beat an extreme conservative in a district that favored Obama in 2008, and has an voting index of GOP +1% (it's therefore a very moderate district). That's a victory for the dems, but it includes huge caveats that something has scared the voters away from democrats.

That's not even getting to how the GOP was vicious in attacking Hoffman. When your own party attacks you, that carries credibility with voters. Yet Hoffman almost won... he went from 5% to 46% in 14 days.

So Democrats should be careful about NY 23, a geographic area that was in democrat hands in the 1990s, 1970s, 1950s, etc. Basically a very moderate place that, with Hoffman's circumstance and 'extremism', they should have not expected a serious contest.

mrs whatsit said...

A few points about the Congressional race from someone who lives in upstate NY (not in district 23, but nearby.)

1) We have been inundated with TV commercials here. On TV, Hoffman comes across as exceedingly weird, skinny and overeager with googly eyes, bright yellow teeth, and an odd, halting way of speaking. He kept repeating a slogan that he was a common-sense Reagan conservative and common sense isn't so common any more. It got annoying.

Owens, by contrast, is big and rugged-looking. He's an Air Force veteran and he has that military solidity, calm and self-possession. He seems like a country guy, and this is a rural district. He presented himself as a centrist. On the human level, Owens is the kind of person voters around here feel comfortable with. Hoffman's not. Neither was Scozzafazza.

2) On the numbers -- as of this morning, with 93 percent of the vote counted, the math-challenged local newspaper is reporting that the split is 46 percent Hoffman, 49 percent Owens, and 6 percent Scozzafazza, who was still on the ballot, not having quit until Saturday. (Adds up to 101 percent, but who's counting?) In any event, Scozzafazza's vote is bigger than the split, which seems to put most attempts to diagnose the Owens/Hoffman outcome into guesswork territory.

Owens came across as to the right of Ms. Scozzafazza, whose ads emphasized her support for such lefty favorites as card check. Hoffman, by contrast, seemed to belong pretty far over on the right. Upstate NY has traditionally been rock-ribbed Republican but has been trending Democratic recently, with the result that Blue Dog Democrats and other center-tending politicos have been doing well. I don't think the Owen win has as much to do with the candidates' political parties, though, as it does with who they are personally and with their ad presentations.

Slow Joe said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district

This area's congressional representative has swung from democrats to republicans over and over again.

Democrats are saying that this district was GOP for 100 years, which is just flat inaccurate. Not to mention not very relevant, since the GOP dropped out of the race, and Hoffman winning would also have taken the seat out of the GOP.

Hoffman almost won this thing... he was at 5% two weeks ago when Palin and the Tea partiers got really involved. He was viciously attacked by the NRCC, who said he could not be elected to any office ,let alone congress, and had no integrity. He was attacked by the democrats even more fiercely, with the entire national apparatus calling him an extremist, based on complete fictions.

Then, the GOP candidate actually dropped out and endorsed the democrat! How did Hoffman do as well as he did? It seems superhuman to me. He only has 4 months until the GOP primary, and we'll see if Owens keeps the seat.

What's amusing is that this oddball race, one that shows that the TEA party and Palin have a lot of influence, but was an oddball in many ways, is considered some kind of proof that Palin and the TEA partiers are irrelevant.

We all know that no democrats really believe that crap. They are just trying to spin. Had Scozzafava won this thing, NY 23 would be much worse off, with a crooked monster in power for the next 25 years. Instead, they will get to see Hoffman or some other conservative in a FAIR FIGHT, starting in only a couple of months (if not right now).

Slow Joe said...

mrs whatsit,

That's a good point.

Hoffman is not a polished candidate. He's a complete nobody who took on both major parties.

Owens is a better looking man.

We live in an era where Abraham Lincoln would have lost an election to JFK. The normal looking people just don't cut it.

And yet, Hoffman came within breathing distance. Owens is going to do a better job than Scozzafava in representing New Yorkers, and he is a moderate. I'm not sure if Hoffman is all that extreme (I know he's pretty soft on immigration and would probably be called a RINO but for the circumstances, since he's technically a RINOT). But with Palin being labeled an extremist, and the TEA partiers being called violent rabble racists, I can understand the idea that Hoffman is extreme.

No one ever really explains the policy that makes Hoffman extreme (if there was one, we'd hear it).

But Hoffman needed a lot more time and a lot less NRCC flack to get the voters to understand him... instead, we heard about how his teeth were yellow about a million times.

kentuckyliz said...

I didn't vote for Obama because I'm Catholic and used to functioning well with guilt. LOL

Give me a black president I can vote for!

Camacho 2012!

kentuckyliz said...

Comedy Central has been showing "Idiocracy" which should be required viewing before every election.

ricpic said...

New Jersey went Republican? New Jersey?! That is not only huge, it's hugh.

Make no mistake, the blue dogs have been put on notice and will not commit mass political suicide for their boy king.

Pogo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Crimso said...

"Speaking of right wing logic; has the right settled on an explanation for NY-23 if this seat is taken by a D for the first time since the nineteenth century?"

Though I'm not "the right," I'm jumping ahead through the comments to go ahead and address this bit of brilliance, so forgive me if someone else beat me to the obvious.

"Do you need to have a math/science background to" understand that if the R's have had the seat since the 19th century, and the R candidate withdraws from the race and endorses the D, that the D would win the seat for the first time since the 19th century?

traditionalguy said...

Lots of hot air here today about Republicans losing NY23. They gave it away to a liberal Democrat for unknown reasons. Then the CPA figured out the slimey deal was wrong and he had the guts to fight and came within 2% of reversing that total disaster. In the end he caused a better outcome anyway by electing a conservative Democrat instead of the superliberal 5th columnist democrat running as a Republican.

Freeman Hunt said...

I think, amongst those outside of that district who were all worked up and sending money to Hoffman, it was mostly about social issues.

But you are clearly mistaken. Club for Growth was bringing in a lot of outside money, and the Club has no interest in social issues at all.

Rose said...

In case you haven’t seen it:
Photo of the Day – Jon Corzine seen scraping “Yes We Can” bumper sticker off of NJ state SUV