Althouse: "How Lisa Murkowski (might have) lost."

August 25, 2010

"How Lisa Murkowski (might have) lost."

Explaining Joe Miller.

77 comments:

Drew said...: And because neither of the two candidates here are Democrats, we don't need to worry about the sudden discovery of ballots in a car trunk.; 8/25/10, 11:06 AM
traditionalguy said...: Let me get this straight. Murkowski was appointed by her father when he was Governor and Stevens was Senator. Palin stands up to the corruption and defeats Governor Murkowski while the Feds go after Stevens re-election bid with corruption charges. Now Palin nails Lisa's seat in the Senate by pushing a newcomer that is not corrupt. So that is Palin stopping corruption. Therefore Palin is bad and corruption is good. The Media have got their work cut out for them with this Palin narrative.; 8/25/10, 11:10 AM
Opus One Media said...: or in a state where apparently moose can vote there is no depth to the bottom of this lake.; 8/25/10, 11:14 AM
Drew said...: What's funnier is all the "This proves Palin's a loser!" editorials that were pushed yesterday, when everyone thought Murkowski would win easily.; 8/25/10, 11:14 AM
AllenS said...: So a moose is closer to an elephant than a donkey? Who do polar bears vote for?; 8/25/10, 11:17 AM
Richard Dolan said...: When an established incumbent loses, it's usually because the voters didn't like the incumbent all that much. That story will play out big time on Nov. 2.

The Congress that convenes in January will have a very different feel, not only because it will be controlled by Reps but also because so many of the new Rep senators and house members will be inexperienced newcomers to politics. It will be a wild ride for a while.; 8/25/10, 11:20 AM
kent said...: "Palin had an extremely good night on Tuesday as all five of her endorsed candidates in Florida, Arizona and Alaska appeared to win."

Heh-heh-heh. SUCK on it, naysayers.; 8/25/10, 11:27 AM
Opus One Media said...: kent said...
"Palin had an extremely good night on Tuesday ...Heh-heh-heh. SUCK on it, naysayers."

don't misundstand Kent - I want nothing more than Sarah at the head of the GOP, running things, making decisions, out in front - leading the charge...

oh to sleep perchance to dream....; 8/25/10, 11:33 AM
MadisonMan said...: I thought it interesting that about 16% of the votes were by absentee ballot. That seems like a large number -- but I think it's increasingly common (I know plenty of people who only vote absentee).

If 16% of the votes are routinely sort-of unknown at the end of the voting day, it's gonna make for very interesting returns nights in the future.; 8/25/10, 11:33 AM
kent said...: I want nothing more than Sarah at the head of the GOP

Of course you do.; 8/25/10, 11:42 AM
Greg said...: HDHouse: try not to get your sheets dirty; 8/25/10, 11:44 AM
Calypso Facto said...: MM: I think Alaska has a disproportionate absentee ballot population because it has a large military presence and since the state levies no income tax, many servicemen (persons?) change their home of record to AK when stationed there. This SHOULD bode well for Miller.

As a former Alaskan, concurrent college student with Joe, and current admirer of his philosophy, I recently made my first out of state political donation to the Miller campaign. Hope he can pull off the upset!; 8/25/10, 11:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Mr House, how about you fix the political cesspool known as your home state of New York before anywhere or anyone else, eh?

With the myriad problems we have right here in N.Y. you never say a word.

Your phobia about Sarah Palin is beyond tedious and tiresome; 8/25/10, 12:13 PM
Anonymous said...: "How did we get here?"

We, meaning Democrats? Does he write as a Dem or as a reporter?; 8/25/10, 12:15 PM
Original Mike said...: Never liked Murkowski. Good riddance.; 8/25/10, 12:18 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: don't misundstand Kent - I want nothing more than Sarah at the head of the GOP, running things, making decisions, out in front - leading the charge...

Well that won't happen as she doesn't seem to mix well with the Establishment GIP. Which is fine with me as I don't either.

I did get a kick out of Morning Joe this am when Mike Allen from Politico said that Boehner will be Speaker Boehner in November. The look on Mika Brezenki's face was priceless. Well sort of priceless since she pretty much looks like she's perpetually sucking on a lemon.; 8/25/10, 12:19 PM
Kev said...: (the other kev)

Well, obviously, Alaskans just weren't able to appreciate that faaaabulous EMILY's list ad.; 8/25/10, 12:37 PM
RJ said...: I think this is just more evidence that "tea party" voters are more motivated than the rest - even within their own party.; 8/25/10, 12:38 PM
Alex said...: HDHouse:

don't misundstand Kent - I want nothing more than Sarah at the head of the GOP, running things, making decisions, out in front - leading the charge...

Be careful what you wish for. By August 2011 Sarah Palin will be more popular and powerful then Obama.; 8/25/10, 12:51 PM
Trooper York said...: Hd much prefers the class and honesty of Charley Rangel to Sarah Palin.; 8/25/10, 12:52 PM
jr565 said...: HDHouse wrote:or in a state where apparently moose can vote there is no depth to the bottom of this lake.

Nice view you have of Alaskans. They probably are clingers to their guns and religion and their parkas and snow cones. Just like a democrat/liberal to be so dismissive of a whole state. Any alaskans here, take note of this and vote accordingly. All lberals/dems are like HD and think you are rubes. Don't give them your vote.
But it's funny coming from the party that demanded everyone have the right to vote even dead people and fake names like Ronald McDonald. And which turned off their verification on their website to get around the restrictions on how much people could donate.; 8/25/10, 12:52 PM
Trooper York said...: But then he always prefered Uncle Joe to Uncle Sam.; 8/25/10, 12:52 PM
Chase said...: Democrats - and their more-than-willing sycophant accomplices in the Main Stream Media - are whistling past the Graveyard.

The 2 most respected political predictors - Charlie Cook and Michael Barone - are already stating that the House of Representatives is going Republican, and are now watching closely to see if the Senate (the SENATE!) might possibly go Republican. Funny how widely quoted Charlie Cook was in the Main Stream Media in 2006 and 2008 when he predicted Dem victories, and is relegated to side conversations and non-network news shows now that he says Republicans are coming back.

It's not that Democrats aren't aware of reality. It's that all they've got left going into the election is to muddy up the narrative, to make it seem like people are just mad at everyone - and therefore, won't change anything.

But Democrat primaries - regardless of who wins or loses - are irrelevant to what will happen on November 2.

Housing sales at lowest point ever recorded and unemployment at almost record levels are only 2 of the factors that are going to make motivated voters say goodbye to the Democrats in record numbers, and unmotivated voters stay home.

Headine November 3:

American People Win; Record Democrat Defeat; 8/25/10, 12:57 PM
Anonymous said...: MadisonMan:

I thought it interesting that about 16% of the votes were by absentee ballot. That seems like a large number -- but I think it's increasingly common

Absentee ballots are very common on the Pacific Coast. All of Oregon's elections have been mail-in for a few years now. I might be wrong, but I remember reading that upwards of half of the votes cast in Washington in recent elections have been via absentee. In California, the majority of votes cast in the 2008 and 2010 primaries were absentee votes. Almost 42% of the general election ballots in both years were absentee ballots. In California, absentee ballots received before election day are almost always counted first. (FWIW, absentees received on election day tend to mirror votes cast in regular voting booths.); 8/25/10, 1:00 PM
Big Mike said...: In the end Murkowski lost because she (1) couldn't resist a catty remark when Palin resigned as governor, and (2) took her opponent too lightly. Also neither she nor Bob Bennett were prepared to make the case to the public that their votes for TARP were the right and responsible thing to do -- which is something they should have assured themselves about before they voted for it.

WV: sledaps -- aps designed to run in the middle of an Alaskan winter; 8/25/10, 1:13 PM
Big Mike said...: Voters requested 16,000 absentee ballots, but I wonder what the normal rate of return is?

I once asked for an absentee ballot when there was a chance I'd be out of town on a business trip. But the trip didn't materialize so I pitched the ballot and voted in person. I know my son, when he was away in college, always requested absentee ballots but I'd guess he sent in ballots less than 50% of the time.

If the return rate is 50% then nearly all the ballots are in that are going to come in and Murkowski has to take 5/8 of them -- a pretty tall order. If the rate of return is 90% then she still has to take 57% of them, but that's a lot more feasible.

So is anybody aware of the statistics associated with absentee ballot return?; 8/25/10, 1:26 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Yeah last week CNN had an episode where they brayed that Palin was 0-5 in August. I was hoping the token Conservative would have chimed in and said that 0-5 is still better than Obama's recent endorsement record!; 8/25/10, 1:50 PM
1775OGG said...: Certain counties in Florida might have tallies on the number of absentee ballots ignored or not counted due to spoilage by the counters. Of course, one should also determine how many Minnesota Metro area counties didn't count absentee ballots either or thrown out because the vote wasn't for Franken.; 8/25/10, 1:51 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Actually, I read the Murkowski loss as the frothy leading edge of the massive tidal wave that is about to clean out D.C. [has a tidal wave ever reached D.C.? Then perhaps we can blame it on climate change].; 8/25/10, 1:53 PM
Clyde said...: @ AllenS

Q: "Who do polar bears vote for?"

A: Al Gore. They know which side their bread is buttered on.; 8/25/10, 1:56 PM
Unknown said...: Florida's races look like the ones to watch, especially the Governor. On a larger scale, Insta noted a Michael Barone piece about how the R resurgence would really hurt the Demos through redistricting (remember the Census?). That would prolong the effects of this election for a decade.

HDHouse said...

kent said...
"Palin had an extremely good night on Tuesday ...Heh-heh-heh. SUCK on it, naysayers."

don't misundstand Kent - I want nothing more than Sarah at the head of the GOP, running things, making decisions, out in front - leading the charge...

Old Greek proverb about being careful for that which you wish, etc.; 8/25/10, 1:57 PM
Clyde said...: One thing that bodes ill for the Democrats in November is the turnout in the primaries, in terms of the number of people voting in either Republican or Democratic primaries. The last couple of elections when the Republicans got stomped, the enthusiasm in the primaries was all on the side of the Democrats, with many more people voting in their primaries. This year, the pattern is reversed. Karl Rove was saying on one of the Fox shows last night that it was the highest ratio of Republican to Democrat votes in the primaries since 1946. Read the tea leaves as you will. I don't think the Republicans will win the Senate, but retaking the House is a distinct possibility, as long as everyone who is angry at the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) way that the Democrats have run things the since Inauguration Day 2009 shows up at the polls on November 2.; 8/25/10, 2:02 PM
Joe said...: Over at HotAir there is some discussion of Murkowski running as an Independent and of course, how she'll cry, like Bennett and Inglis about how the GOP is becoming "extremist."; 8/25/10, 2:13 PM
Methadras said...: HDHouse said...

or in a state where apparently moose can vote there is no depth to the bottom of this lake.

You're allowed to vote and that isn't saying much, dunce.; 8/25/10, 2:14 PM
kent said...: Over at HotAir there is some discussion of Murkowski running as an Independent

Alaska has a Sore Loser law.; 8/25/10, 2:42 PM
Joe said...: @Kent...
Good, I guess she'll just spend the next frew months "lamenting" to Olderman, Matthews, and Maddow et. al. about the extremism of the GOP and it's hateful Tea Party appendage.; 8/25/10, 2:50 PM
David said...: HDHouse said...
"or in a state where apparently moose can vote there is no depth to the bottom of this lake."

HD, you are a bigot,; 8/25/10, 3:00 PM
Big Mike said...: I don't think the Republicans will win the Senate.

I think they'll split 48-49 with three independents. If Crist caucuses with the Dems the way Lieberman and Sanders do, then they'll hold the Senate, and if he joins the Republican caucus (and won't they bend over backwards to make hime feel welcome!) then Biden will be the tie-breaking vote.

But to get to that scenario Crist has to beat Rubio -- which is not certain at this point -- and Democrats have to hold three out of California, Connecticut, Illinois, Nevada, Washington, and Wisconsin. The way polls are trending right now that won't be as easy it seems.; 8/25/10, 3:04 PM
Joe said...: @Big Mike,

Crist isn't going to win in FL.

I'll bet cash on that (not much, true). No way such an obviously self-serving career hack wins in FL...especially as teh Democrats have Meek on the ballot, now.

Crist needed the 20% of doofus GoP'ers and a bunch of Disaffected Dem's to vote for him. That plan is so much scrap now....; 8/25/10, 3:09 PM
Big Mike said...: @AJ, there's a reason why that pond near the Jefferson Memorial is called the Tidal Basin, but a tsunami would have to move up the Chesapeake, angle off to the west to enter the mouth of the Potomac, and then twist and turn up that river until it got past . I suppose it's do-able, and I realize that your question is rhetorical, but any wave strong enough to do that would probably take down most of our coastal cities.; 8/25/10, 3:15 PM
Big Mike said...: @Joe, I hope not. But he's a nasty piece of work and I imagine he could do some seriously negative campaigning.; 8/25/10, 3:16 PM
Joe said...: @Big Mike, "take out most of our coastal cities"...as a proud inhabitant of "FlyO ver Land" I must say you make that sound like a "bad thing."; 8/25/10, 3:16 PM
Joe said...: @Big Mike, he certainly ahs the Oompa-Loompa Vote locked up...; 8/25/10, 3:17 PM
former law student said...: In California, the majority of votes cast in the 2008 and 2010 primaries were absentee votes. Almost 42% of the general election ballots in both years were absentee ballots.

Yep, the County Clerk would rather you didn't show up to vote in person, especially since the hanging chad problem torpedoed the old reliable punch cards and readers, setting off a quest for the perfect voting machine.

Here's the historical trend:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/hist_absentee.htm; 8/25/10, 3:17 PM
Joe said...: At Hot Air they report Murkowski has two options, besides retirement:
1) Run as a Write-in candidate; or
2) Run as the Alaska Independence party Candidate, assuming she and they could agree to such a pairing.; 8/25/10, 3:24 PM
jayne_cobb said...: "Alaska has a Sore Loser law."

According to Ace she could technically still run if she were to win the nomination of another party. In this case it would most likely be the Alaska Independence Party (it has been done before).; 8/25/10, 3:27 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Big Mike:

I learn more good stuff here.; 8/25/10, 3:31 PM
Peano said...: Cillizza finds Miller's apparent win "stunning news." Liberals are stunned because this upsets their narrative, which holds that a) Obama is mainstream and, therefore, b) the Tea Partiers who oppose him must be a bunch of fringe wackos.

Obama is a radical leftist, which is why a mainstream Tea Party has formed and continues to grow.

Come November 2, Cillizza and his flock are going to be stunned beyond their wildest fears.; 8/25/10, 4:08 PM
mariner said...: HDHouse,

oh to sleep perchance to dream....

"Ay, there's the rub:

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause."; 8/25/10, 4:17 PM
Big Mike said...: @Joe, I'd sure miss the Outer Banks, though, not to mention the Delaware beaches.; 8/25/10, 4:18 PM
blake said...: Wow, that's a huge shift in absentee ballots in CA.

In the '80s and '90s, absentee ballots were heavily Republican. I wonder if that's still true.; 8/25/10, 4:57 PM
jayne_cobb said...: According to Hotair since the AIP didn't run a candidate they are not an option if she loses.

If she decides to go the 3rd party route she would need to get the libertarians to sign a petition or do a write in campaign.; 8/25/10, 5:00 PM
Big Mike said...: Legally Murkowski might run as a third party candidate for a known party but as a practical matter she'd get her butt kicked in November.; 8/25/10, 5:13 PM
Rumpletweezer said...: All you have to do is look at his name. It's a normal name. It says he's bright, down-to-earth, and trustworthy. What more does one need to know?

--Joe Miller; 8/25/10, 5:53 PM
AST said...: The last word I've seen is that Miller is up by 1492 votes with 15000 absentee ballots still be be counted.

It seems appropriate that the link is to a blog called "The Fix." Alaskan politics have been corrupt for a long time.

I just heard Krauthammer "confess" to having underestimated Sarah Palin's influence. Even if Miller loses, it'll be a Palin victory.; 8/25/10, 5:54 PM
Robert W. said...: To show you how incredibly unhinged Leftists are becoming as November comes closer, read this piece about Alaskan Joe Miller's "imminent" defeat "by a wide margin". This screed was written just the day before the Primary so the author, Alexandra Gutierrez, had access to all the latest poll data. Yet she was absolutely convinced that Miller was going to be decimated and decided to hang his defeat on Sarah Palin and The Tea Party.

P.S. Bonus points if you join Slate's Facebook group and read the comments therein about this story. There you will find true Kool-Aid nutters who rival the very worst you've ever read on the Daily Kos!; 8/25/10, 6:24 PM
Matt said...: Clearly Murkowski should have done some negative ads against Miller. That's the primary lesson learned.

Hey, don't retreat... reload!; 8/25/10, 7:09 PM
AC245 said...: Clearly Murkowski should have done some negative ads against Miller. That's the primary lesson learned.

Hey, don't retreat... reload!

She did run some negative ads against Miller, and then the guy she had doing those ads turned around and endorsed Joe Miller anyway.

From the previously-linked Slate piece:

Meanwhile, Murkowski's own last-minute advertising strategy failed. On Monday, her campaign finally went negative, airing an ad that featured the voice of popular talk radio host Dan Fagan accusing Joe Miller of lying about Murkowski's record on Obamacare. (She voted against health care reform, but Miller says she didn't ask for repeal soon enough.) Unfortunately, after the ad aired—and just a few hours before the polls opened—Fagan endorsed Miller. (He made his decision, he said, "after further weighing the evidence."); 8/25/10, 7:44 PM
Drew said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/25/10, 7:47 PM
garage mahal said...: What informed voter in these troubled times wouldn't absolutely crave a candidate that wants to phase out Medicare, Social Security, and eliminate the Dept of Ed? Compared to our current Fascist Overloads who are cramming affordable health care and unemployment extension benefits down our throats. But of course it never really means "us", does it? You'd think calling unemployed people lazy slobs, as Republicans do, highly detrimental to their reelection chances long term. But it doesn't. What could possibly explain this? Answer: Republicans know that most people are hard working and would rather work, and by calling everyone lazy slobs, they know most people will think it's always "other guy", that's fucking everything up for everyone else. And Democrats naively think appealing to these people's plight, and promising them help and resources, just doesn't work. Its a paradox liberals haven't been able to solve.; 8/25/10, 7:54 PM
Richard Fagin said...: Take our goverment back. Throw the rascals out. All of 'em. Every last stinkin' corrupt, greedy, power mad, sanctimonious one of 'em. I'll even put Cornyn, Hutchison and Pete Olson (TX-22) in that bucket in case you think I'm just picking on everyone else's Congresscritters. Don't let the newly unemployed crapheads get 99 weeks of unemployment comp. either. They caused it, so they shouldn't benefit.

And while you're at it, someone arrest Barney Frank for disturbing (Article I breach of) the peace over his $1 ferry discount.; 8/25/10, 8:03 PM
jeff said...: hey garage, how about those links of republicans calling everyone lazy slobs? But you are correct about one thing. Only an INFORMED voter would be for phasing out medicare,SS and the dept of education. So you got that going for you.; 8/25/10, 8:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Maintaining respect for the individual, in a country with a strong political and cultural tradition of freedom for the individual apart from government...also a problem liberals haven't been able to solve...

Not resorting to political thuggery and message building around bigotry and religion bashing...also a problem liberals haven't been able to solve.

Deficit spending (health-care will pay for itself!)...also a problem liberals (and conservatives recently ) haven't been able to solve.

At the present...responding ably to the economic crisis...not a problem liberals have been able to solve..and this is where the next election may be decided.

Gutierrez's Slate piece is priceless. Soon, even Althouse's underlying radicalism and sympathy for the 60's may not be enough to house the local clowns.

At least on Blogginheads comments they think more clearly and have better reasons.

Tax and spend...tax and spend... and promise to rob Peter to pay Paul and give the people what they want...; 8/25/10, 8:28 PM
AC245 said...: Its a paradox liberals haven't been able to solve.

Imagine that!

Americans prefer things like 5% unemployment versus 10% unemployment, the Dow at 14K versus the Dow at 10K, political leaders who talk America up versus talking America down, judging people on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin, and being able to keep their hard-earned money to spend as they choose versus being told what government programs they're going to be forcibly enrolled in.

Quite the paradox, trying to figure out why Americans aren't embracing what the liberals have to offer.

Yes indeedy.

A real mystery.; 8/25/10, 8:32 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: HD House, like his diapers, is full of shit. He just cannot comprehend the Democratic dynasty has been an abject failure.; 8/25/10, 8:38 PM
jayne_cobb said...: AC245,

Go easy on them; most liberals still haven't been able to figure out how welfare reform lowered unemployment.; 8/25/10, 8:40 PM
jayne_cobb said...: I know this is OT but since this is the political thread I figured I'd just make mention of it here.

Turns out that the main suspect in the Carnahan firebombing campaigned for him. Funny how there has been so little noise about this after the way he freaked out about a coffin (which incidentally the TP had nothing to do with); 8/25/10, 8:59 PM
Quaestor said...: HDHouse wrote: "or in a state where apparently moose can vote there is no depth to the bottom of this lake."

All in favor of rescinding HD's franchise (which only wastes on libtard hacks, anyway) signify by saying "Aye!"; 8/25/10, 9:29 PM
Dr Weevil said...: I don't know why HDHouse thinks it's funny that moose can vote in Alaska. In his state, whichever it is, they apparently allow weasels, toads, snakes, and asses to vote - not to mention those who are a little bit of each.; 8/25/10, 9:37 PM
garage mahal said...: Go easy on them; most liberals still haven't been able to figure out how welfare reform lowered unemployment.

then what's the problem? There hasn't been any change in welfare reform? Things should still be fine.; 8/25/10, 10:01 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: In the '80s and '90s, absentee ballots were heavily Republican. I wonder if that's still true.

Depends on how busy ACORN has been lately.; 8/25/10, 10:37 PM
Eric said...: don't misundstand Kent - I want nothing more than Sarah at the head of the GOP, running things, making decisions, out in front - leading the charge...

Yep, I remember thinking "Man, I sure hope Obama beats Hillary in the primary. There's no way voters would be dumb enough to put that moron in the oval office..."; 8/26/10, 12:16 AM
Opus One Media said...: well she could have also received fewer votes...that's one explanation that springs to mind.; 8/26/10, 8:19 AM
Drew said...: Yep, I remember thinking "Man, I sure hope Obama beats Hillary in the primary. There's no way voters would be dumb enough to put that moron in the oval office..."

My wife still hasn't forgiven me for that primary vote.; 8/26/10, 8:38 AM
GMay said...: garage mahal asked: "then what's the problem? There hasn't been any change in welfare reform? Things should still be fine."

Goddamn you're dumb garage. Did you miss the part about gubmint dicking around in the mortgage industry and fucking up the housing market so bad it led to a financial collapse which in turn leads to lower employment?

No, you didn't. You're not hopelessly stupid. You just fail to make somewhat obvious connections.; 8/26/10, 9:59 AM
Johanna Lapp said...: Gee, Lisa, that strategy of running Sarah out of office with groundless ethics complaints from your stooges seems to have paid off quite well, eh?

You've been served.

Cold.; 8/26/10, 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: garage mahal --

"Its a paradox liberals haven't been able to solve."

That's the nature of false paradoxes.; 8/26/10, 12:20 PM