Teabaggers Destroy G.O.P. in Safe NY Seat (with Poll)

Christie will have (0.00 / 0)

too much baggage to ever be a POTUS contender, but McDonald is an excellent candidate. The biggest blockade in his way is the fact that Virginia has an absurd term limit of 1 term for governor. Then again, the lack of a record and little statewide experience seems to be a boon these days.

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.

---

by: Ryepower12 @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 02:30:37 AM CST

favorable loans (0.00 / 0)

Chris Christie's staff is psyched. They'll all get subprime mortgages now ... but the US Attorney's office will have a lot of slots to fill, and it won't be good news when the FOIA requests are finally released.  He and the gatekeeper who worked for him had the gambit that she signed off on his expenses and her on hers.  They were living high on the hog at taxpayer expense.  

Christie is one of Rove's appointees after the US Attorney scandal.  


www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:02:59 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe they can hire Sen Chris Dodd's lawyers to defend their mortgage problems? (2.50 / 4)

Or Charlie Rangel's?

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:16:47 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Two ZEROS... (0.00 / 0)

Hey, where are the ZERO police? Don't you get the humor/satire of asking for the lawyers who defended Chris Dodd's VIP mortgage from Countrywide to defend the "favorable" loans? Where is my good friend Huh coming to my rescue and attacking others for using ZEROs.

Oh well...

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:09:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree. (0.00 / 0)

That comment was not the outrageous personal insult that merits a zero IMO.

---

by: Christopher @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 16:06:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

can you blame people, though? (3.67 / 3)

comments worthy of 3s are inevitably going to turn into zeroes when there's a very long history of worthless, trollish comments from that user.

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.

---

by: Ryepower12 @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 17:13:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'd jump to your defense (6.00 / 2)

if you could state your positions without taunting.

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 18:06:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

this may help serve as a reminder (0.00 / 0)

JohnD is not exactly a champion of tolerance and free speech:

Then by all means BE SILENT KBusch. (3.00 / 1)
I have not asked for YOU to respond to anything I write. In fact, if you see my ID please ignore it and don't even read it. You of course are free to do what you want but I would rprefer that you "pass" with your comments. Certainly a "troll" like me deserves no interest from the likes of KBusch (and Tonto).
You have never exhibited even the slightest modicum of chance that you possessed an ability to change your opinion so dialogue is "impossible" and a waste. So... enjoy your stubbornly bigoted positions, your politics and your life. I'll try to do the same.

A Republican alternative for Healthcare Reform.... http://coburn.senate.gov/publi...
by: JohnD @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 11:29:07 AM EDT

---

by: huh @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 21:05:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

His biggest blockade is an asset... (0.00 / 0)

it means that in two years he can start campaigning for POTUS, against Obama.

---

by: stomv @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:14:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Wishful thinking (2.50 / 8)

Its fun to watch the left analyze the R's - always some portent of doom colored with the usual snarky arrogance.  A bit self serving, though, and this time in the face of crushing defeats in NJ and VA, get with it man!  Reality is a-callin.

If you want to know whats up with the R party then read what the R pundits are saying, not some wacked out NYT writer wailing about Stalinists.

The "good news", I guess, is that CNN is claiming that this is not a setback for Obama.  So I guess this won't affect health care "reform".

No bias there, thats a real news organization!

Heads in the sand, lefties!

the government can give you nothing
that it doesn't take away, first

---

by: demolisher @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 06:14:28 AM CST

A governor doesn't define policy at the National Level. It's about local politics. (5.80 / 5)

Two more Democratic seats adding to an even larger Democratic majority during a time of pivotal legislation is more important than two figurehead victories. The Republicans lost a seat in NY that they have held since the Civil War, yet our 'liberal' media isn't mentioning this.


"None of us has gotten where we are solely by pulling ourselves up from our own bootstraps. We got here because somebody bent down and helped us." ~Thurgood Marshall

"Facts are stupid things."-Ronald Reagan

---

by: Kathy @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 06:40:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The Democrat in upstate NY (0.00 / 0)

won against the Republican nominee, indeed got her endorsement,  AND the  Conservative nominee who was endorsed by Palin, Glenn Beck and Dick Armey, but who didn't even live in the district and who had that Michelle Bachman far away look in his eye.  Republicans crow about their gains while the party is being cleaved in two between conservative and wingnut conservatives.  Good luck getting it together.  Yeah teabaggers!  

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:08:52 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Healthcare, Afghanistan and banking reform should be a slam-dunk with these 2 seats. (0.00 / 0)

What's the delay? How much of a majority is needed before the Democrats can do something right?

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:18:39 AM CST

[ Parent ]

you know the diff between the house and the senate, don;t you? (6.00 / 3)

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:31:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

No (6.00 / 2)

It's all equivalent.

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:07:55 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Rightttt (5.00 / 6)

So let's break this down.  Two "Republican" candidates were elected in a strong repudiation of the Democrats!   Well, that may have been the case if finding the word "Republican" on their website/lit wasn't like playing a game of "Where's Waldo?"  At least they did it campaigning on those important Republican issues:  a bad economy, infrastructure issues, and transportation; a tri-fecta of conservativism!  But who could hold it again them? Republican are all about tradition, and the president's party has lost these off year elections for the past 25 years.

In the only race in which the GOP candidate wasn't trying to be a moderate, in which the bright stars of the conservative movement weighed in to anoint him, Doug Hoffman was beaten by a Democrat in a state that hasn't elected one since the 1800's.

And of course the exit polls, those will tell the tale of voters sticking it to BO!  Wait, what's that?  A majority of voters in both VA and NJ claim that the President had no bearing on their vote?  Ouch.

Reality is a-callin.

Yes, and apparently you aren't listening.

Proverbs 10:14

---

by: AlexSWill @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:43:05 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Last night was a great night and a great start. (5.00 / 2)

You could start to hear all the Democrats over the last few days lowering the bar for success and beginning to sow the seeds of "Republicans wins being no big deal". It begins with these wins and will realy take hold on 2010.

I think it would be wonderful for Democrats to minimize yesterday's Republican gains and continue along the "sunshine" path. How do you think the "blue dogs" are going to view the Republican wins? Why is Harry Reid talking about moving the Healthcare vote into 2010?

Keep your heads in the sand...

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 06:46:12 AM CST

Let's be honest (6.00 / 11)

I'd have preferred that Corzine (who started his campaign with favorables in the 30s) and Deeds (who probably couldn't earn his mother's vote) won.  It is indeed concerning that while Democratic ideas are just as popular today as they were years ago, Democratic voters stayed home in those two states.  Of course I'd have preferred to see Democratic victories in the two contests.

In the long run, however, NJ-GOV and VA-GOV are not useful as predictors of future success -- Dems won the 2001 VA-GOV...and then came the Republican wave in 2002, for example.  The only thing from last night that may augur for the long run is the victory one wing in the Republican Party had in pushing out the local, grassroots, moderate candidate.  If the Club for Growth/Glenn Beck can parachute it and sweep away the locals for their ideologically pure losers, that's a good sign.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 07:49:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Keep whistling in the dark. (3.00 / 3)

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:47:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Will do (6.00 / 8)

I'll ask Governor Healey and President McCain what I'm doing wrong, if you'd prefer.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:59:55 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I just wanted to bring huh out of the woodwork this morning. (0.00 / 0)

Read this article in today's WSJ re the hubris of today's liberals (progressives). Each extreme wing of both parties really causes the independents to vote against the party itself in subsequent years. http://online.wsj.com/article/...

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:19:31 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Excellent!! (6.00 / 4)

Everyone should read that article -- it's unintentionally hilarious.  A phenomenal exercise in denial and self-delusion.

I'm not saying that Democrats can't do better.  Of course they can.  But anyone who can say, with a straight face, that "the nastiness in American politics is largely on the left" should drop whatever he is doing now and move into stand-up comedy straightaway.

---

by: David @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:27:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

An odd looking duck (4.00 / 1)

Basically, it's the "liberal elite" canard dressed in historical costume.

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:44:30 AM CST

[ Parent ]

even the categories are odd (6.00 / 1)

It's like they cribbed them from a transcript of a Bush administration era Laura Ingraham show.  The liberal world consists of ordinary people, corporate executives, and liberal elites? Really?

This corporate executive liberal begs to differ...

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:13:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]

right, edgar complaining about tone is funny enough... (0.00 / 0)

...but the article verges on parody.  This in particular is self-refuting:

The conservatives of today bear little resemblance to those of the 1930s that cartoonist Peter Arno immortalized heading down to Manhattan's Trans-Lux theater to hiss newsreels of FDR. They are instead abubble with ideas to reform aspects of American politics and economics that badly need reform, such as the tax and legal systems, and the impending entitlements crisis. They want to utilize the great power of markets to force efficiency, drive down costs, and drive up yields. But liberals refuse to engage those ideas, simply because they are not liberal ideas and must, therefore, be wrong if not the latest plot by the wolves to exploit the sheep.

Last I checked, today's conservatives are all about denying people like me rights and fighting reproductive choice...

On a related note, I've been toying with making a diary out of this.  When did fighting choice more important than providing health care to the poor? And what insurance plan doesn't cover choice, now?

This past weekend the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops instructed pastors at parishes across the country to distribute material urging Catholics to oppose the health reform bills making their way through Congress for allowing public funding of abortions. Priests were to insert the Bishops Conference pdf leaflets and letters into parish news bulletins, distribute them at church doors or place them in pews. They were also directed to read a statement at mass to reinforce the message.

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:45:27 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Truth be told (6.00 / 2)

Times past, when I would end up at a Catholic mass for whatever reason (weddings, mainly), I'd fork a coupla bucks over because the Catholic do a lot of good work.

Given that the Diocese of Portland blew over 150 grand on question 1, though, I've come to the conclusion that money given to the Catholic Church is often money that is indirectly given to conservative movement politics.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:16:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

msnbc (0.00 / 0)

said the catholic church spent $550,000 in ME.


www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 14:50:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Advocacy? Tax-exempt status? (6.00 / 2)

This sounds like it's at least flirting with the boundary of political advocacy that rightly jeopardizes the tax-exempt status of any religious organization.

"If the Republicans will stop lying about the Democrats, the Democrats will stop telling the truth about the Republicans" -- Adlai Stevenson

---

by: BrooklineTom @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 14:51:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Did any churches support Obama? (4.00 / 1)

We all know they did so did support Obama but did they lose their tax status?

Churches cannot endorse any candidates, make donations to their campaigns, engage in fund-raising, distribute statements, or become involved in any other activities that may be beneficial or detrimental to any candidate.

Also, can't a NPO support an issue but not a candidate?

Churches and non-profits are free to be involved in political issues as long as no candidate or party is endorsed.

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 16:09:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh please. (0.00 / 0)

We know somebody got a photo of a sign for Obama on a church sign, and then made a blog post.

Hardly damning evidence.

---

by: stomv @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 17:54:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Are you saying no church supported Obama for President? (0.00 / 0)

Also, is it true that a non-profit can support a political issue but not a political candidate?

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:32:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It is true (0.00 / 0)

As said below, issue advocacy is okay for tax-exempt, candidate/party endorsement isn't.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:53:25 AM CST

[ Parent ]

An individual church's sign isn't the same... (0.00 / 0)

...as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, in any case.

Beware of false equivalencies!

---

by: huh @ Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 13:52:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh please. (0.00 / 0)

We know somebody got a photo of a sign for Obama on a church sign, and then made a blog post.

Hardly damning evidence.

---

by: stomv @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 17:54:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not really (0.00 / 0)

Tax law says that religions can do issue advocacy, but not endorse a political candidate or party.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 17:53:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Exactly what you and your followers have been doing today: (0.00 / 0)

"veryone should read that article -- it's unintentionally hilarious.  A phenomenal exercise in denial and self-delusion"--

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:27:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not sure what you're getting at (6.00 / 1)

You pointed to an article that spends most of its time setting up straw men and being nasty by accusing liberals of being nasty. According to that article, I must be a silly sheep. I resent that elitist characterization!

---

by: MizJones @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 15:57:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Lincoln and FDR (6.00 / 2)

Certainly both Lincoln and FDR were regarded as extremists in their day, but a long period of Republican dominance followed Lincoln's Administration as did a similar Democratic dominance after FDR's.

I suspect that a real move back toward "the middle" would occur only if there were a middle that were coherent beside being neither liberal nor conservative. It's evidence that is lacking: We hear no band playing and we see no banners waving in praise of Baucus, Snowe, Collins, and Lieberman.

These are the guys in the middle. Who, pray, are their ardent fans?

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:33:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Perils of too many revisions (0.00 / 0)

It's evidence evident that is lacking:

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:46:15 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe so. But people in the middle, or the so-called independents (0.00 / 0)

are not "fans," so to speak, of either extreme although they may agree with those on the left on some issues and with those on the right on other issues.  Just because you don't hear people cheering for Joe Lieberman means only that they prefer him to boobs like (I've already forgotten his name) the one that beat him in the primary--oh, it was Ned something or other, wasn't it?. Forget the bands playing and get out and talk with regular folks about the issues. Most people don't like idealogues on either end of the spectrum.

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:19:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It didn't take a year (6.00 / 1)

for voters in Connecticut to feel extreme buyer's remorse. Polling showed that they would have preferred Lamont as their Senator.

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 18:05:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Polling (0.00 / 0)

http://www.dailykos.com/statep...

Poll results indicate

	Before	After
Lamont	43	51
Lieberman	48	37
Schlesinger	8	7

That's a substantial swing to "the boob".

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 19:39:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Methinks that you drink the DailyKos koolaid. (0.00 / 0)

Since when have their polls become reliable?  I am surprised at you.

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 20:38:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Uh, Edgar (6.00 / 1)

It's not the Daily Kos poll. It's a Research 2000 poll. In the 2008 election, Research 2000 was among the polling firms to predict the election results most closely.

My turn for shock: It's a conservative knee-jerk reaction to discount anything deriving from Daily Kos.

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 21:06:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Agreed--as it is a knee-jerk liberal reaction to discount anything from the WSJ. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:52:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

who did that? (0.00 / 0)

We reacted to the contents of a specific article, not the WSJ.  It's an excellent paper, generally.  

---

by: huh @ Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:44:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Hey John, didn't Congress move further Left? (6.00 / 3)

after this round of elections.  That's a victory for the right?

Just wondering.

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:23:22 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe it's like ink blots where we can see what we want to see... (5.00 / 1)

I am looking at last night's results in my own way and it is a positive thing. I play chess with my kids and they often try to "get as many of my pieces" as they can instead of getting he "right" pieces.

If you believe your side did well yesterday then "don't worry, be happy"!!

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:53:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I really don't know ... (6.00 / 1)

just making the observation that the net effect of this "Republican Wave" against Pelosi and Obama is voters adding another Democratic seat in Congress.  That's all.

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 14:02:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Everybody has a reason to be optimistic today.. (6.00 / 1)

...but to extend your chess metaphor, I usually teach students to have a strategy of attack and control the center of the board.  Too many novices are thrilled to take a knight at the cost of moving their attack pieces into the corners of the board.

Last night, the conservatives gave up a pawn, captured a couple bishops, and decided to send the queen careening into the corner where she's no use toward a coherent strategy of winning.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 14:06:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sigh (0.00 / 0)

Wish the choice of Lee's army wasn't there.  Those were tired men, many barefoot, who melted away home to plant their crops.

I think that General Chamberlain's response to them was best.  Not like teabaggers, at all.

Chamberlain at Appomatox

Deborah Sirotkin Butler
AmberPaw dot @aol.com

"Failure to plan is planning to fail."
Proverb

---

by: AmberPaw @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 07:42:03 AM CST

Well, the lemmings one might be worse (0.00 / 0)

See "Myths and misconceptions"

But no animals (or soldiers) were harmed in making this poll!

---

by: Michael Forbes Wilcox @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:22:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Meaningless Races (6.00 / 3)

Clearly I'd rather be the Republicans tonight than the Democrats, because winning two large state governorships going into redistricting is always nice. Nevertheless, the notion that this is a sign of Obama's weakness going into the 2010 midterms is nonsense.

Not only are these NJ/VA governor's races not predictive of national trends (see the 2001 Dem VA/NJ sweep prior to the subsequent 2002 Republican off-year victories), but consider the exit polls for the two races. In Virginia, the exit polls indicated that Obama's favorable/unfavorable rating is 48%/51%. Not great, but not that much worse than the numbers he received on election day. Further, fully 20% of those who approved of Obama voted for McDonnell, whereas only a mere 5% of those who disapproved voted for Deeds. This suggests that it was Deeds's weakness, not Obama's, that played the big role.

A similar dynamic was at play in New Jersey. The exit polls there indicate that Obama still commands a solid 57%/42% approval among the voters yesterday. Further, 26% of those who approved voted for either Christie or Daggett, whereas only 7% of those who disapproved voted for Corzine. Again, this suggests that Corzine's own unpopularity is what drove votes, not views of Obama.

The media loves hyping these types of things, but looking beyond the talking heads to analysis of the actual numbers reveals that these races were much more candidate-centered than a reflection of national trends, much less a reflection on President Obama himself.

---

by: Hoyapaul @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:25:26 AM CST

Also... (6.00 / 1)

70% of VA voters told pollsters that their vote for Governor was in no way reflective of their feelings toward Obama and the remaining 30% split almost exactly in half between those voting for Deeds to show support for Obama and those voting for McDonnell to express opposition.

---

by: Christopher @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:55:32 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Is NY-23 really a victory? (5.60 / 5)

I haven't been following the race too closely, but I understand that:

* It's a very conservaDem who won
* The Republican candidate who dropped out was quite liberal on social issues; she could have provided Obama some added bipartisanship from time to time
* A HoffBeckPalin victory would have emboldened the teabaggers -- and resulted in teabaggers winning GOP primaries and getting creamed in general elections

I have a strong hunch that Bill Owens (D-NY23) will both frustrate the heck out of progressives over the next year, and then lose to a conservative-but-not-crazy Republican in 2010.

Given that we've got the House by quite a bit, what do we gain but another Blue Dog, another vote for a less progressive Speaker, and another chunk of the Northeast painted blue for the map?

---

by: stomv @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:29:32 AM CST

it's certainly better than the alternative (5.67 / 3)

the Republican endorsed him and the conservative lost. How can that not be better than having the conservative in the House?  

The Empire state is due for re-districting too.  

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:34:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What's the difference? (6.00 / 1)

The Dem majority is so strong that the vote doesn't matter.  A real possibility is that he becomes entrenched and wreaks havoc for years... except that
(1) he's going to lose his district in 2012 redistricting anyway, and
(2) he'd more likely overplay his cards and be seen as crazy-go-nuts, thereby opening up the seat to a Democrat who would be willing to actually behave like a Democrat.

I'm not suggesting that I wanted the Conservative guy to win; I just don't see how winning this seat with Owens helps push forward progressive ideals in any way.

---

by: stomv @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:07:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Three things (6.00 / 2)

1 - It's a victory in that the Republican lost and a Democrat won.  And given the dynamics of the district, I don't think we could expect a Democrat much more liberal than Owens to win, even in such a crazy election.

2 - This is an election for a relatively brief term.  I can't wait to see what happens in 2010...perhaps a Scozzafava-Owens Dem primary, winner takes on Coffman?

3 - I think this is the beginning of a victory.  NY-23 is the first time a high-profile win was achieved by C4G (remember, Toomey and Laffery both lost), and they did it outside the Republican Party.  If these geniuses start moving outside the GOP infrastructure, that can only help as well...

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:07:16 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Fair 'nuff (5.00 / 1)

1.  Sure, that's good I guess.  However, I'm not sure that we couldn't get a Democrat who's populist and not overly blue-dog, as I understand Owens to be.  Hell, Scozzafava seemed better.  If Scozzafava could beat Coffman in a GOP primary, surely Scozzafava could beat Coffman in a general election, no?

2.  I'd be down for that, but I'm not so sure Coffman will run again.  Methinks the teabaggers have short attention spans, and they'll be focused in many elsewheres for the non-special NY23 election next time.

3.  I do love the idea of the GOP splitting; I think it will help Democrats tremendously.  I do wonder though -- wouldn't that split happen mo'better'sooner had Coffman won?

---

by: stomv @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:13:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What does it mean when an Attorney General can get elected in 2009 (in a purple state VA)... (0.00 / 0)

with this attitude...

Just days before the vote, the Washington Post ran an editorial against the GOP conservative titled "Mr. Cuccinelli's Bigotry." The Post and fellow pro-"gay" liberals were astounded at Cuccinelli's forthright stance against granting "rights" based on homosexuality, as the Post indignantly reported:  

"Homosexual acts, said Mr. Cuccinelli, currently a state senator, are 'intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law-based country it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that. . . . They don't comport with natural law. I happen to think that it represents ... behavior that is not healthy to an individual and in aggregate is not healthy to society." The Post stated that "as attorney general, [Cuccinelli] would be an embarrassment to Virginia." But the state's voters paid little heed to the newspaper's pro-"gay" political correctness, and elected Cuccinelli in a landslide.

Something bigger is going on. There's a ground swell which goes well beyond the "teabaggers". I'm attending a town Republican committee meeting here in MA which hasn't happened in years. Something is going on...

Congratulations to all who supported the effort to preserve traditional marriage in Maine! Despite a massive effort by outside homosexual activist groups to influence the vote, a homosexual "marriage" bill went down to defeat in Maine through a "People's Veto" - whereby voters can reject a law by plebiscite. The YES on 1 lead was inching up in the late hours Tuesday and early morning. At 2:00 AM EST, with 87% of the precincts tallied, the Bangor Daily News reported that the "YES" vote to repeal Maine's new "gay marriage" law was ahead by about 52.75 to 47.25%.

Maybe the Republican party is adrift but conservatism seems to be taking hold of the center. 2010 is looking like a very interesting year.

Some of what I have heard is people are scared and "angry" about the controls Washington is taking over commerce and business. This is a clear message to DC and it will be curious how much more arm-twisting and bill cramming will happen.

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:30:15 AM CST

The Republicans will have to chase the energy, an energy (0.00 / 0)

bigger than the teabaggers and bigger than the far right (Palin, Huckabee, Beck, Limbaugh, Palenty) but who?

 

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:37:26 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What? (0.00 / 0)

Despite a massive effort by outside homosexual activist groups to influence the vote,

Hmmmm

Proverbs 10:14

---

by: AlexSWill @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:53:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

oops (0.00 / 0)

This link works

Proverbs 10:14

---

by: AlexSWill @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:54:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

coattails (0.00 / 0)

The AG race was as negative as the Governor's race and Cuccinelli has publicly stated that he won't enforce laws he disagrees with.  It doesn't always happen, but this year it seems most people on both sides voted the same party for all three statewide offices, determined by their choice for Governor.

---

by: Christopher @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:59:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What's going on (6.00 / 4)

is that voters have clearly shown that they have no problem with voting to restrict the rights of others, particularly when it has no impact on them personally. Anti-gay marriage voters are a textbook example of how easy it is to motivate voters based on rabble rousing and fear of the unknown.

Personally, I think this issue would go away if the government would be responsible only for sanctioning civil unions (for all couples, not just gays) and let religious groups determine for themselves what their individual definitions of marriage are.

As for the governor's races, I think they are notoriously unreliable predictors of trends among voters. Of course, we can point to the example of how Mitt Romney's election was a harbinger of Massachusetts' stunning transition to a red state.

All that said, I do think Dems have allowed themselves to believe that Obama's election was an indication of a fundamental shift in voter attitudes, rather than an anomaly based on a number of factors. Discussion of the impact of the unprecedently high black turnout was discouraged, as was the fact that any of the top three Democratic contenders would have likely beaten McCain (assuming Edwards' personal issues had stayed under wraps.) It's interesting how we are so quick to diminish Christie's win because Corzine was so unpopular, yet Obama's win was based strictly on his wonderfulness, as if Bush's performance wasn't really the deciding factor.

---

by: ChrisO @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 14:23:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Very well said! (0.00 / 0)

Baker/Tisei in 2010... Charlie Baker on why people "have been" leaving MA, "It's not the weather here, it's the climate"

---

by: JohnD @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 16:26:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

interesting point about the supposed shift (0.00 / 0)

Dems have allowed themselves to believe that Obama's election was an indication of a fundamental shift in voter attitudes

Which Dems? Rahm and the DNC? The Dems who want to discuss single-payer health care and are furious over being ignored?

Obama's win was based strictly on his wonderfulness, as if Bush's performance wasn't really the deciding factor.

I would not confuse the public posture with what party leaders really think, not that I know what that is. I'm sure they're aware of the effect of anti-Bush feelings.

Dissatisfaction with Bush though, could be described as a fundamental shift in attitude. It wasn't that many years ago when polls showed high approval for the Iraq invasion.

I read some anecdotal evidence of angry Democrats who stayed home in the NJ election. It drives me crazy when I see the discussion framed by MSM in terms of Republicans vs Democrats, ignoring the large divisions within the Democratic party.

---

by: MizJones @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 17:16:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Beyond whining and taunting (6.00 / 4)

Some of the above comments make me feel I'm listening to sports fans.

On the NJ governorship. First, Corzine was supremely unpopular. That partly has to do with his own automotive foibles. He was also unable to rein in property taxes. In New Jersey, apparently, they are exorbitant. His unpopularity translated into low voter turnout from Democratic strongholds. So one explanation for the New Jersey result is that Corzine was unattractive. He lost more than Christie won.

I suspect that New Jersey's property tax issues are similar to Massachusetts:

• The recession is squeezing money out of states and municipalities. So there is upward pressure on property taxes everywhere.
• The goal of making state functions more transparent so that the public is willing to fund them adequately hasn't really been achieved anywhere.

Beyond that, polling does show a slight shift to the right in the voting populace, but that has been accompanied by extremely negative perceptions of the Republican Party. I'm not sure how one can confidently make the case yet that the New Jersey result says anything about health care reform, global warming initiatives, or Iraq policy. It might have those implications. It might but there are precious few data to support it.

---

by: KBusch @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:27:44 AM CST

Kudos (6.00 / 2)

for using the plural "are" in connection with "data."  :-)

---

by: David @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:42:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Let's remember that... (0.00 / 0)

...next time someone uses the word "media" here, and it seems that word is used pretty often.  Both singular forms end in -um as they are derived from second declension neuter nouns in Latin.  Likewise, I tend to use fora and podia as the plurals of forum and podium respectively.  (Thus endeth the Latin lesson; we now return to our regularly scheduled discussion!)

---

by: Christopher @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 16:11:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A friend in NJ points out... (5.00 / 1)

...that a month ago Christie was clobbering Corzine.  The election was actually closer than expected.  

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:13:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What I like about you KBusch: at least you have the honesty (0.00 / 0)

to say that the implications "might" have a certain meaning. Most of your friends here will deny reality right to the end. By the way, will we have to suffer the same whines when Moakley trounces that guy from Cambridge in the primary?

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:25:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

and what I dislike about you edgar... (5.00 / 1)

...is you never go beyond taunting.  Have the courage of your convictions.  Post something instead of mocking and downrating.  Or at least back up your assertions.

I'll be the first one to say the vote in Maine is very bad news.  The two Governor elections have been clear losses for months.  Anyone paying attention to the races knows they weren't about liberal vs. conservative per se and certainly weren't about Obama, as born out by the exit polls.

Much more interesting is the NY election.  The conservatives forced a litmus test   based on idealogical purity and lost  a seat they've held since the civil war.

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:55:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What you appear to dislike, my dear Huh, is anyone who (0.00 / 0)

disagrees with you. I have posted material on the new-age religion of "Let's Save the Planet" and supportive material re a universal consumer tax. I won't quote you, but the words are on record, as saying that most of what I have said is foolish, but I actually agree with you progressives on more than 80% of the issues: equal rights for all, taxation that isn't regressive, no bail-outs to corporate thieves, free reproductive choice for women, not trying to "save the world for democracy" etc. I wouldn't let my disagreements with you about "climate change" and government controlled medecine ruin the dialogue. Sorry, if I upset you; just felt like tweaking you guys this morning. And, whether you like it or not, Martha will crush the guy  from Cambridge in the primary. You can take that to the bank.

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 13:40:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm seriously starting to question your reading comprehension (0.00 / 0)

We've been discussing Martha Coakley, not Joe Moakley.  Joe is dead. Mike Capuano is from Somerville, not Cambridge.  I'm on record as liking both Martha and Mike, but giving the edge to Mike.  I've no idea why you feel Martha winning would upset me.

Your discussion on climate change was with KBusch not me.  I agree with him that your supporting material was fictitious, but never engaged you on that topic.  

My issue with you remains that you confuse downrating and taunting with participating.  You can call it "tweaking" if you like.  

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 14:16:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Capuano is more Cambridge than Somerville, (0.00 / 0)

at least to me.  I am well aware of where he is from; unlike him I am true to my roots.

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 16:32:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

what roots would those be? (0.00 / 0)

His are 100% Somerville:

Capuano is a lifelong resident of Somerville. He was born to Rita Garvey Capuano and Andrew Capuano, Michael attended Somerville High School, and graduated in 1969. In 1973, he received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Dartmouth College, and in 1977, a law degree from Boston College Law School. He specialized in tax law.

I'm sure you remember that prior to joining Congress, Capuano served as Mayor and Alderman of Somerville...

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 16:55:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That was then; this is now. (4.00 / 1)

---

by: Edgarthearmenian @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 17:28:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

you lost me (0.00 / 0)

How has Capuano abandoned his roots?

What roots have you held on to that he didn't?

(where are you from anyway?)  

---

by: huh @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 18:19:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Election Results (5.00 / 1)

What the election results demonstrate is a clear path to victory for the GOP. The average person does not care about social issues, the average person will never have a gay marriage or an abortion and could care less about those things, the average person wants job security, good public services, and smart management of the funds to pay for those services to keep taxes at a manageable rate. If the GOP can run on a platform of streamlining government, making it more accountable, and more efficient it can win anywhere in the country. What these races show is that conservatives who pass themselves off as moderates (McDonnell and Christie) can win in purple and blue states. Ostracizing moderates for true conservatives as occurred in NY-23 and will likely occur in Florida might make the NR and WSJ editorial boards happy, but it can't win elections. The party with the bigger tent wins, which is why nationally Democrats will be in power for a long time to come still-hence the GOP lost the only race of national importance Tuesday. Locally speaking, any governor in this economy is going to be very unpopular and the GOP fielded two candidates who were able to capitalize on that. Also Deeds and Corzine were remarkably unremarkable opponents, both ran negative campaigns, both relied on starpower that actually overshadowed their own mediocrity, both relied on out of state funding and special interest groups to barrage the state.

VA is more interesting since a decent number of McDonnell supporters voted for President Obama, and his campaign, more than Christie's where Corzine's unpopularity was the dominant theme of taht race, showed how the 'Axelrod' campaign style of emphasizing positive generic themes and downplaying divisive issues can succeed for a conservative candidate. What is scary about this is that if Republicans start adopting the Axelrod method of campaigning and ditch the Atwater-Rove slash and burn tactics, they could be really innovative at winning elections and could regain a majority in two cycles. But clearly the NY-23 race demonstrates that a significant portion of that party still favors the politics of the past.  

---

by: jconway @ Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 15:28:53 PM CST

Be careful (0.00 / 0)

about declaring NJ a reliably blue state where the Governor's office is concerned.  NJ, like MA, has had a lot of Republican Governors over the last 30 years.

---

by: David @ Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 14:43:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]