Election Night Thread

[Bishop Hedd]

23rd district goes to Democrat Owens in a race the angry right put a ton of energy, money and (out of state) star power to regain a seat they've held since 1852.

[John Adams]

23rd district goes to Democrat Owens in a race the angry right put a ton of energy, money and (out of state) star power to regain a seat they've held since 1852.

 

Yeah, the Republicans can only win most of the big seats in one night.

 

Terrible night for the Dems.

 

Great night for Independent voters--lots of publicity that the Indy voters were out and angry. That momentum will build with the awful work Obama and Co. are doing. Enjoy your one term Bishop.

[IDBillzFan]

Yeah, the Republicans can only win most of the big seats in one night.

 

Terrible night for the Dems.

 

Great night for Independent voters--lots of publicity that the Indy voters were out and angry. That momentum will build with the awful work Obama and Co. are doing. Enjoy your one term Bishop.

The one true result I look forward to following from this election is how the Blue Dogs start feeling about the health care bills that are out there.

[bills_fan]

I don't think its a referendum on just the Dems and Obama, but more of an anti-incumbant movement. People want goevrnment to stop meddling and lower their taxes. Taxes was THE big issue in NJ. Doesn't bode well for Obama's big government agenda. People are seeing incumbant Dems and Reps as part of the problem.

[Kelly the Dog]

My take:

 

NJ: Corzine lost because Corzine sucks and is a crook and is from Goldman Sucks and was doing a terrible job the last few years. Period. Christie was a pretty lousy candidate but he kept it fairly clean. Corzine was an ass, way too negative, gambled and lost when he couldn't generate enough interest in the Democratic machine to care about him. It had little to do with Obama, as noted by the fact that 2/3 of the Corzine voters said national issues topped their list and 2/3 of the Christie voters said local issues topped their list. Christie should have run away with it if he was a good candidate in this environment. Corzine is and was terrible.

 

VA: McDonnell did very well and should be applauded for how well he ran his campaign. Again, the Democratic candidate was abysmal, and it repeated the earlier election when McDonnell beat Deeds. I don't think this has any great long term effects on how Virginia votes for governor four years from now. I would expect the best candidate to win, regardless of the party in power or his party. Neither party has any hold whatsoever over the electorate in that state, in the major races.

 

NY: It really proves nothing, other than the fact that the old-fashioned NY selecting committee did a bad job. It doesn't really show anything about the Democrats, and even though Owens won, it really shows that a decent conservative candidate should, and will again, trounce a Democrat or liberal in that district (unless it changes greatly in realignment). I expect it to be retaken by the GOP in the next election. I don't think this election showed anything other than a botched job.

 

It should also be noted that Republican moderates won, not strict conservatives. And IMO this is not a harbinger whatsoever about how the 2010 elections will be fought or won or lost. The political climate will very likely be drastically different, either way.

 

It is, and always was, and remains, all about the economy. The economy and unemployment are bad right now. If it's better a year from now the Democrats will be fine. If it's the same or worse, they will get crushed. I just don't think the economy as it is right now has much to do with Obama or the Democrats and would be pretty much exactly the same whomever was President nine months into their Presidency unless he or she did something criminally stupid and irresponsible.

[Magox]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ST2009110202928

 

Contests serve as warning to Democrats: It's not 2008 anymore

 

Off-year elections can be notoriously unreliable as predictors of the future, but as a window on how the political landscape may have changed in the year since President Obama won the White House, Tuesday's Republican victories in Virginia and New Jersey delivered clear warnings for the Democrats.

 

Although the economy is the biggest reason contributing to the gains for the GOP, it is pretty clear that the presidents policies are also contributing to some of the worries voters have.

 

But the Republicans' celebration was marred by the surprise loss of a House seat in upstate New York that had been in GOP hands for more than a century. The race that underscored the consequences of the ideological warfare that now grips the party and threatens its ability to rebuild itself as a broad-based coalition.

 

The most significant change came among independent voters, who solidly backed Democrats in 2006 and 2008 but moved decisively to the Republicans on Tuesday, according to exit polls. In Virginia, independents strongly supported Republican Robert F. McDonnell in his victory over Democrat R. Creigh Deeds, while in New Jersey, they supported Republican Chris Christie in his win over Democratic Gov. Jon S. Corzine.

 

For months, polls have shown that independents were increasingly disaffected with some of Obama's domestic policies. They have expressed reservations about the president's health-care efforts and have shown concerns about the growth in government spending and the federal deficit under his leadership.

 

Tuesday's elections provided the first tangible evidence that Republicans can win their support with the right kind of candidates and the right messages. That is an ominous development for Democrats if it continues unabated into next year. But Republicans could squander that opportunity if they demand candidates who are too conservative to appeal to the middle.

 

Agreed as well! GOP should move to a generally more socially liberal stance than it has, as evidenced in the Poll results in N.Y. In the 2008 elections it wasn't so much about BO as it was about the disdain voters had for Bush. Any Democrat would of won against McCain, even Kerry. Stick with the Fiscal conservative issues, and the GOP will defeat liberals by a wide margin in most states.

 

 

Axelrod warned against extrapolating into the future the shift among independents. He said he believed that many people who called themselves Republicans in the past now call themselves independents but are still voting for Republican candidates. "I don't think they portend long-term trends," he said.

 

He said the only race with real national implications was the congressional contest in Upstate New York. "It's more significant because of the message it sends to moderate Republicans that there's no room at the inn," he said.

 

Talk about delusional

 

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, chairman of the Republican Governors Association, said he agreed that Tuesday's races were not a referendum on the president. But he argued that Obama's policies were creating anxiety among voters that was helping Republican candidates.

 

"It's not about the president personally. The president's not unpopular. Americans want our presidents to succeed. But the president's policies are very unpopular, and they are hurting Democrats in Virginia, New Jersey, New York," Barbour said.

 

Agreed! President is still somewhat popular, but his policies aren't.

[IDBillzFan]

My take:

Good to see you back. It was just Bishop and Conner, and in 12 days, 1 hour and 49 minutes, odds are good we'll lose Bishop for a few days.

[ExiledInIllinois]

What is with all the Gov's non-sense the last 20 or so years. I live in IL, I can care less who the Gov in the other 49 states is. I mean, I not that I really care who gets elected (Dem or Rep) in IL even. When did Gov's become players within the federal system?

 

These outside races, it just something for the media to talk about? What does it all mean?

[ExiledInIllinois]

My take:

 

NJ: Corzine lost because Corzine sucks and is a crook and is from Goldman Sucks and was doing a terrible job the last few years. Period. Christie was a pretty lousy candidate but he kept it fairly clean. Corzine was an ass, way too negative, gambled and lost when he couldn't generate enough interest in the Democratic machine to care about him. It had little to do with Obama, as noted by the fact that 2/3 of the Corzine voters said national issues topped their list and 2/3 of the Christie voters said local issues topped their list. Christie should have run away with it if he was a good candidate in this environment. Corzine is and was terrible.

 

VA: McDonnell did very well and should be applauded for how well he ran his campaign. Again, the Democratic candidate was abysmal, and it repeated the earlier election when McDonnell beat Deeds. I don't think this has any great long term effects on how Virginia votes for governor four years from now. I would expect the best candidate to win, regardless of the party in power or his party. Neither party has any hold whatsoever over the electorate in that state, in the major races.

 

NY: It really proves nothing, other than the fact that the old-fashioned NY selecting committee did a bad job. It doesn't really show anything about the Democrats, and even though Owens won, it really shows that a decent conservative candidate should, and will again, trounce a Democrat or liberal in that district (unless it changes greatly in realignment). I expect it to be retaken by the GOP in the next election. I don't think this election showed anything other than a botched job.

 

It should also be noted that Republican moderates won, not strict conservatives. And IMO this is not a harbinger whatsoever about how the 2010 elections will be fought or won or lost. The political climate will very likely be drastically different, either way.

 

It is, and always was, and remains, all about the economy. The economy and unemployment are bad right now. If it's better a year from now the Democrats will be fine. If it's the same or worse, they will get crushed. I just don't think the economy as it is right now has much to do with Obama or the Democrats and would be pretty much exactly the same whomever was President nine months into their Presidency unless he or she did something criminally stupid and irresponsible.

 

 

Nice take.

[BillsNYC]

My take:

It should also be noted that Republican moderates won, not strict conservatives.

 

Good take, although I disagree with this, McDonnell is a Reagan Conservative, he just didn't run on the social issues.

[Bishop Hedd]

What is with all the Gov's non-sense the last 20 or so years. I live in IL, I can care less who the Gov in the other 49 states is. I mean, I not that I really care who gets elected (Dem or Rep) in IL even. When did Gov's become players within the federal system?

 

These outside races, it just something for the media to talk about? What does it all mean?

Acording to Gecko, Labills, maalox etc it was a fantastic day yesterday because governorships are just soooo important!

[blzrul]

I don't know why the media is hyping these elections as a referendum on Obama, when polled voters stated the opposite. Governors and local elected officials have a great impact on local daily life, and only an idiot would think that voting purely on the basis of anti-POTUS is smart. Of course there are lots of idiots out there. I personally thought Jon Corzine was one of them...hopefully for my NJ relatives the new guy will be better. It's not like he's a wingnut extremist or anything.

[IDBillzFan]

Acording to Gecko, Labills, maalox etc it was a fantastic day yesterday because governorships are just soooo important!

You're right. If the gubernatorial races held any importance beyond state lines, you'd have probably seen Obama campaigning for Deeds at least three times and Corzine at least five times.

[VABills]

I don't know why the media is hyping these elections as a referendum on Obama, when polled voters stated the opposite. Governors and local elected officials have a great impact on local daily life, and only an idiot would think that voting purely on the basis of anti-POTUS is smart. Of course there are lots of idiots out there. I personally thought Jon Corzine was one of them...hopefully for my NJ relatives the new guy will be better. It's not like he's a wingnut extremist or anything.

yeah you're right. only 2/3rds of the exit polls said it was about Obam, not all of them. those 2/3rds are probably idiots so they don't count.

[John Adams]

What is with all the Gov's non-sense the last 20 or so years. I live in IL, I can care less who the Gov in the other 49 states is. I mean, I not that I really care who gets elected (Dem or Rep) in IL even. When did Gov's become players within the federal system?

 

These outside races, it just something for the media to talk about? What does it all mean?

 

Umm. Governorships in big states like NJ and VA are hugely important. There have been almost as many US Presidents from Govs (17) as US Presidents from Congress (22). Considering that there are a lot fewer governors, those positions matter.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Umm. Governorships in big states like NJ and VA are hugely important. There have been almost as many US Presidents from Govs (17) as US Presidents from Congress (22). Considering that there are a lot fewer governors, those positions matter.

 

 

Here is the list:

 

Thomas Jefferson, Governor of Virginia, 1779-81

James Monroe, Governor of Virginia, 1799-1802

Andrew Jackson, Governor of the Florida Territory, 1821

Martin Van Buren, Governor of New York, 1829

William Henry Harrison, Territorial Governor of Indiana, 1801-13

John Tyler, Governor of Virginia, 1825-26

James Knox Polk, Governor of Tennessee, 1839-41

Andrew Johnson, Governor of Tennessee, 1853-57, Military Governor of Tennessee, 1862-65

Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Governor of Ohio, 1868-72, Governor of Ohio, 1876-77

Grover Cleveland, Governor of New York, 1883-85

William McKinley, Governor of Ohio, 1892-96

Theodore Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1898-1900

William Howard Taft, Governor of the Philippines, 1901-04

Woodrow Wilson, Governor of New Jersey, 1911-13

Calvin Coolidge, Governor of Massachusetts, 1919-20

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1929-33

James Earl Carter, Jr., Governor of Georgia, 1971-75

Ronald Wilson Reagan, Governor of California, 1967-75

William Jefferson Clinton, Governor of Arkansas, 1978-80, 1982-92

George Walker Bush, Governor of Texas, 1995-2000

 

There are some good ones in there, and there are some bad ones. IMO, I don't think it should carry a lot of weight. To each his own.

[IDBillzFan]

There are some good ones in there, and there are some bad ones. IMO, I don't think it should carry a lot of weight. To each his own.

Just out of curiosity, if you really don't think it carries a lot of weight, can you explain why Obama went to NJ five times for Corzine and to VA three times for Deeds?

 

Nothing else to do? Bored? Caught up on his reading?

[Doc]

This was definitely about Obama, the Dems, and the frightening direction they're trying to take the country. As an independent who voted for Obama (and regrets it!), I can say that I will never vote for a Democrat again.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just out of curiosity, if you really don't think it carries a lot of weight, can you explain why Obama went to NJ five times for Corzine and to VA three times for Deeds?

 

Nothing else to do? Bored? Caught up on his reading?

 

I don't agree with Obama. I don't like the pandering.

[ExiledInIllinois]

This was definitely about Obama, the Dems, and the frightening direction they're trying to take the country. As an independent who voted for Obama (and regrets it!), I can say that I will never vote for a Democrat again.

 

 

Why which way are the gonna take it? To the same place our country was from 1932 to 1980, both dem and rep presidents alike during that time frame. I will even include the 8 years under Reagan, he even looks like a moderate dem.