Good Night for Republicans
Cool.
Independents who swept Barack Obama to a historic 2008 victory broke big for Republicans on Tuesday as the GOP wrested political control from Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey, a troubling sign for the president and his party heading into an important midterm election year.
I hope those allegedly conservative Democrats in the House are looking at these races and their political future when they consider Pelosi’s health care bill.
One can dream can’t one, especially when overlooking the debacle brought on in upstate NY where the GOP lost a seat that has been in the GOP for the past 100 years.
Hubris away.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 0956 hrs
Big O got no mojo, that for sure. Really slayed them in New Jersey, eh? Want to talk “debacles” - look at Virginia - White House threw Deeds under the bus, biggest win by a Republican gov in history. It’s that “Obama magic”, I guess.
I hope those allegedly conservative Democrats in the House are looking at these races and their political future when they consider Pelosi’s health care bill.
This just in;
Top Dems: No Health Care Bill in 2009
Senior Congressional Democrats told ABC News today it is highly unlikely that a health care reform bill will be completed this year, just a week after President Barack Obama declared he was “absolutely confident” he’ll be able to sign one by then.
“Getting this done by the by the end of the year is a no-go,” a senior Democratic leadership aide told ABC News. Two other key Congressional Democrats also told ABC News the same thing.
This may come as an unwelcome surprise for the White House, where officials from the president on down have repeatedly said the health care bill would be signed into law by the end of the year.
http://abcnews.go.com/m/screen?id=8987651&pid=4380645
Also this:
Reid signals delay of health care bill
The Senate Democratic leader indicated Tuesday that lawmakers may not complete health care legislation this year, missing President Obama’s deadline on his signature issue and pushing debate into a congressional election year.
http://www.usatoday.com/NEWS/usaedition/2009-11-04-capcol04_ST_U.htm?csp=34
Seems like ObamaCare is becoming toxic waste - no one wants to touch it now.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1025 hrs
I hope those allegedly conservative Democrats in the House are looking at these races and their political future when they consider Pelosi’s health care bill
Indeed. And I hope allegedly conservative republicans will recognize that what people really want is a limited and cautious government, not a steamrolling one that ignores economics principles, fiscal responsibility and individual rights.
The media wants to call this a trend, but its not. Its a volley. Until someone gets it right, we’ll just see independents volley back and forth between one sides bad ideas and another sides bad ideas. Someone give our core principles of freedom and accountability a try. You’ll be surprised.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1118 hrs
Keith,
I don’t think NY was a debacle for conservatives….and it was a lesson that I hope the Rebuplicans learn from. If they had run a conservative candidate, they win that seat. The 6% of morons who voted for the republican who had withdrawn from the race, would have been enough to win the seat. I’d rather be part of a smaller, truly conservative party of limited government, and individual rights, than one that includes McCain and Snow.
And I think a party that stood on those principles would be one that you could sell. As it is now, half the time it is difficult to tell the difference between the parties.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1131 hrs
I disagree. It was more of a bad day for incumbents, or incumbent like.
Bloomburg not doing as well in NY. Everyone had written that race off and it was fairly close.
NY 23 going for a Democrat when republicans had held it since the civil war. Even though Hoffman was not a “republican”, he was the conservative in the race and became the de facto republican candidate even before the republican nominee dropped out. The dem almost got 50%, which no one thought was even reachable.
Corizine being knocked off in NJ.
The dems losing the VA governorship when they had held power for the last two.
Atlanta mayor, electing a white mayor in a black majority city. I think she was one of the conservatives on the council.
Houston mayor, the city council president being stomped in the mayor’s race and not even making the run off when he was supposed to walk away with first. The winner is a big time liberal and a black city councilman, both of them were way outspent. Plus, several incumbent city council ended up in run offs when they were supposed to be easy wins.
Memphis mayor had a similar situation.
Not a good day for incumbents from either party, and with the state of the economy is expected.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1140 hrs
I wonder if Obama will start to move more towards the middle now - like Clinton did after his first mid-term election.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1159 hrs
I hope those allegedly conservative Democrats in the House are looking at these races
Actually, the most conservative Democrat lost last night—Deeds in Virginia.
The Dems are now 5 for 5 in House races since Obama took office, every one of those Dems supporting, for example, the public option in health care reform.
I also hope the “allegedly conservative Democrats” in the House are paying attention, too, but not for the reasons you are.
Posted by folkbum on November 04, 2009 at 1754 hrs
John Garamendi won in the conservative 10th district in California and pushed hard for a robust public option, with the intent of leading to single payer.
You bet blue dogs should look at the Congressional races. When someone represents the actual people and not insurance companies they will do pretty damn well.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1925 hrs
NY 23 going for a Democrat when republicans had held it since the civil war.
The Dems are now 5 for 5 in House races since Obama took office, every one of those Dems supporting, for example, the public option in health care reform.
Wrong and wrong.
Unless the Civil War lasted a lot longer than I learned in public school, the seat was last held by a Democrat in 1993.
And Owens campaigned against the public option.
Nice attempt at spinning what was clearly a bad night for Obama and the Democrat party.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1939 hrs
Cynical: You apparently misread you comment. I was wrong though it was not the civil war, but 1870. Sorry I added those 5 years.
This was not a bad day for democrats and it was not a bad day for republicans. It was a bad day for incumbents, or candidates that represented incumbency. There are more democrats in power right now, so yes I guess you could say that it was a worse day for democrats. To say that, however, is disingenous since the motivating factor was a vote against incumbency.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1945 hrs
Cynical: You apparently misread you comment. I was wrong though it was not the civil war, but 1870. Sorry I added those 5 years.
Uh-huh. How about Michael McNulty
Nice try.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 1955 hrs
Jim Geraghty posted a story from a NY 23 Paper that Hoffman was not at all familiar with local concerns. THAT is what cost Hoffman the race. In the end it sounds like the guy in the middle won the race as Scozzafava was reputed to be to the left of Owens.
The only thing I think safe to take away from last night is Obama’s draw only applies when he is on the ballot.
Posted by Marcus Aurelius on November 04, 2009 at 2008 hrs
So other popularity contestants won the supposed right to scribble magic words on pieces of paper. They will still use intimidation and violence to enforce those magic words.
The only winners are greedy violent government people, no matter which arm of the government party gets elected.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 2110 hrs
And Owens campaigned against the public option.
Owens softened his stance considerably.
Posted by folkbum on November 04, 2009 at 2232 hrs
Once again, in traditionally republican areas or incumbent republicans had a tough time too. NY 23 is a perfect example of that. Houston is a perfect example of that. Bloomburg had a close race when no one thought the challenger would come within 15 points. At one point the polls showed Bloomburg up by almost 30.
It was an anti-incumbent vote. Does not bode well for Democrats in Wisconsin just like it does not bode well for Republicans in Florida, Georgia, etc.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 2238 hrs
He may have softened his position a bit, but he’s hardly on record as
supporting, for example, the public option in health care reform
I guess time will tell.
And let’s not forget he’ll be up for re-election in a year.
John, I think anti-incumbent sentiment certainly had something to do with it, but it would be a mistake to believe the GOP isn’t picking up momentum at the moment.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2009 at 2309 hrs
cynical, here’s Bill Owens, in is own words, last week about the present House bill: “I think moving towards this legislation is very appropriate. I think the type or the form of the public option included in this bill is reasonable.”
Posted by folkbum on November 05, 2009 at 0628 hrs
Ah cynical, the Library of Congress, a source far more authoritative (though I’m sure rather it would be authoritarian) lists McNulty as being in the 21st http://tinyurl.com/yb9ahpb— and the NY Times reporting on the 1998 elections has McNulty in the 21st—http://tinyurl.com/ycp3qmr Some .guy by the name of Sherwood Boehlert winning in the 23rd. Wikipedia and the rest of the wingnut world are wrong.
As usual, the MSM got it right. But of course this will not stop the rumor from flying around freeperworld.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 0850 hrs
By the way, wikipedia has just corrected this.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 0852 hrs
Um, Keith, it was redistricted. He was elected to the 23rd.
Again, nice try. I guess the moonbat world is wrong once again.
Also, I’ll concede this isn’t scientific, but I took a look at the history of all 29 congressional districts in NY. Every single one of them has had a Democrat in the seat in the 20th century.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1002 hrs
Cynical- Sherwood L. Boehlert was the Congressman from the 23rd district elected in 1998.
It is nice that you are finally getting my point. It is an antiincumbent mood and vote, and of course with the Democrats in control more than Republicans it will effect them more. I just want to be clear that the election has nothing to do with Obama. Actually looking at what the elections mean are much more important then creating what you want it to mean.
I would not want to be an incumbent or running in an open seat linked to an incumbent.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1035 hrs
Cynical- Sherwood L. Boehlert was the Congressman from the 23rd district elected in 1998.
Okay, what does that have to do with 1993?
I just want to be clear that the election has nothing to do with Obama.
I couldn’t disagree with you more strongly.
Actually looking at what the elections mean are much more important then creating what you want it to mean.
Pot meet kettle.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1121 hrs
to help out with your amnesia, this was the supposed time there was a D representing the 23rd.
Quite simply, you brought it up. We shot it down.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1250 hrs
Unless the Civil War lasted a lot longer than I learned in public school, the seat was last held by a Democrat in 1993.
Quoting myself, where did I mention anything about 1998?
Other than the entertainment value I get from making you look (more) like a moron, this argument is irrelevant. Owens won. He isn’t the first D to hold the seat since the Civil War, but he the first in a while. We’ll see if he can win again next year.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1318 hrs
NY 23rd has been redistricted 17 times since 1871 so we can argue all day long about who has or has not held it. Here is a list that contains the folks elected - both dems and republicans and shows how it has changed over the years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York’s_23rd_congressional_district
But the important point is that it was trending Dem and that is why Obama appointed McHugh Sec. of the Army. Or did you think he just couldn’t find anyone else qualified besides this sitting GOP congressman from Damn-near Canada New York.
What we should learn here is clear. No one knows what would have happened if Hoffman were the GOP candidate from the get go. What we do now is that he made it very close as an outsider, running openly as a fiscal conservative and that Dede’s take made up the difference. So, the lesson is this: running conservatives does not equal death as some many have tried to claim in the past. Would Hoffman had won? Who knows but it would have been really close and that is enough.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1330 hrs
But Joe, Nancy Pelosi said this:
We had one race that we were engaged in, it was in northern New York, it was a race where a Republican has held the seat since the Civil War
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1109/Pelosi_dismisses_impact_of_New_Jersey_Virginia.html
If Nancy says so, it is time to MoveOn, nothing to look at here, ye that have little faith in the (O)ne. Can’t let facts get in the way of positive spin.
By the way, Hoffman must have set some kind of record for entering a race so late in the game (I think he started in September) & taking 45% of the vote. I think it took Obama two years to secure the nomination - what was he a Senator for 150 days before he began his campaign? Whose the real “rock star”?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1355 hrs
Color me unconcerned. What I see is that we picked up another vote in the House.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2009 at 1944 hrs
Color me unconcerned. What I see is that we picked up another vote in the House.
Another vote for intimidation and violence to achieve social or political goals is always a good thing!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2009 at 1956 hrs
I’m sorry you have such a dim view of democracy in action. Your fellow Americans elected Obama and majorities in congress. It isn’t some coup de tat. You do understand that, don’t you?
Posted by scott on November 05, 2009 at 1958 hrs
That’s asking way too much Scott.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2009 at 0029 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134036
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 11:00 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 95
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 11:32 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).