Virginia- Robert McDonnell (R)
New Jersey-Chris Christie (R)
NY 23rd- Bill Owens (D)
Will edit as things change.
FOX is tentatively calling NJ, which is the most significant of all, for Christie.
Will post in an hour with updates.
10,000 absentee ballets in NY 23rd district. This race just became a toss up again.
Four precincts in St. Lawrence County are having mechanical problems and total results for the county won’t be available tonight.
Fox is calling it for Bill Owens and I am too.
expect to see the white house shouting this from the rooftops tomorrow.
[quote]John S. wrote:
10,000 absentee ballets in NY 23rd district. This race just became a toss up again.
Four precincts in St. Lawrence County are having mechanical problems and total results for the county won’t be available tonight.[/quote]
St Lawrence County is really a shithole.
Hoffman concedes.
two big republican victories today and 1 big democrat victory today.
Obama can try claiming that that election was a referendum on him.
It didn’t seem to me that that was what it was about.
It was about repudiation of RINOs, even if that cost a seat.
The fact that with no Republican in the race, the Democrat won really says nothing that would seem worth Obama touting.
But will it be spun that way? Could be.
Obama can try claiming that it was not about him, but it was. Especially in NJ, he risked a lot of political capital stumping for Corzine, and his wager did not pay off. In fact his support actually helped Christie. A fact not lost on other candidates.
Voters are fed up with Pelosi, Obama and Reid. They don’t have Bush to run against and they simply cannot handle the burden of actually running things, instead of running against it.
They’re going to say it points to the divided state of the GOP and they will have a point. On the other hand, if there had been a proper primary, it’s likely Hoffman would have gotten the nomination and been able to mount an actual campaign without which he still got 45% of the vote.
There’s a bunch of mixed implications in the other major races as well, Virginia and NJ, but I don’t have time at the moment. I actually think Virginia has more significance, or at least as much, for Obama than NJ. Corzine was on the mat on all fours puking blood on his own.
Harry Reid’s ass is on the chopping block in Nevada too, Sue Lowden (R) has his number.
Just announced, former CEO of Hewlett Packard Carly Fiorina is running for Senate in California against Barbara Boxer. God please, get Boxer the hell out of office.
45% of the vote for a third party candidate is still shocking.
I’m not entirely surprised by the election (except for Maine; I guess I hadn’t been watching polls there). It’s actually the Democrats that are divided, as I see it. I believe it was Nate Silver who noted that there are many possible ways to write a health care bill, but only one way to vote “No.” The party that wants an active government is going to have a harder time with unity than the party that just says no. Add the greater diversity of Democratic voters, and the fact that they’re incumbents in a recession, and it’s only natural that they’re falling apart. The GOP has the defensive war here, which makes things easier for them.
I’m starting to think 2010 will be rough on the Democrats.
What you have here is political equilibrium, anytime you see too much of any one side, the next voting cycle moves the other way. The best thing Republicans can do in 2010 and 2012, is not go too far right. The extremeness of anything will kill your efforts, and this is what we are seeing with Obama and his people. He ran on left policies, and he is enacting them WAY TOO LEFT.
Interestingly, the White House is now distancing itself from the losses, saying this had nothing to do with the President or a reaction to his first year in office.
That, of course, does not square with the story the White House was pushing prior to the elections: that Democratic wins would be by virtue of Obama’s influence and a sign that Obama’s mandate was sealed - and that uncommitted House Democrats better recognize the mandate and pass health care and cap-and-trade on Obama’s terms.
This was the story prior to losing.
I haven’t forgotten something my friend Tiribulus wrote once (I’m paraphrasing…and let me know if I’ve got the wrong guy, Tirib!)
If we keep voting “against” people and their agenda instead of “for” people…we are going to keep getting what we’ve gotten…this change of parties and politicians in power with absolutely nothing changing in terms of the size, scope and reach of Government.
Politicians either are “happy” after an election or are “sad” because of their gain or loss of power…that’s it.
Question: (and be honest)
Are we REALLY going to see a significant change in Government, whether its DEMS or the GOP in power?
I guess I’ve been through enough of these political cycles to answer (for myself):
Not really…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I haven’t forgotten something my friend Tiribulus wrote once (I’m paraphrasing…and let me know if I’ve got the wrong guy, Tirib!)
If we keep voting “against” people and their agenda instead of “for” people…we are going to keep getting what we’ve gotten…this change of parties and politicians in power with absolutely nothing changing in terms of the size, scope and reach of Government.
Politicians either are “happy” after an election or are “sad” because of their gain or loss of power…that’s it.
Question: (and be honest)
Are we REALLY going to see a significant change in Government, whether its DEMS or the GOP in power?
I guess I’ve been through enough of these political cycles to answer (for myself):
Not really…
Mufasa[/quote]
It depends on which GOP shows up and more importantly which GOP governs. If contrasted with this gang anyway. Truth be told, by the time the present college crowd takes power it will be over. Any move today to re-Americanize this nation will be only delaying the inevitable. Listening to the younger generations, they can’t wait to drive those last few nails in the coffin.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Are we REALLY going to see a significant change in Government, whether its DEMS or the GOP in power?[/quote]
At this point? Yes. The differences are heightened because of the Obama-Pelosi agenda. For example, the difference between a “public option” health care plan and a plan without it is not merely a difference of degree - it is a distinction between two vastly different public policy approaches.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I haven’t forgotten something my friend Tiribulus wrote once (I’m paraphrasing…and let me know if I’ve got the wrong guy, Tirib!)
If we keep voting “against” people and their agenda instead of “for” people…we are going to keep getting what we’ve gotten…this change of parties and politicians in power with absolutely nothing changing in terms of the size, scope and reach of Government.
Politicians either are “happy” after an election or are “sad” because of their gain or loss of power…that’s it.
Question: (and be honest)
Are we REALLY going to see a significant change in Government, whether its DEMS or the GOP in power?
I guess I’ve been through enough of these political cycles to answer (for myself):
Not really…
Mufasa[/quote]
Hey, Mufasa.
I think you can see the difference between Republicans and democrats quite clearly. Take any example. For instance, deficit spending. How about foreign policy? Cabinet appointments (or lack therof?) Czars? War on media outlets?
I’m not going to sit here and espouse the virtues of Republicans to high heaven. They are guilty at one time or another of many of the same trangressions.
However, the democrats are worse by a large margin. It’s a question of DEGREE.
By the way, if I hear another idiot liberal say that NY 23 wasn’t held by a democrat since the Civil War, I’m going to explode.
LOOK IT UP. THEY HELD IT IN 1993, mCnulty was his name.
JeffR
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Are we REALLY going to see a significant change in Government, whether its DEMS or the GOP in power?
At this point? Yes. The differences are heightened because of the Obama-Pelosi agenda. For example, the difference between a “public option” health care plan and a plan without it is not merely a difference of degree - it is a distinction between two vastly different public policy approaches.[/quote]
Yes, this is exactly right. No Republican, (Except maybe DeDe Scozzafava) would have proposed anything like the versions of any of these programs we are presently being treated to. Hell, JFK would shit himself if he only knew.