Election 2009: Lessons for a Krystal Ball

My head is awhirl from all the political spin this morning! My thoughts:

1) McBollinelli sweeps in Virginia

There's more to this story, as many other Republicans at lower levels were also voted in, including 5 more seats in the Virginia House to increase their majority. Was it Deeds fault for not embracing Obama? Well, that didn't work for Corzine. Was it because voters simply wanted to clean house? Probably, since exit polls indicated that jobs and the economy were their #1 concern. (Despite the fact that VA's unemployment rate is only about 6.4%, far below the national average.)

But wouldn't you know it -- while just four years ago, the Democrat's win was declared a referendum on GWB by the NYTimes -- for some reason that same publication says the success of the GOP in this election is only a reflection on Democrats, not the President. I think it truly was a rejection of the politics of Obama, Pelosi and Reid, and that a better run campaign by Deeds would not have made a difference -- and embracing BO might have made the defeat worse.

One last thing -- it was verrrry interesting that the attempt to beat down McDonnell based on his beliefs expressed years ago was not successful. McDonnell's actual record won over the electorate. The Dems did not learn the lesson that BO won the state of VA in spite of his social liberalism, not because of it. So much for a socially conservative Republican not being able to win.

2) Christie over Corzine

Obama and other prominent Dems went there several times, and Corzine still lost. Not a referendum on BO, but it shows that if you follow the Democratic recipe for dealing with a financial crisis as Corzine did (raising taxes and increasing spending) not even a popular Democratic President -- past or present -- can save you. Voters of all parties are sick of the exorbitant tax rates and spending.

Christie actually didn't run a very good campaign, was outspent by at least 3 to 1, and still beat an incumbent from a Democratic state. So much for a socially conservative Republican not being able to win.

3) Hoffman just misses in NY-23

The Dems are spinning this to say that a Democrat pulled off an upset in a traditionally Republican area.

Said a frequent commenter on my site: "Owens won in a district that hadn't gone to a Dem since the Civil War! I'm over the moon about it. It seems Mrs. Palin's endorsement went over like a lead balloon! I guess she'll have to find redemption elsewhere, because thousands of Facebook followers do not a successful presidential candidate make."

What?! How about this analysis: Owens didn't even get half of the vote (and that 49% might be even less with absentees counted), and that was after he was given a few points by DS's endorsement. You can also add the folks who didn't want to vote for a third party candidate. (I know that I am loathe to encourage them in general, although this case was entirely different.) And -- how do I say this? I think some Owens voters just went for the more "charismatic" guy. I mean, have you seen and heard Hoffman? Anyway so much for a socially conservative Republican not being able to (almost) win.

A lead balloon? Seriously? Hoffman was a blip on the radar just 30 days ago. He took off like a rocket in the polls once Palin and others got on board. Another 30 days and the result could easily have gone the other way. (And I hardly think a win by Hoffman would have meant anything about Palin's presidential chances -- a loss doesn't either.)

Over the moon? About a special election that will more than likely be corrected a year from now when the local GOP -- which I believe has learned it's lesson not to put in a DIABLO (even worse than a RINO -- a Dem In All But Label Only) -- chooses a candidate even better than Hoffman and blows Owens away? More like, get over yourselves.

The interesting 2010 race that I now look to locally involves the most unfortunately named woman since the owner of Lear Jets named his daughter Chanda. Krystal Ball is running for Congress. She kicked off her campaign 18-months ahead of time earlier this year under the hubris of the Obama win, imo.

Gee, if it weren't for her politics, I'd love to support her. I mean, I'm glad she's running because more young women need to. And she is very young -- only 27, which would make her the youngest member of Congress. She is also very charismatic, and has a ton of money (and I imagine EMILY's List will throw a ton her way) but I knew right away this pro-choice Democrat looking to unseat a Republican was living in Obama-LaLa-Land.

Maybe yesterday will give her pause, but knowing the DNC, they will figure she just needs to tinker with her message, and she will prevail. Can't wait 'til it's proven that this election cycle was not just a correction, not just throwing the bums out, but the people of this country showing that they realized they were hoodwinked last fall -- and they won't be fooled again.

Comments

[Pat]

"And I hardly think a win by Hoffman would have meant anything about Palin's presidential chances -- a loss doesn't either."

How can you write that? Surely you've been hearing/reading what's been reported ad nauseum: 1) that losses in VA and NJ by Dems are a reflection of a change in the political climate, and 2) Hoffman's lose or win would determine the caliber of Palin's political clout.

I'm willing to concede that the results in VA and NJ demonstrate the electorate's desire for balance in politics. As I've stated before, a two-party government with influence from both sides is ideal. But whether you admit it here or not, you must know that Sarah Palin's Hoffman endorsement was absolutely her attempt to influence an outcome and solidify her position as a true 2012 contender, and it failed...like a lead balloon.

[ChunLing]

Well...she definitely did influence the outcome. I'm sure she would have preferred that her 90 day campaign produce more than a 20-30% shift in the outcome...but it was hardly a lead balloon. Hoffman was a complete unknown who never ran for dogcatcher before...and he forced the Republican candidate to throw the race to the Democrat to insure his defeat.

Even if you don't think that Palin can ever push a third party ticket to victory, she's definitely proven that she can utterly destroy the chances of any 'moderate' Republican, no matter how solidly Republican the district. The Republicans probably noticed that. You'll note that everybody is talking about how Palin failed to win...nobody is talking about her having split the Republican vote or anything like that.

As it is right now, Republicans can look at this race and know, beyond any doubt, that if Palin supports a candidate to their right they have zero chance of winning...that they may well have to throw the race to the Democrats just to keep Palin's choice out. Any district, any state, any office.

In effect, she holds a veto on any 'moderate' Republican running anywhere in America. It's not an unlimited veto, it probably uses some political capital...but how much is unknown. The "reform or die" attitude towards both parties is pretty strong at the grass-roots level right now, and stronger on the right than the left. I think that Palin could probably openly tout the fact that she crushingly defeated the Republican Party in that race and come out ahead politically, but she's probably too classy for that. We'll see if she lives up to her 'rogue' image.

But whatever happens in the news, right now Republicans are scrambling to negotiate with her, because she can annihilate them. Not just in every race, she can abolish their party entirely if they don't move dramatically to the right.

The real question is...are they all willing to fall on their swords for the Democrats? Or is Scuzz an exception? I think that Scuzz is not as unusual as most of the party faithful would like to believe. But then I've never been a Republican.

[Pat]

"right now Republicans are scrambling to negotiate with her, because she can annihilate them. Not just in every race, she can abolish their party entirely if they don't move dramatically to the right."

I disagree wholeheartedly. McDonnell didn't need Palin's help to secure a win in VA -- neither did Christie in NJ -- and they won. And I dare say that this Democrat thinks that McDonnell might be a good fit for VA, from what I know of him and his constituency. Palin splits the Republican party to its detriment. She's not a Republican "purifier."

Americans may usher in a new era of Republican rule at some point. In fact, they WILL, as all things are cyclical, especially American politics. But it won't be a Sarah Palin who runs this country next. She lost the election for John McCain. Whether you choose to believe it or not, Americans prefer moderates.

[ChunLing]

You miss the point, as usual. Sometimes it seems like you do it on purpose.

[jan wright]

krystal ball claims on her website that she wants to end "buying votes" but yet her campaign to raise money includes " paying off the student loan" of her biggest financial supporter. Isn't this " buying a vote" ? in a very deceptive way ? We don't need any more liar's or schemes especially by someone used to manipulating the federal system