Election Night Post-Mortem: Victories In Jersey And Virginia, Gingrich Wasn’t Right In New York

Republicans have a lot to be happy about tonight. Obama and the Democrats invested a lot of time and money in backing candidates John Corzine and Creigh Deeds and both of those candidates lost. Corzine in the heavily blue New Jersey to a guy running on a fiscally conservative district.
Christie, who is now the Governor-elect of New Jersey, even won in Middlesex County which Obama won by 30 points in 2008.
But in the coming days the liberals aren’t going to want to talk about Virginia or New Jersey. They’ll want to talk about the New York 23 race and the Republican civil war that had Republican candidate Scozzafava dropping out and Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman losing despite a bevy of high-profile conservative endorsements.
So what does New York 23 mean? Was Newt Gingrich when he said this: “I think we are going to get into a very difficult environment around the country if suddenly conservative leaders decide they are going to anoint people without regard to local primaries and local choices”?
I don’t think so. Hoffman’s loss in New York 23 had less to do with him than it did with dissension among the Republican ranks brought on not by conservatives refusing to fall in line behind the liberal Scozzafava than Republicans like Gingrich anointing a liberal candidate like Scozzafava (remember there wasn’t a primary to pick her) and then trying to cram her down the collective throats of the conservative base.
Liberals will claim that Hoffman’s loss confirms their theories about the GOP moving too far to the right. Establishment Republicans will claim that it confirms their conventional wisdom about needing to run less-than-conservative candidates to win races.
The truth? If the GOP had just picked a conservative in the beginning, and rallied around that conservative from the get-go, New York 23 would likely have stayed Republican.
As James Pethokoukis notes, the New York 23 race proves “that me-too, moderate Republicanism is a non-stater in [the] party. Hofffman will encourage more primary challengers and boost folks like Rubio in FL and DeVore in CA.”
Oh, and by the way, let the scapegoating of Sarah Palin begin:

Republicans have said that this year’s elections are a referendum on President Obama. That might be the case – I would also ask, might this be a referendum on Sarah Palin?
The two Republican gubernatorial campaigns rebuffed Palin’s offers to stump. They won, and largely on independent voters. Doug Hoffman, the third party candidate in the NY-23 election who Palin endorsed, is by all appearances losing.

That’s not even remotely fair. Hoffman’s loss was due to bumbling the nomination process by the Republican party establishment. But with liberals and the Republican establishment coming together in a perfect storm of Palin hatred “conventional wisdom” will soon have her taking the fall.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • http://Array I don’t like today’s GOP

    Acorn? What’s wrong with you? Start thinking and stop being a jock puppet.

  • sayanything-4625

    Pluralism is dead within the Republican party.

    It is official now that there is a litmus test that all candidates nationally must now meet

    Pot, met kettle.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/A-divided-party-Progressives-threaten-Democratic-lawmakers-68909752.html

    MoveOn.org is sending out emails today seeking more contributions for its campaign to defeat any Democratic senator who does not fully support Obamacare. Yesterday the left-wing activist group asked members to contribute “to a primary challenge against any Democratic senator who helps Republicans block an up-or-down vote on health care reform.”

    It seems we aren’t the only party “purging” the “moderates”, we’re just the one that everyone writes about. Why is that?

  • jimmypop

    its too bad if he does lose in 23. imagine if they had supported him from the start. besides…. as many of us here said form the start; whats the point of giving support to a democrat with an ‘r’ behind their names?

  • sayanything-43

    The most significant election was Virginia. New Jersey was about corruption and incompetence from the Dem incumbent.

    There are a couple good lessons from NY 23. The Republican’s need to nominate good candidates or the conservatives might not follow. Also conservatives should have noticed that dissension doesn’t help the cause.

  • sayanything-13

    If Hoffman lost because of Palin and Limbaugh, did Corzine and that VA fella lose because of Obama? Are the liberals going to try to have it both ways again?

    Cf

  • sayanything-12

    Greg:

    It seems we aren’t the only party “purging” the “moderates”, we’re just the one that everyone writes about. Why is that?

    Moveon.org isn’t the Democratic party, and it is a fact that many Democratic candidates have won on the basis of running a more conservative platform than their more liberal Republican opponents.

  • sayanything-2

    ” Republican party was formed in 1854.”

    You beat me to it, Toot.

    Mike? The Democrat who is substantially more conservative than the Republican who dropped out won, even with Scozzofazza being on the ballot twice. Hoffman garned a large part of the vote in less than 30 days. With an actual primary next year the NY Republican backroomers won’t be able to thwart the will of their Party members. Look to the mass of lost Democrat seats throughout the country at the state, county and municipal level. That is the indicator to watch. That vernier is rarely off.

  • Dan

    HA! Rob I think Newt knows a little bit more than you about what it takes to win campaigns and elections. Your pontification is amusing, but I have to tell you it is hilarious for you to suggest that Newt was wrong and you know better than he does. That takes quite a bit of ego! and of course all of the usual suspects will defend you, but come on….Newt know a thing or two more than you or I.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    “…so why the more centrist voters, who seem to have voted Republican before, voted Democratic this time may not be answerable on the basis of liberal vs. conservative at all.”

    Maybe you can take a hint from the fact that the so-called Republican threw her support to the Dem candidate, instead of uniting behind the conservative. Another hint might be the overwhelming propaganda from the leftie MSM falsely characterizing someone who represents American values as “far right wing” and “hardcore right”; both of which are completely wrong.
    Maybe, since you use the crude sexual term “teabaggers” for real Americans supporting the Constitution and founding principles, you have fallen victim to that same propaganda blitz.

    The correct term is “Tea Partiers”, like the Boston Tea Party, which ignited the American Revolution, and has nothing to do with any crude sexual practices.

    I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that you are merely ignorant of that smear tactic, instead of a willing participant in it.

  • sayanything-12

    Bob:

    The two gop gov’s won without Palin and if I got it right, they rejected Palin’s support.

    That’s one district and a defeat of sorts for a politician with no current standing.

    Obama is president of these united states and head of the democratic party, and if I got it right, they rejected Obama’s support.

    That looks like the bigger story to me. CNN appears to agree.

  • sayanything-51

    Mike A’s point, either here or another thread is the underlying tell here, IMO.

    The two gop gov’s won without Palin and if I got it right, they rejected Palin’s support.

    Talk about your upheavals.

    Will the gop be forever cleaved or with this stunning defeat, will they rummage around the basement for some other winning unity strategery?

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    “The backstabbing by Scozzafava, which is what it certainly was, was precipitated by forces outside of District-23 trying to force her to withdrawal from the race.”

    Incorrect! The outside forces for her to stab Hoffman in the back came from the White House, among others. I posted an article on Rahm Emanuel’s involvement in the Reader Blogs recently. Check it out.
    Sarah Palin was campaigning(camping?) for Hoffman, not against Scozzafava.

  • sayanything-12

    Dino:

    BUT THE NY-23 THING IS HUUUUUGGGGEEEE

    You must have been looking at a picture on your screen that popped up when you wrote that lol. Seriously that could be a computer virus, get it checked out.

    It’s a nothing because we know that a local reaction to external interference played a role in Hoffman’s defeat.

    If anything it should be worrisome to Obama, because the signal here is stay the f**k out of my business, and like I said earlier, if there is a man all about getting in other people’s business it’s that hack Obama.

  • sayanything-106

    Another leftist troll. Oh Goody.

  • sayanything-12

    Make that “more than anybody on the planet, is all about getting in everybody else’s business.”

  • sayanything-51

    Oh silly Tea Baguettes, where to now?

  • Mongol

    Saw this little “gem” of ignorance in clown Gibbs’ speech today:”..In the New York race, Gibbs said, “we watched a party pick a candidate and then purge that candidate. And I think the result was an election (in which) that district sent its first non-Republican to Congress since before the Civil War.”..”

    Someone please tell me if Gibbs is related to our local village idiot Berlin Wall Boy, because the last time a dem held NY 23 was Michael R. McNulty 1989-93. Two other dems held the office before him. Stupidity, they are doing it right…

  • sayanything-51

    Well isn’t it obvious?

    Hoffman lost because he wasn’t conservative enough.

  • sayanything-3430

    Hoffman getting 45% will make a lot of Republicans reconsider some things moving forward and hopefully move many of them to the right who might have preferred running as Democratic-lite. It’s a longshot, but I hope Rubio overcomes Chuckles in Florida. Regardless, Crist is out there now touting his conservative beliefs. If he moves to the right, it’s a success. I think the same thing will happen in other places because of Hoffman. Plus, Hoffman will be back. He’s a player now.

  • sayanything-2

    And there is “litmus test” to be a Democrat? Hahahahahahaha!!! you got sh&t for brains, dave/dino.

  • sayanything-12

    Kenny:

    This idea that outside support hurts a candidate is the stupidest thing I have EVER heard.

    It’s what the polls reported, a$$hole.

  • sayanything-4625

    but do you think the GOP is going to try and ram through a liberal candidate like Scozzafava again now that they’ve learned its a non-starter with the base?

    Rob, I fear that Hoffman losing will cause those in the GOP to believe that they were right in the first place. I keep reading that its conservatives to blame for the state of the party. I read that in a lot of places.

  • sayanything-2

    dinothefakehomo? You got your teeth kicked in, and now it will accelerate. Look at the locals, and NJ, VA. Look at the debacle in Congress, you losers can’t even with a massive majority, get any of your sh^t passed.

    So, spin&twirl and lie. Its all you have.

  • I don’t like today’s GOP

    “If the GOP had just picked a conservative in the beginning, and rallied around that conservative from the get-go, New York 23 would likely have stayed Republican.” I agree.

    It was seriously impressive to see the entire Republican machine and fox news backing 3 candidates. I would say Obama’s influence was more than matched. Huckabie doing robo calls. Unlimited access on fox, Rush …Impressive work.

    Did Fox ever mention that Doug Hoffman doesn’t even live in New York 23? Do you think they would have mentioned it if Owens didn’t live there? Hmmm

  • sayanything-12

    sparkie:

    Your party used to pride itself on pluralism

    Pluralism is dead within the Republican party.

    It is official now that there is a litmus test that all candidates nationally must now meet.

    It’s called the Rush/Beck test.

    And Rob is wrong, and Newt is right on this. Sarah Palin was part of the reason for the local backlash against external pressure. Hoffman lost because you guys bungled this badly, and no other reason.

    Before Scozzafava was forced from the race by external pressure, Hoffman had a 15-point lead. It swung 20-points in less than a week.

    That’s on you guys heads, regardless of all of the excuse making you want to make.

  • sayanything-45

    Tea Partier it is then. The hint I take is that NY-23 is probably a moderate district rather than a conservative one and the voters elected the moderate candidate who happened to be a Democrat this time around.

  • I don’t like today’s GOP

    I think this name fits. It’s honest. It’s not too offensive. I’ll keep it, if you don’t mind.

    Back to the topic. Fox would have covered Owens like stink on something that stinks if he didn’t live there. I’m not claiming that Hoffman was illegal, just that Fox ain’t news. Don’t bother bringing up msnbc opinion shows, you’re better than that.

  • sayanything-12

    The backstabbing by Scozzafava, which is what it certainly was, was precipitated by forces outside of District-23 trying to force her to withdrawal from the race.

    That’s part of that unintended consequences thing, like the Rebel who fights against the Union not because he’s in favor of Succession, but because the Union army is on his property.

  • sayanything-2

    NY 23 comes up next fall, that will tell the tale.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    “Don’t bother bringing up msnbc opinion shows, you’re better than that.”

    But you’re not. “Give and take” means just that. You get the consequences of what you say, no matter how hard you try to wiggle out of it.

    Let’s not forget the possibility of ACORN rigging in this election, either.

  • sayanything-12

    They won in New Jersey and Virginia didn’t they, Bob?

    This loss was more about overreaching than it was about fundamental philosophical movements of our day.

    Seems like Obama has a bit to worry about in that regard, because he more than anybody on the planet, is all about get in everybody else’s business.

  • sayanything-45

    TW’s analysis is particularly poignant on this subject and his lessons for Republicans should be taken to heart. It’s difficult to generalise from local off-year election results but the GOP had won the District since 1841 thus the Democratic victory must have some significance. My understanding of the Republican is that she wasn’t as liberal as comments here suggest while the winner can not be described as a liberal Democrat. At the very least I think it’s fair to say that the Conservative candidate failed to attract many of the voters who wouldn’t describe themselves as “teabaggers” and what should prompt some conservative reflection is that it’s usually the opposition candidate who can best mobilise support in an off year election. Local races often feature local factors and I don’t know much about NY-23 so why the more centrist voters, who seem to have voted Republican before, voted Democratic this time may not be answerable on the basis of liberal vs. conservative at all. If it is answerable on that basis then this isn’t a good sign for conservative electoral success IMO.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    In your usual careful analysis, Carrick, you omit a very large factor: the national attention this race garnered from all the leftie propaganda machinery. Before they went after Hoffman with lying smear, he was in the lead, but the full force of the Vast Left Wing Cabal, with its misinformation, combined with the backstabbing by Scozzafavva, turned the tide.
    As you opine, if politics in the short run(a week at most) is all about emotions, the ability of the Left Wing Noise Machine dominates the major media. It takes time to dismantle all the falsehoods they generated, and there simply wasn’t time to fight them all before the election.
    They were successful in characterizing Hoffman as an “extremist” for embracing fundamental American values.
    We are all the poorer for the success of that tactic. Americans lost that election.

  • sayanything-12

    Kenny, so I take it the 90% number was pulled from the air, right? And as to “the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard”… not an ad hominem in your universe? Really?

    None of the choices you made have anything to do with what I was saying as usual. If you start by constructing false arguments, of course it’s easy to tear them down.

    Let’s look at the facts from a slightly different angle. Hoffman was leading before Scozzafava was forced out. In fact Hoffman was way ahead on the last pulls before the election (which unfortunately likely didn’t cover Monday or Tuesday).

    Scozzafava withdrew and put her support to the Democratic opponent.

    You don’t think there’s any bad blood stirred up over all of that?

    Politics is always about emotions, especially in the short term.

    What I’m suggesting is Hoffman had the momentum in the week going up to Scozzafava’s withdrawal. People like Palin supporting him probably was responsible for that, because before he got national attention.

    I’m not sure what it was that made Scozzafava actually withdrawal, but the perception and probably the reality is this was due to interference from outside. Since politics is all about perceptions, except maybe in Kenny’s universe, it was this perception of undue interference that peaked with the withdrawal and turning of Scozzafava that spelled the doom for Hoffman.

    Only in your fantasy world, Kenny, would people not be bothered by people outside of their area trying to set who they are allowed to choose and elect for their own districts. Bottom line.

  • Wanderer

    God? Is it possible for Democrats to make sense some day?

  • sayanything-13784

    Hoffman was just warming up for 2010, and he will win.

  • sayanything-4625

    Carrick,

    If you say so.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Grannie/Democrat/Fox Needs Us comes up with yet another alias! Sheesh!

  • sayanything-12

    Whistler:

    Well, 1993, but you got the right millennium. By the way the Republican
    party was formed in 1854.

    Off by a decade. And the district was redrawn in 2000.

    The actual statement is “some parts of the district have not been represented by a Democrat since 1851″.

  • sayanything-2

    Look at the asskicking Dems got at the state and local level in PA. Start looking at your state and local results, gang, cause the “journalists” are going to work twice as hard to coverup all those loses.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I don’t think it’s a big loss having Owens in for Dede. In many issues she
    was to the left.

    Given the Republican endorsement and money that Dede got I think Hoffman
    wins.

    On the other hand maybe it’s good that the 3rd party didn’t triumph. In the
    case of a less than ideal candidate we can’t have conservatives fracturing.

  • sayanything-12

    And in case you hadn’t seen it, there’s this report of disgruntlement on Monday. Anecdotal, but highly predictable.

  • sayanything-12

    While you’re at it Kenny, give us a link for this “90% of the time the candidate with the bigger outside backing wins.”

    You’re pulling sh*t out of your a$$ as usual, and combing it with personal attacks as you always do.

    It’s why bothering with you is a waste of time.

  • sayanything-2

    Really? And yet he was totally wrong, and is still out of office, as he will be for the rest of his life. And Rob clearly knows more about,,,well, everything, than you do.

  • sayanything-2

    “local primaries and local choices”? Ah, there were no local primaries or choices, Scozzofavva was selected by a small group of people in secret meetings. Is that Newt’s “new” strategy? Backroom deals? Really?

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    What about the outside forces from the White House who pressured Scozzafava to stab Hoffman in the back?
    Double standard? How about Obama campaigning(camping?) for Corzine in NJ? Isn’t that another example of “outside forces”?

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    “…it is a fact that many Democratic candidates have won on the basis of running a more conservative platform than their more liberal Republican opponents.”

    That’s because MoveOn.org doesn’t represent the electorate. The Dems have to run left to get MoveOn support, but have to pretend to be conservative to get voter support, which they usually do right before the election, after collecting money from groups like MoveOn by being left in the year before the election. That’s what Obama did in the last election.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    “but the GOP had won the District since 1841″

    Well, 1993, but you got the right millennium. By the way the Republican
    party was formed in 1854.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Go Whigs!

  • http://bwjams.com/ David

    Pluralism is dead within the Republican party.

    It is official now that there is a litmus test that all candidates nationally must now meet

    Blog advertising network

  • thecounselor22

    They won in New Jersey and Virginia did not they, Bob?

    This loss was more about overreaching than it was about fundamental philosophical movements of our day.

    Seems like Obama has a bit to worry about in that regard, Because he more than anybody on the planet, is all about get in everybody else’s business.

  • sayanything-2804

    newt certainly knows a lot more that you, I mean, come on who didn’t know that? really now, you’re just too much… wait, we are talking about the amphibian, right?

  • sayanything-7134

    tie. obama and dems threw their weight around jersey and palin , rush , fox around 23rd. Dems would be foolish to believe people aren’t pissed and cons ouch the 23rd going down in flames. Rural area , usually conservative… just not conservative enough.

  • sayanything-4416

    Republicans outnumbered democrats in that district by 45,000.

    This was a very strong repudiation of the right wing/teabaggers.

  • sayanything-1317

    Thanks Carrick.

    Tell me Carrick, how often does an incumbant get the backing of the party, and how often do national figures come in to support a candidate? The answer to both questions is, a lot. Right, wrong, or indifferent, incumbants get a lot of money and support from both the national party and out of state sources. This is an advantage that helps more than 90% of incumbants retain their seats.

    Quite simply, the national parties back a lot of candidates, and, in no shortage of instances, the sitting President helps campaign for candidates of his choice. Unless the President is unpopular, no one blames them for any candidates of theirs who lose.

    Sorry boss, this idea that any outside support hurts a candidate is total nonsense. Look at the candidates that Bush supported in 2002 and 2004 and let me know how many of them won. Here, I’ll give you the answer. It’s most of them. Well beyond supramajority. If it hurt to have outside influence, no one would ever ask outside politicians to campaign for them. Yet most incumbants do. (Again, unless the national figures are unpopular, such as Bush in 2008).

    I’m not attacking you as a person, Carrick, so it’s not ad hominim. But the idea that outsiders kill candidacies is a ridiculous argument contradicted by the facts on the ground. If you don’t like that I look at reality, and call your argument stupid, tough. But you’re the one making ad hominim here and refusing to debate facts. It’s what you do when someone calls BS on one of your arguments.

  • sayanything-1317

    I’d like to add. If the loss was due to this “outside interference”, than the liberals are right. If they voted against Hoffman because Palin, Thompson, etc endorced them, then it means that that district rejected Palin, Thompson, etc’s message.

    So we have, on this page, three choices. We will expound them as they are endorced, with the logic one must accept for each.

    1. The people of New York rejected the message of conservatives and voted in a liberal. They disliked Palin/ Thompson/ etc, and voted the alternative.
    This is plausible as a conservative was rejected and a liberal voted in.
    2. The people voted in the longest running big candidate with the most backing, because that’s what voters everywhere do.
    This also has the beauty behind it of fitting the facts. Third party candidates don’t win on the national stage except during instances of full moons coinciding with nuclear strikes (rarely for those who refuse to see embelishments). There is only one exception in Congress at the moment (out of 435 people). Even on a state level, they barely win.
    3. All of the New York voters loved Hoffman and were going to vote him in in a landslide, but all of a sudden likeminded national figures backed him, and massively conservative voters decided to vote for a liberal candidate because the guy they super super SUPER loved got voted by other people they also love. They got mad because a candidate they refused to support wasn’t supported by people that they liked and so got mad and voted for someone who held polar opposites to every position they held dear just to spite national figures they didn’t know.

    In short, 1 and 2 are likely, and may even both be true. 3 is ridiculous, and when spelled out, as I just did, sounds more ridiculous than the Cubs winning the superbowl, despite being a baseball team. Yet, milquetoast Republicans want us to believe that, despite 1 and 2 both being plausible and likely, than his impossible scenerio happened.

    Sorry, but pass.

  • sayanything-1317

    Spin? It’s simple truth. The majority of candidates Obama backed were elected in 2008. Riding Obama’s coattails was a sure way to achieve victory in 2008. The same was true for Bush in both 2004.

    The truth of third parties is one that strategists across the spectrum acknowledge. Perot cost Bush the election in 1992, and Nader may well have cost Gore in 2000. Ask any third party candidate in your district how hard it is to get attention. It has been the frustration of endless socialist candidates that they can’t get any attention in the 3rd Missouri district despite taking very similar or even more leftist positions than Russ Carnahan. Etc.

    It’s not spin. 3rd party candidates fair poorly in this country. Look up Teddy Roosevelt, a popular President who tried to rerun as a third party guy. Ended QUITE poorly.

  • sayanything-5568

    I was born and raised near Saranc Lake and if Hoffman lives there and works in Lake Placid where he votes..it’s like a stones throw away…Like driving from Bismarck to Mandan…

  • sayanything-1317

    The Hoffman loss is for a few reasons:

    1. People don’t vote for third party candidates. There are some exceptions of course, but they are EXTREMELY rare. There’s only one I can think of in Congress right now, and that’s Bernie Sanders.
    2. Johnny Come Latelys usually don’t do very well. This is kinda a subset of 1, but it’s still true. People who jump into races long after they’re going tend to get slaughtered.

    That’s really it. Had Hoffman run as a Republican, he’d have won. Since he didn’t, the other major party took the victory. Seems too simple, but that’s really how it goes.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    So are you going to start posting under the same name or am I going to have to ban you?

    You can say what you want, but use the same name.

    And by the way, Hoffman was on the ballot legally. And he lives closer to the people he was running to represent than any of North Dakota’s delegation.

  • sayanything-5568

    Christian brainwashing…?? You don’t know a damm thing about the people in the North Country…They don’t like to be call upstater’s….

  • sayanything-81

    Also, NY 23 Republicans and Independents endorsed the RINO lady. Just because they aren’t Glenn Beck clones shouldn’t count against them. Your party used to pride itself on pluralism. Now it’s something else… what is it again? What do you pride yourselves on? Snottiness? Hostility?

  • sayanything-81

    * I called NY 23 from the beginning. * It ain’t Texas and it ain’t Alaska and it ain’t Oklahoma. YANKEE conservatives don’t like downstaters, etc etc. Gingrich wasn’t shoving sh*t down your collective throat, Rob. It’s upstate NY’s rep and Gingrich stated that. Read: not yours. Gingrich’s position is consistent with small government. Armey, Palin, etc were trying to Shiavo it and it blew up in their face. I said it would. I’m thrilled about all the Christian brainwashing money wasted up there. ha.

    NJ is a joke. It’s expected that those folks would be fed up with the outrageous budgets. Maybe now they will be able to buy BB guns without routing a chit to the town sheriff.

  • sayanything-4416

    New Jersey has voted for the opposite party governor candidate from the one occupying the White House since 1977. In fact, in 2001, the republicans lost the governorship to a democrat. Virginia, too, went democrat after bush’s first year even AFTER 9/11 and his unearned rise in popularity.

    BUT THE NY-23 THING IS HUUUUUGGGGEEEE! A real SLAP in the face to the teabaggers and nutjob cons!

    I LOVE IT!

  • sayanything-4416

    SPIN, KENNY, SPIN!

  • sayanything-1317

    On a different point, there is some “conventional wisdom” that is dead wrong here.

    90% of the time the candidate with the bigger outside backing wins. This is why, unless there’s a purge or a scandal, incumbants always win. They ALWAYS have more backing. In this case, right wrong or indifferent, the Democrat had the bigger backing. Hoffman may’ve gotten a few names behind him, but it wasn’t enough to overcome the odds against him, which were substantial.

    This idea that outside support hurts a candidate is the stupidest thing I have EVER heard.

  • sayanything-81

    Carrick
    Let the excuses begin. You’ll never get an inch out of these folks because they place to much value in saving face in one-off internet threads. I think the pluralist angle should be the only angle. It’s the only possible thing you guys COULD HAVE had left to hold dem feet into the fire. GOP will never convert another independent or moderate who believes GOP to be as intolerant as GOP actually is.

    Moreover, everyone is starting to realize that all of these social and economic situations are much more complex and nuanced than the three-word memes that Palin and the shock-jocks use can convey. Gingrich was right. He’s got better vision on this than the others. I chalk that up to being a smarter guy. Just because you know how to get a rise out of people… push a button… move a crowd… doesn’t mean you can spit limited government justifications for national litmus tests for regional candidates! It’s asinine. Your party has been captured by pirates. Get it back. Let the smart guys talk for christ’s sake.

  • sayanything-4416

    As a candidate himself, Obama didn’t actively “back” anyone in 2008.

  • sayanything-81

    BOB! ;)
    Hoffman wanted to CUT HIS OWN MOM for chrissakes.

  • sayanything-4416

    The con fringe had all their eggs in the NY-23 basket. It blew up in their faces.

    Spin it, dry it, rinse, repeat. Won’t change the truth.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Carrick, you keep talking about these “forces from outside District 23,” but what about Gingrich a force from, uh, Georgia who endorsed Scozzafava?

    Big-name endorsements from around the country are typical in contentious races like this one. That many if the big-name conservatives decided to eschew a liberal Republican candidate who was a poor choice is a positive thing, I think, even if Hoffman lost.

    Sure, this seat might have gone Dem and that sucks, but do you think the GOP is going to try and ram through a liberal candidate like Scozzafava again now that they’ve learned its a non-starter with the base?

  • sayanything-4416

    Yeah, yeah, Carrick. Massachusetts elected republicans governor several times in the past 30 years but they’re not conservative by any stretch of the imagination. So did California.

    Governors can’t be as ideological as congressmen. They have states to run.

  • sayanything-1317

    Simply a lie.

    http://thepage.time.com/2008/10/24/obama-steps-in-to-help-boost-oregon-senate-candidate/

    When a politician does ads for another they are backing them.

    “Vote for this person” is always a sign of support.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development