It was a decidedly mixed night for gay rights. Maine narrowly rejected their gay marriage law, while Washington upheld a law allowing civil unions. Chapel Hill, North Carolina elected an openly gay mayor, while Houston, Texas saw an openly gay women come in first in their mayoral election (there will be a runoff). Kalamazoo, Michigan passed an anti-discrimination measure that protects people from discrimination based on sexual orientation. Meanwhile, gay activist Eric Resnick won a seat on the Canton, Ohio, Board of Education. The defeat in Maine was disheartening, but I think the most positive sign is that gays are winning elected office at a more steady clip. That’s a better indicator of social acceptance than the results of a low-turnout ballot initiative.
As for the national political implications of last night’s elections, the first thing to consider is that the Democrats picked up one net seat in the House of Representatives and will have two more votes for the remainder of the 111th Congress.
Of course, the big upset was in NY-23, where Democrat Bill Owens comfortably defeated the Palinist, Doug Hoffman. But John Garamendi also won a special election in CA-10. Both candidates have expressed support for a public option in the health care reform bill, and Garamendi apparently prefers a single-payer system. He replaces the decidedly centrist Ellen Tauscher, who retired to work on nuclear non-proliferation issues at Hillary’s State Department. Owens was a registered Republican until recently, and we can expect him to compile one of the most conservative voting records of any northern Democrat. He’ll add one more vote to the Blue Dog caucus, giving them just a shade more clout in the House. But, he’s also a bit of insurance against the Republicans retaking the House, and he’ll be a more consistent vote than his predecessor John McHugh, who is now Secretary of the Army.
The election of Owens, in a geographically huge Upstate New York district that hasn’t been represented by a Democrat since before Abraham Lincoln was elected president 1871, completes the process of painting blue the entire region from Maine to the western suburbs of Rochester and down into New Jersey. In all of New York and New England, the GOP now has one seat between Rochester and Buffalo and one seat on Long Island. And lest we think that the governor’s race in New Jersey signals a resurrection of the Republican Party in the region, the Republicans only picked up one net Assembly seat. There were no coattails whatsoever, and no sign of a general revolt against incumbent Democrats.
The same cannot be said for Virginia. The Republicans had a huge night there, winning governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general and five or six seats in the House of Delegates. More than anything else, these victories were caused by depressed turnout among the Democratic base. This might more accurately be described as a return to the norm after Obama’s candidacy fundamentally altered the typical makeup of the Virginia electorate. Progressives will argue that Obama is at fault for failing to excite the base, but that’s only a tiny part of the explanation. No matter what he did, he couldn’t turn out his supporters at the same rate when he wasn’t on the ballot.
Erick Erickson of Red State invested most of his energy in the NY-23 race, and he is declaring victory despite the loss.
First, the GOP now must recognize it will either lose without conservatives or will win with conservatives. In 2008, many conservatives sat home instead of voting for John McCain. Now, in NY-23, conservatives rallied and destroyed the Republican candidate the establishment chose.
I have said all along that the goal of activists must be to defeat Scozzafava. Doug Hoffman winning would just be gravy. A Hoffman win is not in the cards, but we did exactly what we set out to do — crush the establishment backed GOP candidate.
Here’s the interesting thing. Erickson goes on to make the same argument that the progressive blogosphere makes about third parties and working within the party to make positive change.
Secondly, and just as importantly, there has all of a sudden been a huge movement among some activists to go the third party route. We see in NY-23 that this is not possible as third parties are not viable.
Third parties lack funding and ability for a host of reasons. Conservatives are going to have to work from within the GOP. The GOP had better pay attention.
It’s an interesting spin. Erickson is trying to shepherd these shock troops back inside the GOP tent. But the Teabaggers are not a domesticated animal. Erickson is going to need the equivalent of a bear-trap to regain control of this movement. They will go after any Republican who crosses conservative orthodoxy and seek to destroy all recruits who might match the moderate social beliefs of the dozens of districts that have recently fallen into Democratic hands. This is a great strategy for keeping already elected Republicans from crossing the aisle and lending bipartisan support for anything on Obama’s agenda. But as a strategy for taking back Congress, it’s about the most self-defeating approach possible.
Erickson wants to go after Florida governor and U.S. Senate candidate Charlie Crist next.
For all intents and purposes, NY-23 is a trial run for Florida. And in Florida, the conservative candidate is operating inside the GOP. If John Cornyn and the NRSC do not want to see Florida go the way of NY-23, they better stand down.
I’m not sure what ‘standing down’ means in this context. Erickson is threatening to hand the Florida senate seat to the Democrats if Crist is the Republican nominee. I don’t know whether that is within the Teabagger Movement’s power without running Rubio as a third-party candidate in the general election. But Rubio might be able to beat Crist and win the nomination. In such an event, the chances for Kendrick Meek, the likely Democratic nominee, will go up considerably. And, if the Republicans lose the Florida seat, their chances of knocking the Democratic caucus below sixty members will be significantly diminished. Of course, this Teabagging Movement will not be restricting their mischief to only Florida. They could make trouble for the GOP candidates in Illinois, Connecticut, and elsewhere.
The lessons of the night are that the Democrats need to focus on job creation next year, while taking care to satisfy and motivate their base voters. The Republicans are in a real jam. They ought to be in good position to pick up seats, but their opportunities will be crushed if they continue to be intimidated by their fringe base.
markos also has suggestions:
people are not impressed by throwing gigantic hunks of meat to goldman sachs, without so much as a bone to ordinary people. And while you might argue “that hunk of meat saved the economy”, people aren’t feeling it. And when they’re not feeling it, they stay home.
health care reform plays into that as well: your average person sees how easy it is for Goldman Sachs to get bailed out and how hard it is for Joe Schlub to get help, and draws a pretty basic conclusion.
I know i wasn’t feeling it in Philadelphia. Mostly i voted against the judges, and refused to vote at all for some of the candidates.
Of course, Obama hasn’t forgotten about any of those four issues.
.
I was quite surprised to view a report on local television … in The Netherlands!
Two weeks ago, Ann Minch of Red Bluff, Calif. announced in a YouTube video that she’d launched a one-woman “Debtors’ Revolt” and would refuse to pay off her credit card balance after an unfair interest-rate hike. Now, after her video made a huge splash, Bank of America has agreed to reduce her rate.
Ann Minch said in a video posted Saturday that a Bank of America executive contacted her on Friday.
“He asked me to talk a little about my personal financial situation so we can negotiate some kind of agreement in regard to my existing credit card account,” she said. The executive “tried to get me to agree to 16.99 percent and I said, ‘No, nope, I believe because you guys are getting your money from the Fed at zero percent interest… that 12.99 percent is a more than generous profit margin for you guys.’ So he did finally agree to that and he also agreed to send me that in writing.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I often wonder if some, no many, progressives are delusional in their over estimation of their impact on the overall electorate, but Kos’s take away from last night makes me question his sanity. There is absolutely no tangible evidence that the losses in VA and NJ had anything to do with Deeds avoidance of a progressive agenda. If anything, just the opposite. Independents are not abandoning Democrats because they think they aren’t progressive enough. They are abandoning Democrats because they think they are too progressive.
I’m African American and I live in Virginia, and I can tell you that progressives are delusional if they think that Black folks in Virginia gave a damn about Deeds like of adherence to a progressive agenda. Voters like me who normally vote in off-year elections didn’t vote because we were disgusted by Deeds naked attempt to appeal to bigoted rural white voters. He distanced himself early from the President and minority voters. I told his campaign who tried to recruit me as a volunteer in NoVa in the early Summer that I would have a scheduling conflict then to election day. It was in response to Deeds refusing to appear with the President at a rally citing a scheduling conflict with an appearance at an elementary school. I’m not stupid and neither were other African Americans who saw the writing on the wall: Deeds didn’t want to be associated with the Black President. That’s why he didn’t get the endorsements of prominent African Americans, including former Governor Wilder and prominent Latinos in NoVA. It didn’t have a damn thing to do with the public option, unions or immigration reform. There is no need to over analyze this. We just didn’t like Deeds!
As for NJ, not living there, I can’t speak to the mood or attitudes of black, white, Latino or any voters for that matter, but if exit polls are to be believed, and there is no reason not to, Democrats, like Independents and Republicans, voted their pocket books. And they damn sure weren’t going to turn out for a governor with a 30% approval. It didn’t have a a damn thing to do with a progressive agenda.
Voter’s don’t give a damn right now about any of those issues. They want jobs. If Obama can turn this economy around and produce jobs by 2010, he’ll turn out the base and regain Independents and moderate Republicans. It’s that simple.
I think both the media, the progressives and conservatives read far too much into these elections.
When I vote it is to support someone not to make some broad statement.
Especially not nationally.
I do wonder about progressives ability to understand what is physically possible in moving legislation through congress, their ability to understand the process and how things work in congress. What is the job of the president and what is the job of congress and what the president legally can and cannot do as far as making law.
We have had 30 years of conservative destruction. A systematic dismantling of our agencies, our treasury, ect. by conservatives who tried to bankrupt the country in order to take down all the programs and social responsibility of the government.
They just about succeeded last fall. Bush and Paulson blinked and worked to save the banking system.
Progressives do not seem to understand that you collapse our economic system and the banks you are going to take the world’s down with you.
How responsible is that?
Obama had to spend time and money this past year to save the banking system. You cannot send the world’s financial backbone into the abyss.
All of this and the other messes, dismantling and other asst. problems takes time to fix. This is not a television drama.
But, progressives have been crying since day 1 that things have not progressed fast enough, their pet issue has not been addressed, how dare he save the banking system and expect congress to do their job when he should just roll over them, ect.
They have been as disheartening as the rightwing and as irresponsible and as unknowing about how the government works.
A year ago Obama said:
We may not get there in a year, or in 4 years but, I promise you we will get there.
You captured by sentiments to a T. Sometimes I think they truly live in la la land. Personally, I’m not interested in financial armageddon to prove a point. Progressives bitch on blogs, but believe me in private they are smiling now when they open their quarterly 401K and employment based savings plans and see big green numbers rather than the bright red numbers we were seeing at the beginning of the year. The President had to take unpopular steps not only to save the banking system but build confidence in the markets in which the vast majority of our pensions and savings are invested. He didn’t want to do it; he had to do it.
Exactly. I, too, wonder about some “progressives” and their desires to push us closer to economic collapse just so they can say they stuck it to the banking industry.
No one disputes that it sucks when the federal government had to bail out some big banks while individual home owners lost their houses, but I never heard a peep from those progressives on how they’d mitigate the economic and social chaos that no doubt would have transpired in a collapse.
I do think that many progressives don’t like the idea that time and compromise are both required to get solid, meaningful changes accomplished. They’d prefer to sit on the sidelines and snipe at anyone they deem less than perfect (or scream: “Rahm Emanuel is throwing progressives under the bus!”) rather than getting their hands dirty in pursuit of positive, incremental change.
A lot of darker and younger faces who voted for Obama in Virginia in 2008 stayed home. Deeds ran against healthcare reform.
Garamendi ran in a district that was once solidly Republican until Tauscher ran as a fiscally conservative bank and corporation-friendly Dem. She was by far the most right-wing Dem Representative in Northern California. Garamendi won comfortably. He is for a single-payer Medicare for all kind of reform.
If nothing else, supporting the most radical healthcare reform didn’t hurt Garamendi and opposing even the watered-down versions of healthcare didn’t help Deeds.
Running to the right of Republicans didn’t help the Republicans in New York’s 23rd.
From this narrow sampling, it suggests that Kos is correct. I think that the electorate is to the left of what the media would have you believe.
You can’t be suggesting that a congressional candidate in a district with an 18 point Democratic voter registration advantage is a model for Democrats running state-wide?
“I think that the electorate is to the left of what the media would have you believe.” No, it is far more center right than progressives will accept. Even those “darker faces” that you mention are far more socially cnoservative than progressives will ever admit. Gay marriage failing in the most liberal and libertarian of states should be a wake-up call to that. The vast majority of African Americans and Latinos are not and would never self-identify as progressive or liberal eventhough they share progressive or liberal values.
Progressives mistook a rebuke of conservative or Republican incompetency under Bush as a turn left. It wasn’t. Voters change their minds all the time. The vast majority aren’t even ideaological. They just want competency, right or left.
The vast majority of voters aren’t going to vote on issues like the public option or climate change. Those are gimme issues that voters accept or let slide when everything else is running smoothly.
Totally agree with Kos. I just didn’t feel like voting yesterday. I did, but I had to drag myself to the polls. Why blame VA on Obama? I haven’t seen that. I blame it on Deeds. The dude ran against climate change legislation, the public option and EFCA. What was he thinking? It’s not like it’s 2012 and he can rely on Obama’s coattails…
He also ruined the down ticket races for Jody Wagner.
you are spinning Boo. we got our asses kicked in the 2 gov races and that is what the media will play up. sure, we got some local wins re gays but again, the STATE of Maine, that’s a STATE and that is what the media will play up.
the loss of va and NJ resulted from the lack of the youth and minority voter and both those groups will not vote if they think that they are being played. simple. all they are saying is- don’t shit the shitter!
The voters of the STATE of Washington extended the rights afforded to married couples (adoption, wills, etc.) to domestic partners. While there are a few hetero senior citizen couples who are registered as domestic partnerships for one reason or another (didn’t want to remarry, issues with the kids, etc.) the overwhelming majority of domestic partnerships are gay, and R-71 was largely viewed as a gay rights issue.
The tide is turning, but it’s turning pretty slowly and we might not see a state vote in favor of gay marriage for a generation or so until today’s college students start taking the reins of power. When the forces of legalized gay marriage are running 0-31 in statewide contents, a domestic partnership law like R-71 that stops just short of allowing marriage is about as good as we can expect at the moment. So why isn’t R-71 bigger news out there?
Washington STATE has five times the population of Maine, and all I’m seeing in most national accounts is the Maine vote.
Oh, wait. Maine’s on the east coast. Never mind.
Yeah, what was I thinking anyway.
I’ve got people in Jersey. I grew up there. Corzine was univerally hated and his car accident crystalized that hatred. As John Cole quipped this a.m., finally someone from Goldman Sachs lost his job.
Deeds ran like a Republican and lost. Where have I seen that before? The Dems there are out of the governor’s mansion until the new Elmer Gantry is caught boning someone. I give him a couple of years.
End of the day: Repubs lost two governors’ mansions, won two House races. Gays made some gains but when fear and hate plays its hand Americans are ready to vote away each others’ rights.
Wrong. The only major ballot measure that proposed to take away an existing right was in Washington state, where the Christian right forced a referendum on a law the state legislature passed last spring.
Against initial expectations, those rights were preserved, in part because some conservatives saw that when gay couples got all the legal rights of marriage, nothing happened. Except, of course, that gay couples got all the legal rights of marriage. But none of the calamitous effects predicted by the homophobes materialized, and so in the rural counties that decided the election, enough people had their libertarianism trump their fear and hate.
And in 30 years, we’ll marvel that these issues were ever even put to a vote.
Corzine not a bad governor in an impossible situation, but has no public presence and people blamed him for all NJ’s problems. true he has an arrogant streak (the car accident, the g.f.) but he got out of Goldman S before they decided to destroy the economy (I’ve heard it said on principal, but also true it was after he made piles of $) and he grew up on a farm, has old-style classical liberal ideas. Anyway, very curious how long Christie will last since I suspect he’s going to work for NJ keeping it’s place in the corruption hall of fame.
I noticed how the mainstream media, after talking obsessively about NY-23 has suddenly forgotten it even exists today.
they also ignore the fact that dems picked up 2 seats.
But, they are spinning the gov. races like it is this huge referendum against Obama.
Most people from those states said it was a combination of local issues and weak/bad candidates. Neither had a bearing on how they felt towards the pres.
I am shocked a bit by how aggressively the press has tried to knock the president or make everything about how he is simply not good enough.
this coming from a press that lapped up and built up the dumbest guy in history to become president the last 8 years- Bush.
Note Politico’s list of losers. It doesn’t include Palin or Pawlenty. They are the two biggest losers of the night, particularly Pawlenty. He was supposed to be the acceptably Christian, socially moderate, fiscally conservative (sane) Republican with experience winning in a blue state. He decided to follow Palin and the other crazies to the far right and made an ass of himself. Meanwhile, both Romney and Huckebee had the good damn sense to stay out of it. Palin’s relevance is severely diminished today and Pawlenty has gone from a nobody to a has been on the national scene overnight. The Republican nomination now comes down to a charming evangelical social conservative who is sometimes fiscally liberal with experience winning the majority Black vote in a southern state vs. the mormon with solid business acumen that appeals to Independents, moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats in an environment where the number one and two issues are jobs and the deficit.
The fact that the mainstream media continue their infatuation with a “politician” who interacts with the world largely through her Facebook page still amazes me. Do they honestly think we are that dumb? Probably. Palin could endorse ten candidates, nine of which could go down in flames but, thanks to the one that might eke out a victory, the media would portray her as a kingmaker and a force to be reckoned with on the American political scene.
Mock the rightwing all you want–and believe me, I’m with you–but the leftwing in this country will continue to eat itself and bring failure down all around it as long as it continues the same push for purity that we now see mostly from conservatives. Instead of continually hitting Republicans and conservatives hard, contrary to any political rationality that I can see some “progressives” have turned their venom on Blue Dog Democrats.
That is a recipe for political suicide.
The most startling thing that has shaken loose from the aftermath of Obama’s victory last year is the speed with which “progressives” have abandonded him, largely in their eyes because he hasn’t moved fast enough to right the wrongs of the Bush administration or, entering total fantasy zone, brought the Bush administration up on some sort of criminal charges.
All that sort of jibber jabber does is feed the media’s desire to portray Obama as a total failure, and to argue that the loss of governorships in Virginia and New Jersey somehow signal cracks in Obama’s armor and a resurgence in Republicans. Just look at the WaPo coverage today. What the media (and Republicans) want is nothing more than the Republican party to be resurrected WITHOUT EVER HAVING TO PROPOSE ONE SUBSTANTIVE WAY TO SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS. They will always ignore reality–such as the fact that dissatisfaction with Corzine led to his defeat much more than a great desire for the policies promoted by Christie.
Look, this liberal voted for Obama with great gusto last year, and will do the same in 2012. I voted for him not because I thought he would correct every wrong that Bush exacted on America, the world, and objective reality (though I think he will make significant changes), but largely because I trust him enough not to make the same bad choices that Bush made. I believe in the politics of marginal improvements, not the politics of instantaneous perfection, and the belief that Obama was going to punish all the bad guys and change everything back to the way things were before Bush, rather than help us move into the future, was misguided if not completely, utterly stupid.
I would caution all “progressives” who seem to think that they can improve the “progressive” nature of Congress by primarying Blue Dog Democrats in centrist congressional districts to reconsider their strategy, because all they will likely do is increase the number of Republicans in power. If such “progressives” would rather see the country destroyed than to compromise one whit of their beliefs, then it’s time to stop blaming the stupidity of the rightwing for getting us where we are. There is nothing wrong with compromise in politics, and there is nothing wrong with accepting moderates into the Democratic party.
Whatever.
I want out of Iraq and Afghanistan. I want healthcare reform.
Obama was a better bet than McCain to get there. Why shouldn’t he and other Dems who don’t get things done be judged by what they do and don’t do? And why shouldn’t Blue Dogs who are voting the money they get from their corporate owners be exposed?
I refuse to consider any “D” to be a worthy representative of mine. If you have the “D”, you need to stand for something. If you are a RIABN (Repukeliscum in all but name), you MUST be primaried. We need to ensure that when people see the “D” that it actually has a meaning.
Some people “vote for the individual”. That is idiotic and ignorant. I vote for the party. Since I vote “D”, I expect that you, the elected “D”, will stand for “D” principles. If you do not, I will work like crazy to get you out.
When we elect someone to Congress, they are there to do a job. The job is passing legislation. The legislation is determined by the objectives of the Party in power.
Any individual legislator is not there to have a career. They are there to vote on legislation, and that is all. If we can pass health care legislation and several other Democratic objectives at the cost of some members losing their seats, that’s fine by me.
You are not in Congress to get re-elected. You are there to vote and pass Democratic bills. Too bad if the cost is your seat.
You made her point.
It is in the political self-interest of every politician to get elected, and then re-elected. That is what drives the system; that is the reality of the political landscape.
Railing about how “wrong” that might be is pointless. You’ll sooner find Congress full of unicorns and butterflies than you will find it full of idealists who think that their only purpose in life is to pass legislation that passes your purity test.
That is the problem with the narcissistics on either end of the political spectrum who think that by cutting ties to moderates or centrists, they can actually make their respective parties stronger. The more doctrinaire and ideological any group becomes, the more marginalized it becomes, and rightly so because it will have lost sight of anything resembling the common good.
Well said!
Here in the People’s Republic of King County, Washington we had some important business to attend to:
Referendum 71, asking whether the state should extend the rights of married couples to members of domestic partnerships
Initiative 1033, a TABOR bill sponsored by professional initiative peddler Tim Eyman
The King County Executive race pitting the current county council chairman (a Democrat back before the race became non-partisan) against a former news anchor and stealth Republican
The results are trickling in because King County votes by mail now, but if the trends hold up as they almost certainly will I’m happy to say that R-71 will pass, I-1033 will fail miserably, and that the Palin wannabee is losing in the Executive race to the council chairman.
(There was also a race for mayor of Seattle on the ballot, but since I don’t live in Seattle I didn’t get to vote for that.)
These were all important issues, but I would have crawled across broken glass to vote against Eyman’s TABOR initiative. Anything I can do to rid the political landscape of that wannabee governor-by-initiative is a pleasure.