Early on, Tuesday night was victorious for the Republican Party no matter how varied the opinions are on what these results will mean going forward. But the surprise happened late when the voters in New York’s 23rd district rallied against the out-of-state spending and the late candidacy of Doug Hoffman, electing the moderate Democrat Bill Owens – the first Democrat elected in well over 100 years. As I mentioned in yesterday’s preview, the key message to the RNC going forward is to study every election closely, know the core issues for the electorate and nominate a candidate that can stimulate that desire. A straight ideological candidacy will not win in this day and age. Both parties have done too much to alienate middle America. So to win you have to be able to reach the coveted moderate and independent voters. That message won the Republicans two Governorships and lost them one Congressional seat.
Lets review last night’s major races:
The night started with a quick, easy win for the Bob McDonnell. The conservative Republican ran a straight-forward issue-based campaign that worked well in the commonwealth. Although seen is as strong conservative, many of his solutions to address the economy and job growth within Virginia were bi-partisan. His approach led to a 21% win among independents over his challenger. That is a 22% turnaround compared to Obama’s performance last year against John McCain. McDonnell is the type of candidate the party should use as a model going into 2010 for historically stronger red states.
The next result was the biggest of the night for the Republican Party and President Obama. In the state of New Jersey, Chris Christie upset incumbent John Corzine despite Obama visiting the state three times to campaign for Corzine. The moderate Republican killed the one-term governor among independents; nearly doubling the Democrat. Despite his strong showing among Republicans, New Jersey’s strong Democratic machine kept the race close enough to make it interesting. But in the end, a strong moderate that appealed to a base with the same key issues as the race in Virginia won because he was moderate. The media is continuing the storyline that Republicans are pushing out the moderates from their party. Yet, they destroyed their competition among independents in this election.
The final result was the hard to call race in New York’s 23rd district. There was so many oddities to this race that even Nate Silver at FiveThirtyeight.com said he couldn’t predict what would happen. But in the end, Democrat Bill Owens managed to beat the little known conservative challenger Doug Hoffman. Many right wing pundits put their neck out for this guy, and will need to do some spin work to lessen the blow. Already on Tuesday evening some were trying to say that just slapping the wrists of the Republican Party officers in NY that nominated the moderately liberal candidate was enough to be considered a victory. I saw Hoffman speak three times prior to the election and left more and more unimpressed every time I saw his awkward delivery. The short term crow the pundits backing Hoffman must eat, might actually be a blessing because I think Hoffman could have hurt the right wing much more if he remained in the public eye for a long period of time.
One key fact is that Scozzofava, the Republican nominee that dropped out, won 6% of the vote even after she dropped out. This percentage would have won if added to the Hoffman count. However the real reason for the surprising loss in the reliably conservative region had to do with the outsiders financially supporting an out of district candidate. 95% of Hoffman’s campaign contributions came from outside the district. Also, Hoffman himself was not from within the 23rd district. Reportedly, his interview to the editorial board of the largest paper in the district was horrible – solely because he didn’t know the issues within that region. Simply put, the right wing bet on the wrong pony.
Overall, it was a solid night for the Republican Party after you add in many of the smaller profile races around the nation. There is something to build from if they are able to properly analyze the results and not use them to fill some ideological belief.
3conservativebros
MacGregor
Johnny M
Timmy K
Yes, good day for the GOP. I know I was questioning the state of the republican party after Obama’s election. What worried me the most is the state I live in now, Virginia. I thought maybe the aristocrats from D.C. had invaded the state and were poised for takeover. So far from what I have seen though is a complete 180 degrees from the affluent counties of northern VA. Looks like a swing of almost 30% in some counties (loudoun) between the two elections.
http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/Election_Information/Election_Results/2009/November_General_Election.html
I also think there is some to be said for the state of Virginia always voting for a Governor whose party in not the white house. Maybe this shows the states constant discontent with what goes on inside the beltway.
Good article, however, I have to disagree on one point. I’m not sure how much “crow” the right wingers are going to have to eat on the Hoffman issue. You’re correct in saying that in this instance Hoffman was the wrong pony to bet on, but I think the pundits and right wingers were making a statement to the GOP. The GOP has been putting out the wrong ponies for a long time, and has lead to a lot of conservatives feeling a sense of disillusionment with the party in general–I think this is a big part of the reason why Obama got elected. The GOP needs to stop putting out the same old candidates that are only a slightly more “purple” version of the Democratic candidates, and start putting out the kind of candidates that real people in middle America can relate to. Not perfectly polished, but have the right stance on the issues.
Kat – Point taken. I do not think Scozzofava was the right candidate for the nomination and agree with you the correct answer is not all watered-down moderate candidates. And if you want to say that their was victory in stepping up to the GOP in NY and saying we wont take someone obviously not conservative as an acceptable alternative, that is great too (note: this problem does not occur if they had a primary; a conservative candidate would have won the primary & election).
But, I dont think its a coincidence Palin, Thompson, Hannity, Beck, Rush, Levin, etc… chose a district that hasnt voted progressive since 1872 to make this stand. Rush was talking on his show yesterday about how the Dems would spin it when Hoffman wins. They thought they had it in the bag, and would be talking today about how conservatism ideology works in local elections. What they found out was that local politics, especially in more rural areas are dominated more on issues and knowledge of the region – of which Hoffman had none. So yes, minor victory in standing up to the GOP. But minor loss in losing with their candidate.
You need a big tent and to appeal to moderates, even if you run as a conservative like McDonnell did. And that is where the party needs to focus in 2010 – dont go straight with ideologues that appeal nationally, but address each district uniquely and appeal to that base.
Since when should national talking heads trump local concern. Dick Armey and those like him are going to have a negative impact on the Republican party because they champion exclusion and not inclusion. The Republican house has become virtually nothing but idelogues. What is the problem with this? The prolem is, it leaves many moderate Republicans homeless within their own party. The problem is rampant and baseless obstructionism versus any type of bipartisanship destroys any hope of workable government. All the while this mass dissatisfaction with “government” is constantly and loudly trumpeted from every corner. There now is no place in the Republican party for those like Mark Hatfield or Tom McCall or Chuck Hagel. All the while the decorum that used to be so much a part of the G.O.P. has all but evaporated. There is a place for government, workable government that are representative of their constituencies. To exemplify what I’m speaking of, I’ll share a link. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/07/i-object-tom-price-tries_n_349587.html
Where is everybody? I hear crickets and watch tumble weeds blowing down the virtual halls.
Good points by all, i would mildy disagree with you Johnny, as i think conservative ideologues, not the ones the media charicatures, but ideologues that share core conservative values are the way to go. Those values are a big tent in and of themselves.
But, i do agree that pundits and talk radio hosts attempted at overplaying their hand, and see the NY 23 election as a partial indictment against outsiders coming in to tell the locals what to do in essence.
I also believe that Newt played a partial role in shaking this up since the anomalies in that race reared their heads, especially given that 6% still voted for Scozzofava, and im sure some other ardent supporters of hers jumped ship, as did she.
I am against the big tent that allows Repubs or Conservatives, no matter how moderate to actively hurt their party, as Scozzofava did in her late endorsement of the democratic candidate.
Obviously local politics are different than Senate/Gov/or Presidential races, but i will assure you that if displayed eloquently, probably 65-70% of the country can relate to conservative points of view.