NY-23 Facts

[Tech_Esq]

Actually it was the conservatives losing a conservative seat despite a national campaign. Is it big in the scheme of things? Of course not, it is one seat. It was the one race last night that was actually about national policy instead of statewide personalities.

Conservatives do not consider the Republican who withdrew a conservative. NATIONAL conservative campaign for this office? It is comments like this that tell me the big parties don't understand what happened here.

Correction, social conservatives who base their politics on things like gay rights and abortion didn't consider her a conservative. Instead, a Conservative Party candidate stepped in, was endorsed by Palin and had tons of out of state money thrown at him and lost to a Democrat. So a traditionally Republican seat was lost. There is a lesson to be learned here, but it has not in the past and will not be now. Rightwingers can not win on their own nationally without moderates. This particular election was a model case.

She was pro-card check. That alone should disqualify her as a republican.

 

[Oldandtired]

Conservatives do not consider the Republican who withdrew a conservative. NATIONAL conservative campaign for this office? It is comments like this that tell me the big parties don't understand what happened here.

Correction, social conservatives who base their politics on things like gay rights and abortion didn't consider her a conservative. Instead, a Conservative Party candidate stepped in, was endorsed by Palin and had tons of out of state money thrown at him and lost to a Democrat. So a traditionally Republican seat was lost. There is a lesson to be learned here, but it has not in the past and will not be now. Rightwingers can not win on their own nationally without moderates. This particular election was a model case.

She was pro-card check. That alone should disqualify her as a republican.

Bingo.
She was a plant by the dems to create an insincere "bi-partisanship" in the house....and the GOP did whaty the had to do to make sure she did not get in.
It is not rocket science.
The irony is, they never though the conservative would almsot win.

Sorry....but if the GOP was aware of her stance on card check and governemnt control, she would never have had their support....especially in a conservative district.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

She was Republican, but she was no conservative. Buh bye to her, that's what I say. We need to stop this fixation on "Republicans". Shit look at that creep Arlan Spector. Does it really matter what party he belongs too?

 

[NYcarbineer]

She was Republican, but she was no conservative. Buh bye to her, that's what I say. We need to stop this fixation on "Republicans". Shit look at that creep Arlan Spector. Does it really matter what party he belongs too?

NY23 is not a conservative district by national standards. This is the simplest of facts that you rightwingers can't seem to get through your heads.

Much to the amusement of me and many others...

 

[Fatality]

She was Republican, but she was no conservative.

she was no republican, she was a socialist in sheeps clothing.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Since there seems to be a lot of spin (the nice word for lies) coming out of the GOP today about the epic Hoffman loss, here are the facts.

- Hoffman had leads according to two different polls on the final days of polling: Polls: Doug Hoffman leads in New York 23 - Josh Kraushaar - POLITICO.com

- Hoffman was basically an unknown, but he was far from "underfunded." His campaign was funded in large part by Club for Growth, which donated nearly 100k all by itself. He also received large contributions and support from nation GOP figures, most of which have been talked about ad nausem.

- Hoffman was supported by a national movement, Owens was supported primarily by people within his district. More than 95% of Hoffman's money came from outside NY-23. 2010*Transaction Detail
2010*Transaction Detail

- The District had been held by the GOP for more than 100 years

- The RNC came in with a major ad buy on behalf of Hoffman that is not yet noted in any sort of donation group. Furthermore, Hoffman is likely to have raised hundreds of thousands in the waining days of the campaign. Owens fundraising lead was liekly narrowed or completely eliminated.

- No matter your spin, it is a big loss.

Such clarity. Can you possibly be a true believer in things? All politics are local---especially in local elections (unless a social issue gets far out ahead of things).

 

[Misty]

If hoffman's victory was going to be considered big then his loss is BIG

I'm not happy about it and I think it was a huge failure for the GOP.

 

[Si modo]

She was rated more liberal than most of the NY Dems in the state legislature.

Not so much: Scozzafava is a Conservative Republican (in New York) « Boris Shor, PhD

As a self-described 'career politico' one would think you would check your own sources more thoroughly. Shor's conclusion about Scozzafava does not include any data from 2003 on. Oopsie.

 

[ddye]

MrC has a point, Hoffman's loss prevents the far right from proclaiming victory. The fact remains that both GOP winners definitely did NOT campaign from the far right, they campaigned from the center. You know, that same center that the far right says does not belong in the "new" GOP. Also, both turned down Sarah Palin visits.

But there's one thing that is being ignored. The far right makes a big deal over picking up two governorships in an off year election in a bad economy. But consider that demographics STILL kill the GOP in the future. I contend that the only reason the GOP did as well as it did (in addition to the economy) is the fact that off year elections have a disproportionate turnout from older white people.

And it's pretty indisputable that older white people are all that's holding the GOP together these days. And as the far right continues to alienate Hispanics and blacks (in addition to every single minority group whose numbers are growing), I say to you guys, enjoy your little off year election victory.

Doug

 

[saveliberty]

The biggest impact of the election will be Democrats in tough districts bailing on the health care coverage bill. If I were one, I would allow the Republicans to filibuster the bill. This allows me to tell my district, it wasn't my fault.

 

[Mr. Capitalism]

MrC has a point, Hoffman's loss prevents the far right from proclaiming victory. The fact remains that both GOP winners definitely did NOT campaign from the far right, they campaigned from the center. You know, that same center that the far right says does not belong in the "new" GOP. Also, both turned down Sarah Palin visits.

But there's one thing that is being ignored. The far right makes a big deal over picking up two governorships in an off year election in a bad economy. But consider that demographics STILL kill the GOP in the future. I contend that the only reason the GOP did as well as it did (in addition to the economy) is the fact that off year elections have a disproportionate turnout from older white people.

And it's pretty indisputable that older white people are all that's holding the GOP together these days. And as the far right continues to alienate Hispanics and blacks (in addition to every single minority group whose numbers are growing), I say to you guys, enjoy your little off year election victory.

Doug

Both elections I believe also had record low turnout. I didn't vote for Deeds, my parents and my wife also just skipped. Again, that was more just a statement on how terrible Deeds was, not on any greater policy issue. I think if T-Mac or B Moran had been the candidate, Virginia may still be blue.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Much ado about nothing. They will be redistricting in 2010 which will put an end to NY 23. Redistricting is very controversial and is usually done by the corrupt party in control. In this case it's the Democrats. They will redistrict in 2010 and it will make this seat a permanently Democratic-held seat. So this whole mess really is moot. This was a loss for the Republican Party but not for real Conservatives.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A Third Party Candidate came within the MOE of defeating 2 people voting for Obama and got one of the Candidates to withdraw.

 

[rightwinger]

Much ado about nothing. They will be redistricting in 2010 which will put an end to NY 23. Redistricting is very controversial and is usually done by the corrupt party in control. In this case it's the Democrats. They will redistrict in 2010 and it will make this seat a permanently Democratic-held seat. So this whole mess really is moot. This was a loss for the Republican Party but not for real Conservatives.

How can it not be a loss for "real Conservatives" ????

Their idea of a one size fits all republican party, beating down any republican candidate who doesn't conform to their doctrine, bringing in the big dogs to beat down local candidates....all were soundly defeated.

With the result...A Democratic victory

 

[NYcarbineer]

A Third Party Candidate came within the MOE of defeating 2 people voting for Obama and got one of the Candidates to withdraw.

Imagine how cons would have reacted to liberals running around in 2006 cheering the fact that Ned Lamont ALMOST beat Joe Lieberman.

I think they would have called them morons...

 

[xotoxi]

This is what I think of whenever I see "NY-23"...

I just had to get that out...now I can sleep at night.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This whole discussion really is moot. The Democrats have already stolen this seat from the Republicans through Redistricting in 2010. Their redistricting plan basically gives the seat to the Democrats permanently. So if you want to get angry about something,get angry about that. This will all mean nothing by next year. NY 23 will be gone in 2010. Like i said,this was a loss for the Republican Party but not for real Conservatives.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Lesson of NY-23: Conservatives told the RNC not to do the work of the DNC anymore. The one true home for Libruls and Librul Candidates is the DNC, we're not going to run your candidates for you anymore.

And Libruls HATE that they've been outed about this.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A Third Party Candidate came within the MOE of defeating 2 people voting for Obama and got one of the Candidates to withdraw.

Imagine how cons would have reacted to liberals running around in 2006 cheering the fact that Ned Lamont ALMOST beat Joe Lieberman.

I think they would have called them morons...

Yes, that famously diverse Democrat Party who ousted Lieberman for actually supporting our men and women in combat.

Famous Former Democrat Last Word

Joe Lieberman: I support the Troops

Vince Foster: I need to get this Whitewater mess off my chest

 

[Coyote]

The NY race was wildly strange - a Democrat should not have won it and the fact that one did says more about the mishandling of the election by the Republicans then it does about any demographic change.

That is a very good observation, the GoP didn't realize what was happening until the election came on, they had blindly backed exactly the kind of candidate that turned off most of their base.

I would venture to say the only thing saving the Dems right now is the GoP is still stuck on douchebag mode.

I'm not sure it's that exactly. I think the Democrat one because of one important fact - he stuck to local issues relentlessly and he knew those issues. In an interview I heard, the Conservative Party candidate couldn't even provide adequate answers on some of their more pressing issues. Also, the Democrat ran as a moderate similar to VA and NJ - sticking to local issues, not national issues and avoiding extremes. Technically speaking - a Republican should not have one NJ either and if Corzine had not been so unpopular, it is doubtful they would have.

I think that what this election says - if anything - is that it is about local issues, not national issues. The Republicans made made a mistake backing a candidate that was not familiar with those issues and tried to make it a national referendum on Obama and the Democrats.

If you're looking for political trends - the 2010 election will be more telling then this one.