Election Day 2009 Preview

[Hank Ringworm]

My vote for McDonnell was a referendum on state-run liquor stores. And David Axelrod. I hate that prick.

Half-joking on both counts, of course.

[coli]

I live in NJ and we finally got rid of Corzine. All I know is my property taxes have almost doubled since 2001, when McGreevey won and the dems had full control.

NJ has to do something about Property Taxes, as I pay more in taxes a year then my damn mortgage! We are in the top 3 in property taxes, corporate taxes, and income taxes among the 50 states. Hopefully Christie can do something to cut taxes, but you never know what these politicans will do once they get in.

[foggy]

Originally Posted by coli

I live in NJ and we finally got rid of Corzine. All I know is my property taxes have almost doubled since 2001, when McGreevey won and the dems had full control.

NJ has to do something about Property Taxes, as I pay more in taxes a year then my damn mortgage! We are in the top 3 in property taxes, corporate taxes, and income taxes among the 50 states. Hopefully Christie can do something to cut taxes, but you never know what these politicans will do once they get in.

If you want lower taxes then move to a lower tax jurisdiction. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for things to change for the better where you are. Property taxes are something that should be researched before you buy. Here in Massachusetts property taxes constitutionally can only go up by a maximum of 2 1/2 % a year. Mine actually went down considerably this year.

[BKenn01]

Originally Posted by JasonF

That Republican base motivated itself right the hell out of a seat that's gone to the GOP for as long as there has been a GOP. Well done!

So, of the four elections people have focused on, we have two governorships in states that traditional send the party that is out of the White House to the state house and both did so, in both cases by tossing out the incumbent party during a time of economic toruble. We have one reliably safe Democratic seat that stayed with the Democrats and one reliably safe Republican seat that flipped to the Democrats despite the best efforts of Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Dick Armey, and other prominent conservative/Republican voices that had thrown their weight behind the Tea Party candidate. Clearly, this all spells doom for President Obama.

Ok, by your logic Obama is in trouble anyway because the party in control of the White House loses seats (only 2 exceptions since WW2) in the midterm following the first term election. Even if the losses are only a couple of Senate seats the game changes.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by BKenn01

Ok, by your logic Obama is in trouble anyway because the party in control of the White House loses seats (only 2 exceptions since WW2) in the midterm following the first term election. Even if the losses are only a couple of Senate seats the game changes.

I'm not sure I follow your logic, but yes -- the party in power does tend to lose seats during an off-year election. I don't know if I'd characterize that as "Obama is in trouble," but yes -- historical trends do suggest that the Republicans will pick up seats in 2010.

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by foggy

If you want lower taxes then move to a lower tax jurisdiction. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for things to change for the better where you are. Property taxes are something that should be researched before you buy. Here in Massachusetts property taxes constitutionally can only go up by a maximum of 2 1/2 % a year. Mine actually went down considerably this year.

I don't think much will change for taxes in NJ either. You will still have a very heavy Democrat legislature (though the state does have a line item veto) and it is a pretty liberal state. NE Republicans just tend to be more liberal, and if you are going to truly lower taxes, you are going to have to scale back all the public programs, and liberal states love their programs. Everyone will have to continue to pay for the multitude of things that benefit almost no one, and that will take taxes because they can't lower taxes and give the state time to heal. California is in the same boat.

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by Hank Ringworm

My vote for McDonnell was a referendum on state-run liquor stores. And David Axelrod. I hate that prick.

Half-joking on both counts, of course.

I would have completely taken you seriously if you weren't half-joking because the first thing was a factor with me (although I'm skeptical he'll be able to pull it off) and Axelrod is a prick.

[tcoursen]

Originally Posted by foggy

If you want lower taxes then move to a lower tax jurisdiction. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for things to change for the better where you are. Property taxes are something that should be researched before you buy. Here in Massachusetts property taxes constitutionally can only go up by a maximum of 2 1/2 % a year. Mine actually went down considerably this year.

The problem is that there isn't any low property tax towns any more in NJ. They are all high now. I think the average property tax bill is now 8K per year. It's easy to say they should be researched, but it is not uncommon for the taxes to jump more than 10% in ONE year. Corzine did put a cap saying 4.5% is the cap, but it was only a cap on part of the bill, not the school part. So your school budget can still make it grow. Nobody in NJ has seen a property tax bill go down.

NJ is also in a ten year run of decreasing private sector jobs. How many states can say they haven't created a private sector job in ten years? People are also leaving here in pretty big numbers. If not for foreign immigration NJ would be losing population. The native NJ population is in decline, and as the state workers retire they take their big pensions and move south and take that money out of the NJ economy.

[The Bus]

foggy meant leave New Jersey.

[Tracer Bullet]

Originally Posted by The Bus

foggy meant leave New Jersey.

Good advice for any situation.

[sracer]

Originally Posted by The Bus

foggy meant leave New Jersey.

When even many prudent and financially conservative people are finding themselves underwater on their mortgage, that is less of an option than it used to be. In the game of home ownership musical chairs, the music has stopped. The seat you have (home) is the seat you'll have for a long time.

[JasonF]

Op-Ed Columnist
Hark! The Voters Speak!

By GAIL COLLINS
Published: November 4, 2009

In Ohio, citizens marched to the polls on Tuesday and voted to allow gambling casinos in the state. This was a obviously a message to President Obama that independent voters are not happy with the way the health care bill is going.

Really, I don’t see how else you can interpret it. Ohioans were looking forward to the lower insurance costs that would come with a robust public option, and if the president can’t deliver, they’re planning to pay their future medical bills with their winnings at the roulette wheel.

Also, people here in Cincinnati rejected a proposal that would have made it harder for the city to expand mass transit. Obviously a repudiation of the entire cash-for-clunkers initiative.

Meanwhile, both Atlanta and Houston voted on mayoral races, and in each city there is now going to be a runoff between a woman and a black guy. You think this is a coincidence? The meaning could not be clearer if the ballots had had a “maybe we should have gone for Hillary” line.

There seems to be a semiconsensus across the land that the myriad decisions voters made around the country this week all added up to a terrible blow to the White House. If that’s the way we’re going to go, I don’t think it’s fair to dump all the blame on gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia.

Although there is no way to deny that New Jersey and Virginia were terrible, horrible, disastrous, cataclysmic blows to Obama’s prestige. No wonder the White House said he was not watching the results come in. How could the man have gotten any sleep after he realized that his lukewarm support of an inept candidate whose most notable claim to fame was experience in hog castration was not enough to ensure a Democratic victory in Virginia?

New Jersey was even worse. The defeat of Gov. Jon Corzine made it clear that the young and minority voters who turned out for Obama will not necessarily show up at the polls in order to re-elect an uncharismatic former Wall Street big shot who failed to deliver on his most important campaign promises while serving as the public face of a state party that specializes in getting indicted.

They would not rally around Corzine even when the president asked them! Really, what good are coattails if they can’t drag an unlovable guy from a deeply corrupt party into a second term?

Also, we have heard a lot about the fact that Corzine’s campaign made sport of his rather chunky opponent, Chris Christie. It was not until Wednesday morning that it became obvious that Christie’s victory was actually an outcry by average, pudgy Americans against a president who has to continuously battle against a tendency to lose weight.

We have a dramatic saga story line brewing here, and I do not want to mess it up by pointing out that Obama’s party won the only two elections that actually had anything to do with the president’s agenda. Those were the special Congressional races in California and upstate New York. But obviously they reflect only a very narrow voter sentiment, since one involved a district that was safe for the Democrats and the other a district that had not been represented by the party since 1872.

On the other hand, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s victory clearly fits into the pattern of voter outrage against an unsuccessful White House. Initially, New York City residents found it hard to figure out how to send their message of inchoate rage against all that Barack Obama stands for, since Bloomberg is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but rather a member of the well-known splinter group, Extremely Rich White Persons. Also, Obama had backed his opponent, Bill Thompson, with an endorsement that could not have been more oblique and half-hearted if he had sent it via Candygram.

In the end, everyone got together and decided to re-elect Bloomberg by a margin that was much narrower than expected. I know this is the first time that you are hearing this, but I voted on my way out of town on Tuesday, and I can assure you that everyone in New York intended to convey their unhappiness with the administration’s foreign policy by electing Bloomberg by a margin of five percentage points — exactly the average number of letters in “Iran” and “Israel.”

The voters were directed by a crack team of political operatives disguised as elementary school bake-sale ladies, who spelled out their orders with chocolate chip cookies. The national news media missed this entirely, but insiders could tell that the cookie people were working under cover, since the school system banned genuine pastry sales as part of Bloomberg’s healthier-than-thou initiative.

It all worked out great, and I hope Obama has gotten the message. Really, he had better shape up and completely transform the way Washington works before the next election. Otherwise, another governor’s head could roll.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/op...lins.html?_r=1

[dork]

That's just sad.

[X]

What better way to demonstrate the meaning of Tuesday's elections than from the horses' mouths?

Election result: Red-state Dems worried, rethink agenda

Election Day losses in Virginia and New Jersey have congressional Democrats focused like never before on jobs — their own.

While the White House and party leaders are urging calm, Democratic incumbents from red states and Republican-leaning districts are anything but; Tuesday's statehouse defeats have left them acutely aware that their votes on health care reform and other major Obama initiatives could be career-enders in 2010 or beyond.

“I should be nervous,” said Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Huntsville, Ala.

Griffith said the Democratic rank and file is “very, very sensitive” to the fact that issues being pushed by party leaders “have the potential to cost some of our front-line members their seats.”

House Democrats, forced to take a tough vote on a controversial cap-and-trade climate change bill in June, may have to vote as earlier as this weekend on the even more controversial health care bill. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team have struggled to get moderates on board for that vote, and Tuesday's results won't make the task any easier.

“People who had weak knees before are going to have weaker knees now,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.), a relatively liberal congressman who seemed safe in 2010 but now thinks a Republican challenger might feel emboldened by Tuesday’s election results.

Democratic Sen. Jim Webb — who watched Republican Bob McDonnell and other statewide candidates erase years of Democratic gains in his home state of Virginia — said Tuesday’s results show that Republicans are “energized from what happened last year” but also that “people up here on our side need to get their message straighter, too.”

Party leaders put their best face on Tuesday’s results.

Pelosi, pointing to Democratic House victories in special elections in New York and California, said: “We won last night.”

The office of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid circulated an analysis arguing that “gubernatorial races are primarily about local issues,” and that it’s therefore “hard to draw any direct comparisons between what happened in New Jersey and Virginia and what will happen in Congress.”

But some Democrats weren’t buying the spin.

“We got walloped,” said Sen. Mark Warner, the junior Democrat from Virginia.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said it was “nonsense” to suggest that the results in New Jersey and Virginia represented a referendum on President Barack Obama. To the contrary, he argued that the results meant that Democrats should redouble their efforts to “make sure we deliver on the promises of the last election.”

But if Tuesday’s results leave red-state Democrats nervous about health care reform, a climate change bill and regulatory reform, it’s going to be harder — not easier — for Van Hollen and his leadership colleagues to develop that record of legislative accomplishment.

And that’s certainly where things seemed to be headed Wednesday. As Pelosi’s office ordered members to stay in town for a possible Saturday night House vote on health care, other Democrats were suggesting that it's time to take the foot off the gas.

As members came to grips with the election returns, Rep. Frank Kratovil Jr. (D-Md.) said he wants “as much time as I possibly can [have] to review both sides and make the best decision I can make” on the health care bill.

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a big swing vote for Democratic leaders, said Tuesday’s elections should tell Democrats that their “agenda needs to be patterned towards” the economy.

“People need to be saying slow it down and don’t add more to the deficit,” Nelson said. “And what have many of us been talking about? We don’t want to see anything added to the deficit unless there’s cost containment.”

On health care, Nelson said: “Let’s see coverage extended, … but at what cost?”

Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe, the lone Republican to vote for a health care bill, said Tuesday’s results should slow Democrats down on health care — and “certainly gives pause on how you approach things.”

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who’s threatened to filibuster the health care bill if it isn’t changed before it goes to a vote, said he’s sensing that public fears over the rising national debt “may affect” the Democrats’ broader agenda, noting that there’s been “a very large and quick move of independents” away from the Democratic Party and that public fears of the rising debt are at a “tipping point.”

According to exit polls, Republican gubernatorial candidates took 62 percent of the independent vote in Virginia and 58 percent of the independent vote in New Jersey.

“They’re feeling anxious and they want the government to do something to help them; they’re very worried that we’re going to spend more money,” Lieberman said. “I think one thing it says to me is that whatever we do, we better make damn sure it’s paid for.”

Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said in an interview that he’s not concerned about next year’s races, calling Tuesday’s results a “mixed bag” that was not the result of Obama’s agenda.

But Menendez added: “We need to be focused like a laser beam on the question of the nation’s economy and the issues of how we best can create jobs. That’s the laser-beam approach. If we do that, we’ll be fine next year.”

Other Democrats said not advancing health care legislation is not an option, with Karin Johanson, a former DCCC executive director, saying it would “be foolish” if Tuesday’s results had a chilling effect on the health care debate.

“I think people have to keep in mind that we will be judged on if we get a good thing going,” said Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.). “I think failure to get anything done will counted as a huge black mark against us, and rightfully so.”

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) said the gubernatorial results said more about Virginia and New Jersey than they did about Congress. But still, she said she is well aware that voters are feeling anxious about what the Democrats are doing on Capitol Hill.

“They’re very concerned about some of the actions that are occurring here in D.C., and we have got to be very sensitive to the fragile economic recovery that’s underway,” she said.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29167.html

[Dr Mabuse]

Now that actually indicates what the elections meant.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by X

What better way to demonstrate the meaning of Tuesday's elections than from the horses' mouths?

If you're quoting members of Congress, I think you've got the wrong end of the horse.

[crazyronin]

Originally Posted by JasonF

That Republican base motivated itself right the hell out of a seat that's gone to the GOP for as long as there has been a GOP. Well done!

I'm enjoying the hell out of this spin. It totally ignores Michael McNulty.

and Sam Stratton, Pete Peyser, Jonathan Bingham, Charles Buckley, Jacob Gilbert, Isidore Dollinger, Sidney Fine, Walter Lynch, Frank Oliver, Richard McKiniry, Daniel Oliver, Joseph Goulden, Henry Bentley, John Spriggs, and Scott Lord. If you ignore all those Democrat representatives of the 23rd district, then you can say its been a Republican stronghold since 1850.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by crazyronin

I'm enjoying the hell out of this spin. It totally ignores Michael McNulty.

and Sam Stratton, Pete Peyser, Jonathan Bingham, Charles Buckley, Jacob Gilbert, Isidore Dollinger, Sidney Fine, Walter Lynch, Frank Oliver, Richard McKiniry, Daniel Oliver, Joseph Goulden, Henry Bentley, John Spriggs, and Scott Lord. If you ignore all those Democrat representatives of the 23rd district, then you can say its been a Republican stronghold since 1850.

While you're technically correct that Michael McNulty represented New York-23, that was two rounds of redistricting ago, when New York-23 covered a very different geographic area than it currently does. Hell, prior to 1980, New York-23 had covered the Bronx for decades.

If we're speaking of the district that encompasses the geography currently included in the 23rd District -- the Adirondacks and the area along the St. Lawrence -- it's been a solidly Republican district for as long as there has been a Republican Party. Rep. McNulty represented what is now the 21st District, and which includes Albany and the surrounding area.

Here is a map I found:

[X]

Here's more fallout from Tuesday's election...

Paterson Empowered By Obama's Election Woes

Gov. Still Plans To Run Despite President's Request He Not
Brings President Clinton's Former Deputy Chief Of Staff On Board

NEW YORK (CBS) ― Embattled Gov. David Paterson is pulling out all the stops to save his job. He plans to mount a major ad blitz to tell New Yorkers about all the good things he's done for the Empire State.

The election may be over, but the political ads aren't. The governor is now taking to the air waves to convince New Yorkers he deserves to stay in office.

"What it's geared to do is talk about his very good record over the last year, the things he's done for the state, including closing a $35 billion budget," said veteran political consultant Bill Lynch.

The ads are aimed at improving Paterson's low poll numbers and sending a message to other Democrats, including President Barack Obama, that he is determined to seek another term in office.

"Once people know the things he's done for this state they will start to look at him differently," said Lynch.

Paterson, whose popularity currently hovers in the 20 percent range, was seriously wounded when Obama let it be known he didn't want Paterson to run because Republicans like Rudy Giuliani consistently beat him in the polls. But Obama's recent lack of success in backing local candidates, including New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, has empowered Paterson.

"The President went to New Jersey five times for Corzine and wasn't able to turn that around, so I think here in New York, New Yorkers know everything is local," said Lynch.

But that's not all Paterson is doing. He's bringing on board campaign powerhouse Harold Ickes, who was former President Bill Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff.

Will all this help the popularity-challenged governor? At least one lawmaker thinks so.

"I think he's a viable candidate already. He's the governor. Anybody that's the governor is a viable candidate to begin with. I think it can only help make him more viable," said Sen. Bill Perkins (D-Manhattan).

Paterson's political future is hanging in the balance. If the ads are successful they could make popular state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo think twice about a primary challenge. If they're not, it could force him to re-assess his candidacy.

http://wcbstv.com/politics/governor....2.1294872.html

[crazyronin]

Originally Posted by JasonF

While you're technically correct that Michael McNulty represented New York-23, that was two rounds of redistricting ago, when New York-23 covered a very different geographic area than it currently does. Hell, prior to 1980, New York-23 had covered the Bronx for decades.

If we're speaking of the district that encompasses the geography currently included in the 23rd District -- the Adirondacks and the area along the St. Lawrence -- it's been a solidly Republican district for as long as there has been a Republican Party. Rep. McNulty represented what is now the 21st District, and which includes Albany and the surrounding area.

Here is a map I found:

So now the spin is that parts of NY-23 have been a Republican stronghold since 1850? My, how spin changes in relation to facts.

In the past 140 years, the New York 23rd has been redistricted from the 24th district (four times), the 22nd district (four times), the 20th district (two times), the 21st district (two times), and the 28th district (once).

Eleven of the 24th’s last twenty reps have been Democrats, one belonged to the near-socialist American Labor Party, and the district has not been overwhelmingly Republican, again, since Republicans were Lincoln-Teddy Roosevelt style progressives.

The 22nd district has had only three Republican representatives since World War One, out of fourteen total. Like the other districts in question, the district has not been dominated by Republicans since the Lincoln-Teddy Roosevelt era.

Of the 20th districts last twenty representatives, only six have been Republicans.

The 21st district has only been represented by a Republican three times since 1911.

The 28th district has been represented by Democrats eight times and Republicans five times since 1913.

So even factoring in redistricting, it is not true that New York’s 23rd Congressional District has been Republican for the past 140 years

[Hank Ringworm]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

I would have completely taken you seriously if you weren't half-joking because the first thing was a factor with me (although I'm skeptical he'll be able to pull it off) and Axelrod is a prick.

The other half of the joke was that it was a referendum on Obama, too, but I've been told that's not true, so forget I mentioned it.

The liquor store thing is a real can of worms, though I would love privatization of the whole system.

[TheBigDave]

Great toon from Ramirez:

[Tracer Bullet]

Yes, excising all "RINOs" for a one-size-fits-all ideology from coast-to-coast is going to work brilliantly for the Republicans. They showed us!

[classicman2]

If you lose your base - you don't have to worry about the next election.

In addition - you're not concerned about a 'coast-to-coast' strategy.

[dork]

Originally Posted by classicman2

If you lose your base - you don't have to worry about the next election.

But retaining the base seems to be incompatible with attracting independents, which you're always telling us is the important thing.

Plus, the base is dying off.