Election Day 2009 Preview

[Tracer Bullet]

Originally Posted by X

I was referring to how they behaved after things didn't go their way.

I think "loyal" isn't the proper adjective to use for someone who turns that way.

And by "go their way", you mean when the national committee meddled in the local party's affairs because they felt that Scozzafava wasn't ideologically pure, correct?

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by X

Sounds like there are a lot of regretful voters in VA this year.

Do you know Obama's current approval/disapproval in VA?

I have no idea but the Gov election should basically reflect it.

[chowderhead]

those are the rules in NY. I didn't hear anybody complaining when other Republican county chairs selected conservative Jim Tedisco in NY-23. I would welcome more Doug Hoffman, Steve Laffey, Andrew Harris, Pat Toomey, Tim Walberg and other CfG challenges. Democrats are well known for circular firing squads ... why not continue the purge among Republicans?

Edit

[Pharoh]

Originally Posted by X

As I said before, this problem probably wouldn't have been a problem if a primary had decided the nominee.

But I also think many Republicans are finding that supporting Republicans just because they have that label isn't a winning strategy. Many seem to be migrating to choosing candidates based on the candidate's principles which have been found to be sorely lacking in recent Republicans. Maybe that's an effort to scare some principles into currently elected Republicans and get people actually motivated to vote for them.

As evidenced by the PPP poll, in which Mr. Hoffman had an 18-point lead before the news broke that Ms. Scozzafava was exiting the race. Local Republican voters, far more energized by the candidacy of Mr. Hoffman, are showing their support. Shouldn't they, locally, be the ones to decide?

[Red Dog]

How good could this Scozza person have been in a 1-1 race if she's only polling 6% in a 3-way race? Sounds like she would have been routed. I don't put much stock in polls but 6% is 6%. Sounds to me like the party officials were idiots in nominating her.

[X]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

How good could this Scozza person have been in a 1-1 race if she's only polling 6% in a 3-way race? Sounds like she would have been routed. I don't put much stock in polls but 6% is 6%. Sounds to me like the party officials were idiots in nominating her.

Well, you know why there was an opening there in the first place, don't you? And how quickly the White House got Scozzafava to endorse the Democrat.

Sounds suspicious all around.

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by X

Well, you know why there was an opening there in the first place, don't you? And how quickly the White House got Scozzafava to endorse the Democrat.

Sounds suspicious all around.

Actually I don't. I've turned my political radar off for several months.

[Dr Mabuse]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

How good could this Scozza person have been in a 1-1 race if she's only polling 6% in a 3-way race? Sounds like she would have been routed. I don't put much stock in polls but 6% is 6%. Sounds to me like the party officials were idiots in nominating her.

The way people who are writing about it put it, she was a 'no win' candidate who pretended to be republican to kind of guarantee the Democrat won. Which is something that happens in NY, or that NY politics is known for? Is the way it's been presented by several articles and such I've read. I don't know enough about that form an opinion.

The conservative guy running anyway threw that 'insider' stuff off.

[X]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

Actually I don't. I've turned my political radar off for several months.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...902377,00.html

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by Dr Mabuse

The way people who are writing about it put it, she was a 'no win' candidate who pretended to be republican to kind of guarantee the Democrat won. Which is something that happens in NY, or that NY politics is known for? Is the way it's been presented by several articles and such I've read. I don't know enough about that form an opinion.

The conservative guy running anyway threw that 'insider' stuff off.

It's a strategy that works in NYC. If you run as the Republican you only have to beat one person.

[chowderhead]

Originally Posted by Dr Mabuse

The way people who are writing about it put it, she was a 'no win' candidate who pretended to be republican to kind of guarantee the Democrat won. Which is something that happens in NY, or that NY politics is known for? Is the way it's been presented by several articles and such I've read. I don't know enough about that form an opinion.

The conservative guy running anyway threw that 'insider' stuff off.

Teabag or tinfoil?
Dede Scozzafava has been elected to the NY Assembly as a Republican since 1998. Yeah, I sure she pretended to be a Republican for over 10 years just so she could run as a stealth Democrat and siphon over Republican votes because she knew in 11 years, McHugh would resign to be Obama's Sec. of the Army.

Edit: That 6% is after she dropped out.

[Tracer Bullet]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

How good could this Scozza person have been in a 1-1 race if she's only polling 6% in a 3-way race? Sounds like she would have been routed.

You're insane if you think NY-23 would have gone Democratic. That's not the issue here.

[Tracer Bullet]

Originally Posted by chowderhead

Teabag or tinfoil?
Dede Scozzafava has been elected to the NY Assembly as a Republican since 1998. Yeah, I sure she pretended to be a Republican for over 10 years just so she could run as a stealth Democrat and siphon over Republican votes because she knew in 11 years, McHugh would resign to be Obama's Sec. of the Army.

Edit: That 6% is after she dropped out.

You really have to shake your head and wonder about people that spout that kind of nonsense. And that is exactly why the Republicans are in the mess that they're in.

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet

You're insane if you think NY-23 would have gone Democratic. That's not the issue here.

I don't know anything about the district, but if a major party candidate is only polling 6% in a 3-way race, that's beyond awful - I don't care what district it is. If she was at 20-30%, okay I could buy that she'd have a chance in a 2-way race. Why should I believe such a person is capable of winning 50% of the vote in a 2-way race?

[Tracer Bullet]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

I don't know anything about the district, but if a major party candidate is only polling 6% in a 3-way race, that's awful - I don't care what district it is. If she was at 20-30%, okay I could buy it. Why should I believe such a person is capable of winning 50% of the vote in a 2-way race?

As chowerhead pointed out, that 6% was after she dropped out of the race.

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet

As chowerhead pointed out, that 6% was after she dropped out of the race.

What was she polling before?

[Tracer Bullet]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

What was she polling before?

I don't feel like looking up exact numbers, but around 30%. Slightly below Owens and ahead of Hoffman.

[Red Dog]

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet

I don't feel like looking up exact numbers, but around 30%. Slightly below Owens and ahead of Hoffman.

Ok. That certainly changes my assessment.

That being said, it looks like there is a sizeable number of people in that district who are sick of the party politics and party attempts (from both sides) to appeal to the least common denominator and couldn't care less if their vote means the GOP loses the seat.

[Pharoh]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

How good could this Scozza person have been in a 1-1 race if she's only polling 6% in a 3-way race? Sounds like she would have been routed. I don't put much stock in polls but 6% is 6%. Sounds to me like the party officials were idiots in nominating her.

The thought obviously was that it is a Republican district, as JasonF pointed out earlier, so she would have won regardless.

I personally don't agree. It was a district that President Obama won by 5-points back in 2008, and while his approval rating is currently under 40% in the district, it is because of these dissatisfied voters that Mr. Hoffman will likely win. I don't think they would have voted in anywhere near the same numbers for Ms. Scozzafava.

[Pharoh]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

Ok. That certainly changes my assessment.

That being said, it looks like there is a sizeable number of people in that district who are sick of the party politics and party attempts (from both sides) to appeal to the least common denominator and couldn't care less if their vote means the GOP loses the seat.

Of relatively recent polling, she had a high of 35% and a low of 20%, with 30% exactly being the last poll I saw.

However, she was under 50% favourable amongst Republicans in her district and was having huge problems raising monies.

The situation of the national party stepping in didn't take place in a vacuum.

[JasonF]

I'm curious to know what kind of GOTV Mr. Hoffman will have. There's onbviously a local Republican party aparatus in the district -- will it be available to Mr. Hoffman? How strong is the Democratic party apparatus in this district? Given the historically low turnout in special elections, Mr. Hoffman could be in serious trouble if the local Republicans don't put their weight behind him over the next 36 hours.

[TheBigDave]

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet

I don't feel like looking up exact numbers, but around 30%. Slightly below Owens and ahead of Hoffman.

She was around 30% a couple weeks ago. But for the past week or two it's been a 2-man race between Owens and Hoffman. She was around 20% last week with the other two around 30%-35% each.



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-1119.html

[wmansir]

The latest poll I saw had her at %20 and Owens and Hoffman with the margin of each other around 30%, that was just before she dropped. I wouldn't read too much into the race though. The GOP candidate ran a horrible campaign, wasn't selected by the voters and it's a conservative district, so I don't see the events of this race reflecting much on the national party. Sure, you can say the Palin and other conservative endorsements of Hoffman indicate the party is being driven to the right or whatever, but then the DailyKos founder endorsed the GOP candidate over the Dem and then the GOP candidate endorsed the Dem candidate. If anything the endorsements just show how atypical this race is.

Regarding the Maine gay marriage initiative, Question 1. As background, in May the Governor signed a law allowing gay marriage in Maine, this was after several ballot measures narrowly failed over the years. Opponents quickly submitted enough signatures to put a "people's veto" on the ballot and so the law will not go into effect until after the voter's approve it by not passing the veto.

All the major newspapers have opposed the initiative. The anti-GM side has had a large TV campaign that almost exclusively talks about teaching homosexuality/GM in schools. The pro-GM has a counter-campaign that dismisses that as a non-issue and promotes the measure as non-discriminatory. The pro-GM campaign funds are almost twice the anti-GM funds.

Polling is slightly to the anti-GM side, but the major factor in this off-election year will be turn out. I have a feeling it will not pass (which means the law will go into effect), but who really knows what side is more motivated.

The other big init on the ballot is TABOR 2. TABOR (tax payer bill of rights) limits how the state and local gov can increase taxes. It was narrowly defeated in 2006. As in 2006 the opponents of this measure are basically anyone who gets money from the state and they are outspending the TABOR supporters 8 to 1. As with Q1 polls are split and turnout will be the key. I think TABOR probably has a better chance than 2006. The pro-TABOR base is highly motivated and will probably turn out. The huge spending advantage the anti-TABOR side has is more effective with a large turnout.

[DeputyDave]

Originally Posted by sracer

IMO the only difference between big government liberals and big government conservatives is where and to whom the money goes.

Which is why I said "real conservatives".

[Venusian]

already talking fraud in Jersey: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...622116146.html