Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Election 2009: Winners and Losers


New York Rep. Steve Israel (D), former Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe (D) and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) may benefit from last night's results. (Photos: AP/The Washington Post)

The Fix has slept (a little) and sifted through the data (a lot) since last night to bring you our take on the winners and losers from yesterday's votes.

Have winners and/or losers of your own? Feel free to add them in the comment section below. Heck, if they're good, we'll add them to the post.

WINNERS

Haley Barbour/RGA: The Mississippi governor and chairman of the Republican Governors Association was already seen as one of the leading strategists within his party before Tuesday and that reputation will only grow now. The RGA -- led by Barbour and executive director Nick Ayers -- did two very smart things during the course of these campaigns: parceling out the footage of Deeds stumbling and bumbling over an answer on taxes in a post-debate presser and deciding to go after independent Chris Daggett in New Jersey. Both moves proved decisive in the final outcomes and the strategic smarts demonstrated by the RGA bodes well for Republicans as the focus moves to the 37 governors races on the ballot next November.

Terry McAuliffe: The Macker isn't an "I told you so" guy but you can bet he is thinking that this morning as he looks through exit polling that shows Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell (R) hammering state Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) among those voters who said jobs and the economy were their number one issue. McAuliffe ran on the jobs message in the primary and warned Democrats that if they didn't focus on jobs they would lose in the fall. They didn't and they did. McAuliffe is already rumored to be considering a return run in 2013 and might be the best candidate Democrats have after watching their statewide candidates all come up way short on Tuesday night.

Steve Israel: The Long Island Democrat took a major step toward chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the 2012 cycle with Owens' win. Israel went all out to secure the victory and his efforts -- coupled with his work on the winning special election campaign of New York Rep. Scott Murphy (D) earlier this year -- are sure to win him notice from the White House and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.).

Sarah Palin: The former Alaska governor's endorsement of Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman in the New York special election catapulted this sleepy North Country race into a national story. And, Palin proved yet again her status as a prime mover within the Republican party as Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty -- among others -- followed in her footsteps by endorsing the Conservative. And, Palin did all this while communicating with her supporters and the media only via Facebook. It's an amazing (political) world we live in.

Cory Booker: The mayor of Newark was a rising star in the state and national political firmament before former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie's (R) victory yesterday in the Garden State. Now, Booker almost certainly has the right of first refusal for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 2013. And, yes, the Fix begins thinking about the the next election the day after the last election is over!

Steve Murphy/Mark Putnam/Ed Peavy/ Jef Pollock: The consulting team for Bill Owens in New York's 23rd district (Murphy and Putnam did the media, Peavy the mail and Pollock the polling) deserves a huge amount of credit for staying focused and on message in a race that was unpredictable beyond anyone's wildest dreams. The Murphy/Peavy/Pollock team has a knack for Upstate New York specials; they were the same consultants who guided Murphy to victory in New York's 20th district earlier this year.

Charlie Brown: The long-suffering cartoon character was the Fix's preferred image for the New Jersey Republican party. Election after election, Jersey GOPers would run up to the football and try to kick it only to have it snatched away by Lucy (aka the New Jersey Democratic party) at the last minute. Yesterday, Charlie Brown got to kick the football. Finally.

LOSERS

Tim Kaine: Yes, Deeds was a poor candidate and ran a poor campaign. But, for the sitting governor of Virginia AND the chairman of the Democratic National Committee to lose his home state by 18 points -- the largest margin for a gubernatorial candidate in the Commonwealth since 1961(!) -- is an embarrassment. Kaine did his best to put a happy face on the results, noting that McDonnell had beaten Deeds four years ago and that the economic climate hurt Democrats but the simple fact remains that a blowout in Virginia looks bad for Kaine.

Self Funders: It's long been the Fix's position that voters simply don't care about candidates spending vast sums of their own money to win races. After yesterday's results, we may have to revisit that theory. In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent better than $100 million to win by five points over New York City Comptroller Bill Thompson who spent roughly one-twentieth that amount. Gov. Jon Corzine, too, spent tens of millions of his own money on his race for naught -- although Corzine's defeat had more to do with promises made and not kept than it did with his personal largess. In as uncertain an economic time as we currently find ourselves, perhaps the image of ultra wealthy individuals spending so much money on themselves sat poorly with voters.

Sarah Palin: In the Fix's world, you can be a winner and a loser on the same day. (It's our blog and our rules!). While Palin helped bring Hoffman into the national spotlight, the Conservative party nominee's loss in what has historically been a Republican district will reinforce establishment doubts about the wisdom of nominating candidates who appeal largely (only?) to the party base. To our mind, former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.) may have come out of the special election in New York smelling the sweetest -- he avoided getting involved at all and now looks like the voice of reason.

Tom Perriello/Glenn Nye: These two Democratic Congressman from the Commonwealth have to be beyod nervous after analyzing the election results in the governor's race. In 2008, President Barack Obama won Nye's Norfolk-area district with 51 percent and lost Perriello's Southside seat narrowly with 48 percent. Yesterday McDonnell won 62 percent in Nye's 2nd and 61 percent in Perriello's 5th. That does not bode well for either man's re-election prospects next November.

Post-Debate Press Conferences: Want to know the exact day when Deeds lost the campaign? It was September 17 when after a debate with McDonnell, he held a press conference in which he was at turns befuddled and testy with reporters about his position on taxes. That footage was sliced and diced by Republicans to turn the focus of the race from McDonnell's thesis to Deeds' flip-floppery. It's not clear Deeds could have won the race without his post-debate implosion but it is clear that his decision to hold that press conference effectively doomed his chances.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 4, 2009; 11:00 AM ET
Categories:  Governors , House , Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Fix: Sorting through the numbers in Va., N.J., and N.Y.
Next: CA-Sen: Fiorina's in

Comments

Out in the provinces, a first time openly gay candidate, Charles Pugh, was running for Detroit City Council,ran first in the primary, but got some bad publicity when he got behind on his home mortgage. The near-comatose Detroit News and Free Press "rescinded" their endorsements of Pugh who promptly ran first again and assumes the Council Presidency. Is it really a character flaw to live in Detroit and have personal financial problems? Or is it another instance of media with heads up butt? You go, Charles.

Posted by: mcknight131 | November 5, 2009 8:18 AM | Report abuse

I suppose Mr Cillizza intentionally left out the biggest loser of all - his employer, the Washington Post. Didn't the Post endorse all three losing democratic candidates in Virginia?

Posted by: goaway5 | November 4, 2009 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Comparing Charlie Brown to any Republican is an affront to all Peanuts fans.

==

Think about it for a minute .. Lucy and the football ... need I continue?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Comparing Charlie Brown to any Republican is an affront to all Peanuts fans.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | November 4, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

"Good lord, Chris thinks Sarah Palin *won* something yesterday?? She's done. As in cooked, last week's roast. Maybe now the country can move on."

Posted by: B2O2 | November 4, 2009 2:37 PM
_________________________________

"...(T)he Republican candidate (for NY-23), a moderate, was purged from the Republican Party by the most extreme elements of the conservative right wing including Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.... (W)hat occurred in New York has exposed a war within the Republican Party that will not soon end.... The all out war between Republicans and the far right wing is a disaster for the Republican Party and will dog it well after today."
_____________________________________
Wanted to re-share these great postings...
The strategic political movements of Tuesday's elections revealed SO MUCH...pay attention people...the smart ones loved the chess moves that occurred. Some think they are winners, when in actually they set a play board for the future of politics. Palin draws crowds but they don't translate into votes. Her messages are lost in conservative babble. Divide and CONQUER...

STILL LOVING THIS COUNTRY.

Posted by: lindarc | November 4, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Barry Obambi.

==

So many on the right are so immature.

I wonder what the chicken and egg of this relationship is?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

You should watch "V"

==

Wasn't that some made-for-TV movie about aliens coming to Earth?

No thanks.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 5:43 PM | Report abuse

"So we lose, at least we'll know who stands with us."

jpalm, I am so glad you are doing this.
You have to be pure, true to yourself and yours, it is the most important thing. Elections and voting and all that is too complicated and besides, it does not matter who wins and loses.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Palin accomplished what WE wanted.

==

She accomplished what we wanted to: Hoffman lost. The Democrats get a seat denied them for 137 years.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Biggest loser: Barry Obambi. After closing the airport in the Philadelphia corridor for hours because Air Force One was carrying him around to campaign for Corzine, NJ voters told Barry to go f8ck himself.

Posted by: Atenora | November 4, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

@goldnad tanzanite
“Anyone over 12 who still watches television should get candid with himself about what he really wants out of life’

You should watch "V" you might recognize some of the characters. They are based on people like you!

Ok, this does look interesting. From the Chicago Tribune, from Whence He Came.
Imagine this. At a time of political turmoil, a charismatic, telegenic new leader arrives virtually out of nowhere. He offers a message of hope and reconciliation based on compromise and promises to marshal technology for a better future that will include universal health care.

The news media swoons in admiration -- one simpering anchorman even shouts at a reporter who asks a tough question: "Why don't you show some respect?!" The public is likewise smitten, except for a few nut cases who circulate batty rumors on the Internet about the leader's origins and intentions. The leader, undismayed, offers assurances that are soothing, if also just a tiny bit condescending: "Embracing change is never easy."

So, does that sound like anyone you know? Oh, wait -- did I mention the leader is secretly a totalitarian space lizard who's come here to eat us?

Welcome to ABC's "V," the most fascinating and bound to be the most controversial new show of the fall television season...


Posted by: leapin | November 4, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

WashPost is so predictable!
I could have written every lead article.
DEms go their butts kicked. Plain & simple.
Palin accomplished what WE wanted.
Get rid of RINO.
She did that.
And GOP took heed!
No More Specter, Snowe, Grahams....
So we lose, at least we'll know who stands with us.

Posted by: jpalm32 | November 4, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

"Creigh Deeds lost his own race. Yes, the people who voted for McConnell did not like Obama, but the folks who voted for him never did vote for Obama. Deeds's problem was that he could not interest or energize or attract the independents or even the Democrats who supported Obama. Posted by: bagsl79 "

It appears that Deeds wrote off the African American vote in Virginia, and they decided to stay home. He never really tried to use Obama's popularity, never stood up for anything Obama was pushing on the hill, and made no effort to channel "Change we can believe in."

Small wonder that, when he let Obama come in late it didn't much help.

Posted by: ceflynline | November 4, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

America has a choice: it can seek to be thoughtful and intelligent or it can attach itself to that empty headed charlatan, Palin.

No doubt, her supporters will claim that she has much to offer America nd the world. They will also insist that those who defeated her at the polls are dangerous Americans.

The reality is that America is characterised by foolishness and blunderheads who do dangerous things. One doesn't have to look past George W Bush to recognise that Americans give enthusiastic support to fools and that they and the world pay for their sanctimony.

The support given by Americans to Palin is a reflection of their own silliness.

Posted by: robertjames1 | November 4, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

And really and truly loser, Hoffman. He won't move into the 23rd, but next year he will still run in the primary, lose, and then run, again, as the independent candidate, and slaughter whomever the republicans actually nominate. Owens will then retain his seat. Hoffman won't ever understand how he lost.

The local committee of the republican Party in the 23rd seem to know what they are doing when the nominate a potential winner (Had she gotten the money and support the radicals gave Hoffman, and a clear field, she would at least have caucused with the Republicans.

But what is coming is a whole series of farther right challenges to already excessively right Republican candidates in the primaries. by the General election any seat now held by a Republican who sometimes looks a little to the left of Walton Walker gets the RINO treatment.

Can't have candidates, after all, who could be mistaken for a Democrat by H. L. Hunt, can we?

Posted by: ceflynline | November 4, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Quitter Palin writes

"To the tireless grassroots patriots who worked so hard in that race and to future citizen-candidates like Doug, please remember Reagan's words of encouragement after his defeat in 1976: 'The cause goes on,' he wrote. 'Don't get cynical because look at yourselves and what you were willing to do, and recognize that there are millions and millions of Americans out there that want what you want"

==

Uh, yes indeed there are millions of people who want what Palin and Hoffman want. No dowda bowdit.

ON THE OTHER HAND there are hundreds of millions of Americans who don't want it, and Republicans just can't seem to figure this out.

The GOP will take away all the wrong lessons, will aggressively challenge the sane voices in their own party. Expect to see a LOT of green teeth next year.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin: In the Fix's world, you can be a winner and a loser on the same day. While Palin helped bring Hoffman into the national spotlight, the Conservative party nominee's loss in what has historically been a Republican district will reinforce establishment doubts about the wisdom of nominating candidates who appeal largely (only?)
___________________________________________
Mitt you did right by keeping your distance..."Some real effective strategery there, Ms. Palin. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, as they say. No wonder McDonnell and Chrsitie did their best to distance themselves from her." "Ask that astute student of politics Ms Palin what happened."....."the American people's disgust with prejudice, intolerance, and bigotry, becomes a permanent fixture on the political landscape."

Had to share some of the postings to let people see the division of the extreme right" is not acceptable. Can you image where we would be at if 2008 went differently? Whew, we missed that mistake.

Still Loving this Country...Amen

Posted by: lindarc | November 4, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

I disagree with the idea that self-funders were losers -- you already noted it wasn't the issue with Corzine.

Bloomberg squeaked out a win not b/c he spent an obscene amount of dough, but b/c he changed the rules on term limits - that's what really angered NYC voters.

Posted by: wsealsjr | November 4, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

I disagree with the idea that self-funders were losers -- you already noted it wasn't the issue with Corzine.

Bloomberg squeaked out a win not b/c he spent an obscene amount of dough, but b/c he changed the rules on term limits - that's what really angered NYC voters.

Posted by: wsealsjr | November 4, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Big winners? Moderate party faithful. McConnell, Christie and owens were their parties' picks. Each was actually somewhat of a moderate to slightly liberal (Owens) candidate. Each worked hard to win over the center.

Losers, the rebels/outsiders. Deeds was, after all, the maverick who beat the Party nominee, McCauliffe, in the primaries and then spent quite a bit of time distancing himself from the Party and the President. He also apparently totally alienated the black vote and tried to run as a updated Dixiecrat. Can't win in Virginia when you do that as a democrat. He also tried to position himself well to the right of, as it turned out, McConnell. Daggett was the outsider/maverick in N.J. and he paid for it. Hoffman was the carpet bagger candidate of the dissident right, shoving the Party Committee choice out of the way. He lost the seat that Scozzafava would have won.

And as a consolation prize as losers, Conservatives who will draw all the wrong lessons from these races and go on safari, great white hunters out to bag RINOs. The top ten House seats NOW likely to change hands are moderate Republicans that find themselves targeted by the ultra pure land sect. The Way of Peace and its Yellow Turban campaigners will bring down the Newt Dynasty for warring states sometime here in the next couple of months.

Posted by: ceflynline | November 4, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

The biggest winner - those of us who can now watch TV again without being inundated with the Deeds & McDonnell commercials.

==

Anyone over 12 who still watches television should get candid with himself about what he really wants out of life. I mean, really, turning into a potted plant for hours a day in front of a device that doesn't even interact? Come on. Read books, go to the symphony, take control.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

The similarities between the DNC Chair's words and CBS's Katie Couric's October 27 Award winning comments are striking.

In fact, I will provide you with each of their assertions, and reveal who said which only after the jump. Good luck guessing.


"...(T)he Republican candidate (for NY-23), a moderate, was purged from the Republican Party by the most extreme elements of the conservative right wing including Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.... (W)hat occurred in New York has exposed a war within the Republican Party that will not soon end.... The all out war between Republicans and the far right wing is a disaster for the Republican Party and will dog it well after today."

"There's growing concern among some GOP leaders that controversial commentators and far-right conservatives have hijacked the message. People like Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin appeal to the base... (but) you can't win with just the base.... Before the 2010 midterm elections roll around, Republicans need to get the focus back onto the Big Tent where all are welcome - and off the sideshows that are popping up along the party's fringe."

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

The biggest winner - those of us who can now watch TV again without being inundated with the Deeds & McDonnell commercials.

Posted by: lf12 | November 4, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

don't like the news - cue the tape:

It's probably safe to assume many Democrats weren't happy about last evening's election results, no matter how they spun them and how they pertained to President Barack Obama. And to his credit, that's something MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews admitted was not good for the Democratic Party.

However, MSNBC, the so-called "Place for Politics" hyped up its Nov. 3 "Super Tuesday" election coverage throughout the day (emphasis added):

"Tonight, Super Tuesday continues on MSNBC with live coverage of ‘Decision ‘09' inside the key elections that will set the stage for a 2010 political battle," the announcer on the TV spot said. "Follow the results on MSNBC's primetime line-up. Plus, special live editions of ‘Countdown with Keith Olbermann' at 10, ‘The Rachel Maddow Show' at 11 and ‘Hardball with Chris Matthews' at midnight. Super Tuesday continues tonight on MSNBC, the place for politics."

Only problem - Olbermann's 10 p.m. broadcast wasn't completely live. In fact, Olbermann didn't even appear in the live segments on the 10 p.m. broadcast of MSNBC's election coverage as the GOP was winning key elections in Virginia and New Jersey.

Viewers were instead treated to replayed coverage of Olbermann's earlier show, which included he and Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson discussing the so-called public option for health care, his infamous "World's Worst Segment," in which he told Glenn Beck to "go to hell," as reported by Noel Sheppard earlier and an 11 minute and two second segment about the "smartest plays" in the World Series - all of which was shown twice that evening


anyone wonder why MSDNC can't attract 100 viewers while O"reilly has millions?

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Response to Obama's education proposals today - THIS IS HOW THEY EVALUATE TEACHERS AND SCHOOLS IN CHICAGO AND ILLINOIS

See article on how Obama's education plan leaves no child behind, unless they are a poor performer that takes the day off.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/education/chi-never-a-junior-01-nov01,0,6123860.story


.

Posted by: DocHoliday1 | November 4, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

"I can understand reverence for Palin on the part of people of low intelligence and limited education, she is after all one of their own. She's crude, she shares the racism so prevalent among the lower orders, she babbles like they do, and she hates all the same people they do, articulating their anger.

I have a real hard time understanding the reverence for her on the part of people smart enough to know better."

You know all those posts from rightwingnuts asking why liberals are scared of Palin? The only people who really are scared of Palin are establishment Republicans, because her shenanigans are going to cost many of them their jobs (e.g., Mikey Steele).

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

people believe money can think.

-------------------------------

Sir,
I hope you know you are making light of received wisdom, indeed, the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

I'll have you know money can not think.
As a result of the infallible, invisible, invidious and insatiable hand of the free market, money concentrates in the hands of a tiny number of filthy (rich) captains of industry, masters of the universe, whatever you want to call them is fine, anyway, all those mountains of money represent the free speech of the people who, in a sweatshop in a land far away worked for it. So you see, money can not think.


Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Kinda off-topic: what's that sitting atop McAuliffe's head?

==

hair

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Another poster, known for his pederast predilictions

==

I gather you're cool with this sort of stuff, Chris?

Good to know, I'll stop pulling any punches in answering other posters. Why should I?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Kinda off-topic: what's that sitting atop McAuliffe's head?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 4, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Another poster, known for his pederast predilictions, is still threatened daily with unemployment since his job could be accomplished by half of a real code writer. but moving to India is not an option as he would be immediately jailed. But, he offers business advice as if he was actually successful at anything but tasteless insults.

the hot breath of unemployment is breathing down his neck, and not in that good Viet boy way.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Sorry brad but with our politics having shifted so dangerously far to the right there is really no virtue in being in the middle. What you refer to as "moderate" no longer carries any balance or sagacity, it is essentially a concession to allowing the far right define itself as legitimate.

When substantial majorities believe nonsense then there is no virtue in being in the "middle," not when we live on a dying planet and people believe money can think.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Creigh Deeds lost his own race. Yes, the people who voted for McConnell did not like Obama, but the folks who voted for him never did vote for Obama. Deeds's problem was that he could not interest or energize or attract the independents or even the Democrats who supported Obama.

Posted by: bagsl79 | November 4, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

The big time winners I see coming from from yesterday are.

Haley Barbour was brilliant in his decision to go after Daggett. Corzine was stuck at about 44% and he was just not going to get any more votes. By knocking off the option to the Republican it made Christie's votes go up.
Charlie Browns is an eatery that my Republican relatives in New Jersey frequent.
Republican moderates all of the Republican winners ran on a pragmatic moderate platform

The Losers were:

Sarah Palin and the party conservatives who got mixed up in the NY-23 race.
Tim Pawlenty who got mixed up in the NY-23 race and stepped in it big time talking about Republican moderates.
The liberal wing of the Democratic Party
The big winners were moderates... like me. I like Republicans like Snow and Collins and Democrats like Max Baucus and Jim Webb. I never quit being a 50% Republican voter... they just threw all the Republicans I could vote for under the bus.

Posted by: bradcpa | November 4, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

If anything, they outsource them to China, India, Philippines, Taiwan et al, while at the same time lowering corporate taxes for their rich arse buddies.

==

... and amend the tax code to favor shipping jobs overseas, and amend immigration law to bring more foreign workers into the US.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell (R) hammering state Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) among those voters who said jobs and the economy were their number one issue.

~~~

Bob McDonnell ran on a campaign that Deeds should have run on.

Besides, when has a Republican ever created jobs? Not ever, not ever in the history of the U.S. What they do is convince the low-average thinking American that they are going to create jobs.

If anything, they outsource them to China, India, Philippines, Taiwan et al, while at the same time lowering corporate taxes for their rich arse buddies.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | November 4, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Broadwayjoe:

Obama lost big time yesterday - and next time he is not going to have the novelty he did last time.
_________

Last time I checked BHO was not running for anything. Indeed, no federal elective office was in play except the House seat in NY-23, that was won by...Owens, a Dem who prevailed with BHO's VP's help. The state and local races, particularly the NJ and Va. races, had nothing to do with BHO. I know this BHO-referendum line is a narrative pushed by this space and its mothership (Drudge), but t'aint so.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 4, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

I can understand reverence for Palin on the part of people of low intelligence and limited education, she is after all one of their own. She's crude, she shares the racism so prevalent among the lower orders, she babbles like they do, and she hates all the same people they do, articulating their anger.

I have a real hard time understanding the reverence for her on the part of people smart enough to know better.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 3:49 PM | Report abuse

@37:

"The way you walked was thorny, through no fault of your own. But as the rain enters the soil, the river enters the sea, so tears run to a predestined end. Your suffering is over. Now you will find peace for eternity."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 4, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

People talk long and hard about President Obama campaigning for democrats in NJ and VA. He is the democratic party leader for goodness sakes; I believe campaigning for others goes with the job. The pundits really don't recall how many GOP losers George W. Bush campaigned for while president. In the end, I believe most GOP candidates asked him not to come (remember?); the president of the US was simulcast into the Republican National Convention because no one could stomach his actual face. Give me a break when criticizing party loyalty.

Posted by: brossjr2 | November 4, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Hey Chris with the FIX-- RNC Chairman Michael Steele is also a loser. His comments on Morning Joe and elsewhere concerning NY-23 re simply lackluster. "We'll get them next time (2010)?" Sounds like school yard talk to me. Also, Steele makes a big deal about the Republican win in the NJ governor's race, a stronghold for democrats historically. Someone should remind Steele that he and a republican named Bob Ehrlich won the MD governor's race a few years ago. MD like NJ is a democrat stronghold. I remember Ehrlich and Steele served exactly one term, and the state resumed to it's senses and the norm. The Christie win is not a tide turning as Steele celebrates by doing the Heisman dance. The caption in NJ ought to read "GOP- here today, gone tomorrow." My point is, the republican agenda works based on the NJ governor's race is nonsense. Can anyone say "property taxes?" Ralph Nader could have won in NJ in this race had he simply promised to reduce property taxes. Your win/loss picks are good too-- just please add Michael Steele to the loser's panel. God bless.

Posted by: brossjr2 | November 4, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

"I think it's also interesting that the one race that Obama didn't involve himself, which was NY 23, the blue dog conservative Democrat won."

Er, right. He played no role in veep Joe Biden, the liberal senator rightwingnuts deride as a fool, going up to NY-23, where he peformed masterfully in helping Owens across the finish line.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Stop being delusional.

==

You're telling this to a guy who thinks Pawlenty has a shot at national office.

This is past delusion, past psychiatry, we're into neurology territory here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Quite a while ago, snowbama wrote:
We don't want the barking mad loons like drivl and Loud and Dumb ruinning the country or making policy.

Snowbama, I don't want to disturb your fantasy, but there is no chance ANY of the people posting here are ever going to be in a position of running the country or making policy.

Posted by: lowercaselarry | November 4, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Oh please, of course this election meant something. Obama and Biden practically lived in NJ the past couple of weeks trying to pull the pathetic Corzine across the finish line, giving the voters of NJ the full Obama charm offensive and it didn't work. He couldn't get a Democratic Govenor elected in a state he won a year ago by 15 points? The Obama magic is gone. Obama also campaigned for Creigh Deeds in Virginia, a state he won decisively a year ago, for all the good it did Deeds. Deeds ran away from Obama like he had the plague and still got hammered by almost 20 points. Wonder what would have happened if he'd gone around Virginia hugging and hanging all over Obama like Corzine did in NJ (you'd have thought they'd passed gay marriage in NJ already)? Maybe he'd have lost by 30 points instead. I garuntee if Corzine and/or Deeds had won yesterday you'd have heard the Obama administration trumpteting to everyone that the whichever race was won by a Democrat was referendum on Obama and the voters obviously like what they see. I think it's also interesting that the one race that Obama didn't involve himself, which was NY 23, the blue dog conservative Democrat won.

Posted by: RobT1 | November 4, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin: In the Fix's world, you can be a winner and a loser on the same day. (It's our blog and our rules!).

~~~

Yea Chris, it is your Blog and your rules. But, your BLOG lies big time.

Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, Hoffman were all losers. Why in the world, do NeoCons believe that they can influence the voters in a voting district in a state that none of them even hail from.

Stop being delusional.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | November 4, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Biggest Loser = Right wing-nuts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Citi_Street | November 4, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Response to Obama's education proposals today - THIS IS HOW THEY EVALUATE TEACHERS AND SCHOOLS IN CHICAGO AND ILLINOIS


Absolutely unbelievable

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/education/chi-never-a-junior-01-nov01,0,6123860.story

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

CC, You should do an article on the role of the Watertown Daily times in the NY-23 election. They did a great job reporting on this and I think not only held their own under the bright lights of the national spotlight, but I think their indepth reporting had a major impact on the race.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 4, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse


One Comment about Obama's speech today on testing students and rewarding teachers for the performance of the students: The Chicago Tribune recently ran an article stating that the Chicago and Illinois schools were RECLASSIFYING JUNIORS AS SOPHOMORES SO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO TAKE THE TESTS.

So, all the testing that was done in Junior year, the schools and the teachers were holding BACK the bottom 30 % of the students from taking the tests.

It was only for the test, they still promoted the students to seniors in their 4th year, but they didn't have to take the tests then.

YES, the schools and the teachers in Illinois have been caught RED HANDED CHEATING on the test results for their schools by not testing all their students, thereby raising the schools' averages FRUADULENTLY.


OK Obama, with his Education Secretary from Illinois, he is full of it again.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Palin a winner? Her endorsement basically guaranteed a Democratic victory. Only stupid Jerry Springer audience types would embrace her neo-nazi ideology and stupidity. I would bet you that the Republican would have won if she had not endorsed the Conservative Party candidate.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | November 4, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Isn't Obama in Wisconsin today? Then why does he have a White House sign behind him indicating he is in Washington?

What is going on?

Why does what Obama is saying today sound alot like "No Child Left Behind?" Is this another massive evaluation that they have undertaken just to adopt Bush's policies again?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

No amount of fact or reason can penetrate the dense ignorance that is the three stooges of The Fix.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

McAwful still doesn't get it, that's why he has more than aptly earned the misnomer of McAwful.

1) He couldn't even place better than 3rd in a 3 way primary. TERRY YOU JACKPANT, YOU CAN'T EVEN WIN A DEMO LOVE FEST. GET IT?

2) Voters in Grundy, Waynesboro, Farmville and Danville don't take kindly to Carpetbaggers. Just ask the voters of NY23 what they think of the issue.

Posted by: biffgrifftheoneandonly | November 4, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

If a governor of Virginia has extra time then he should not spend it working for the Democratic National Committee in Washington, D.C. If he or she has completed his or her duties and has had sufficient time to rest and recreate, then the additional time should be spent in prayer for (or mediation on) the Commonwealth.

Posted by: blasmaic | November 4, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama lost big time.

==

How you figure?

McDonnell and Christie ran away from the GOP as hard as they could, all but hiding their party affiliations, and both had weak opponents.

The only guy who ran as a conservative, and with corporate money and copro-rate endorsements, went down in flames.

I hope the GOP deludes itself as you are deluding yourself and continues to run green-teeth cavemen and continues to lose.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Obama lost big time.

If he had won, the White House would be screaming.


Why won't anyone just come out and say it directly instead of beating around the bush???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

in drivl's world that is considered brilliant.

you see, it is a very low bar. simply getting dressed in the morning is quite an accomplishment.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

When local Republicans anointed the extremely liberal Dede Scozzafava

==

She's the farthest-to-the-right assemblywoman in the entire district you idiot

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Good lord, Chris thinks Sarah Palin *won* something yesterday?? She's done. As in cooked, last week's roast. Maybe now the country can move on.

Posted by: B2O2 | November 4, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

'as you see CC - the loon has driven the traffic away again. I hope you can survive with one barking mad poster only - snowbama '

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

as you see CC - the loons have driven the traffic away again. I hope you can survive with three barking mad posters only.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Oh please -- this is too precious, people. I'm going out to stock up on popcorn, it's too funny!

Carly Fiorina is the next RINO scalp, you see! The only R who even had a ghost of a chance in Caleeforina.. and the loony wingers want to take her down and push an unelectable nobody! Go for it, suicide bombers!

"A California Republican aiming to unseat Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) next year has gotten a boost from conservative Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC).

DeMint announced last night his Senate Conservatives Fund was endorsing state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore over former Hewlett Packard chief Carly Fiorina. The group supports only "rock solid" conservatives, organizers told supporters on a conference call last night as election results came in.

DeVore "will work with me to shake things up," DeMint said, and "vote the right way ...
stand up in our conference meetings and say, 'Folks this is wrong let's turn this thing around.'"

He urged supporters to directly donate to the DeVore campaign."

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

The Club for Growth staked their claim on party purity by spending to rid the race of Scozzafava in support of Hoffman only to end up getting Owens elected. I would think they both have to be feeling dumb right now.

==

Since when do these uh people learn from mistakes?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

the slobbering Pavlovian dog arrives to spew its brand of ignorant hate.

the loser that we all recognize is the moonbat stooge on this blog who has no other life but to carp and quip on this blog, falsely thinking he is clever – snowbama.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Minority and poor white (working class) voters would be "disenfranchised". Now, do we really want to despise illiterates?

==

Illiterates should not be voting at all.

The whole point of voting is that informed people make informed choices in their own self-interest. Were this the way things actually worked the GOP couldn't elect a bloody toilet attendant. I would work hard to keep the uninformed out of the voting booth.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

the slobbering Pavlovian dog arrives to spew its brand of ignorant hate.

the loser that we all recognize is the moonbat stooges on this blog who have no other life but to carp and quip on this blog, falsely thinking they are clever.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Broadwayjoe:

Obama lost big time yesterday - and next time he is not going to have the novelty he did last time.


David Axelrod is completely full of it.


Yesterday's elections mean a great deal.

Obama would be wise to listen to the people: they do NOT want a massive government health care program which has uncertain costs but will definitely balloon out of control.


If Obama realizes that, and starts to listen to the people, instead of adhering to a wacky left-wing agenda, then he can salvage his administration.

Otherwise, it will be a disaster.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Trying to cast Palin as a "winner" here is too stupid to be worth even a nasty snicker. The only way she "won" was to get a little more attention. If this is some sort of prize to you then you should consider another line of work.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

"A virtually unknown accountant almost elected despite running against the RNC and the DNC."

Really, running against the same RNC that endorsed him? Interesting spin.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

It is troubling how readily the administration is willing to lie about the election results : they care.


If the democrats had won yesterday, they would be out there, screaming that it meant an endorsement of Obama's program and that the election called for an IMMEDIATE passing of the massive health care government program AND another stimulus program with funneled billions to left wing interest groups.

Again, everything the administration is saying runs counter to the way they pledged they would govern during the campaign last year.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

"Sarah Palin will replay that the Republicans are the party that do not wait for months to support our American Troops.

And what will the Democrats say?

Posted by: bsallamack | November 4, 2009 1:26 PM | Report abuse"
-------------
The Democrats will say that shortly after Obama took office he sent 30k additional troops to Afghanistan.

The Democrats will say that we already outnumber the Taliban 12-1

The Democrats will say that it would have been foolhardy to send more troops before the Afghanistan elections were settled, that they make wise decisions based on the facts on the ground, not made-up stories about WMDs.

The Democrats will say that after only nine months in office, over half the most dangerous terrorists on the CIA most-wanted list had been killed directly due to Obama's orders.

The Democrats will remind the populace how the Republicans short-changed our troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq for years.

That is what they will say.

Posted by: JRM2 | November 4, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

oops...

'Republicans may be growing concerned that very few people will actually show up to their protest. As Mother Jones notes, “As of Tuesday afternoon, the official tea party website indicated that only 25 'patriots' were on hand for ‘Operation House Call.’” Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) appeared to try to lower expectations for the event by repeatedly downplaying “Thursday’s event as nothing more than a large-scale ‘press conference‘ on the Capitol steps.”

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Here's the 'grassroots' protests agianst the healthcare bill -- run and financed by wealthy industrialists. These poor teabagger tools have got to be the most gullible people on earth.

"On Thursday, the lobbyist-run groups Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks — which were instrumental in orchestrating dozens of anti-Obama tea parties and town hall disruptions — are planning an anti-health reform rally on Thursday at the steps of the Capitol. Republican leadership, like Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), have endorsed the rally.

But two of the most rabidly right-wing members of Congress, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) are amongst the most aggressive promoters of the rally, with the help of talk radio and Fox News.

FreedomWorks has launched a website called “DontKillGrandma.com” listing recommended tactics for activists to engage in while protesting health reform. For the Thursday rally, FreedomWorks says activists should engage in a “simultaneous chant of ‘Kill the Bill.’” FreedomWorks is funded by corporate money and is led by Dick Armey, the former Republican Majority Leader and until recently lobbyist from DLA Piper.

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is busing people to the rally. AFP is led by astroturf lobbyist Tim Phillips and is bankrolled by gas and oil baron David Koch, the world’s 9th richest person and the financier of dozens of conservative think-tanks, publications, and politicians. Like they did for the April tea parties, AFP has commissioned at least 10 buses from Maryland, New Jersey, and North Carolina to bring protesters — free of charge — to DC for the rally."

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Winner: The voters. A tax raising NJ Governor with a corrupt cabinet defeated despite support from the President and his own wealth. A wishy washy VA Gubenatorial Candidate with unpopular opinions defeated.
A virtually unknown accountant almost elected despite running against the RNC and the DNC.

Posted by: star_key2 | November 4, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

VA gov race: The Democrat ran on a narrow platform of my opponent wrote a paper that offended me and my really liberal friends. He wrote it twenty years ago and we should all concentrate on that. He lost.

NY23: Hoffman ran on a right-wing platform in a backwoods Republican district that has been Republican since 1852. The "liberal" Republican who pulled out on Saturday was still on the ballot. She pulled 6%. Combine her six percent with Hoffman's total and the nutjob would win. This false logic will be used by TPaw, Palin, Fox News and the like to insist that the problem is that Republicans aren't conservative enough. That will lead to the Republicans further ghettoizing themselves.

So what are the lessons: The Democrats need to run moderates, run away from their openly liberal friends and focus on the issues. The Republicans will run nutjobs, instead of moderates, and will win in the South, Idaho and a few other places, slowly leaving the country to any moderate Democrat that cares to run.

Posted by: caribis | November 4, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

NEW YORK 23: The Obama White House machine was far superior here to an awful local Republican Party.


Without a doubt, Hoffman's loss takes a bit of sheen off the night. Having said that, a single race involving roughly a hundred thousand voters in odd circumstances is not the equal of multi-million vote governors' races. Don't let the Obama spin fool you with all the talk about the GOP losing a district they had held since the Civil War. Obama carried that district by 5 points in 2008. Moreover, he tapped the Republican House Member from this district for a minor cabinet post for the express purpose of hoping the Dems could win an open seat. That was good tactical politics.


When local Republicans anointed the extremely liberal Dede Scozzafava without a primary, they were asking for trouble. You can call that awful tactical politics. Scozzafava's endorsement of Owens validated conservative activists and those like Sarah Palin and Fred Thompson in backing Hoffman. That an inexperienced candidate -- with much of the official local GOP machinery pouting on the sidelines -- lost to a suddenly very well-funded Obama-machine candidate is really no surprise. For all the national hoopla about Hoffman, the on-the-ground reality is that the Obama hacks beat the GOP hacks in the game of turnout and tactics. Is anyone surprised that the local Republican operatives would be outplayed?


In short, the night showed that the tea party movement and the palpable bubbling up of a conservative ascendancy is no joke. It would seem to indicate that a repeat of '93-'94 (fueled by HillaryCare) is at least possible in 2009-2010 (fueled by ObamaCare and all other symptoms of malignant government). Certainly last night was superior to those in 1993 when the GOP swept Democrats out of state houses in Jersey and Virginia by any statistical measure.


And it needs to be. Our Republic is in more danger than we were in 1993 -- by any statistical measure. We won bigger, but it was absolutely necessary that we did. And that's the proper spin of election night 2009.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

WINNER: Chris Cillizza

For acknowledging, albeit with a qualifying question mark, that Sarah Barracuda, a/k/a Caribu Barbie, appeals only to the party base -- a statement that also "debases" the party!


***


JOURNO VICTOR LIVINGSTON TO FBI: SEIZE DHS 'FUSION CENTERS'
TO STOP SILENT GOV'T MICROWAVE ATTACKS ON U.S. CITIZENS

See his first-person attack account in latest comments to this article:

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez OR (if link is corrupted): http://NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | November 4, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Who will be the party of Wall Street in 2010?

In 2010 Democrats will face elections where Sarah Palin and others like Rush Limbaugh will take the stage to attack Democrats while extolling the virtues of Republicans.

Republican candidates will introduce the speaker or more effectively will be at another election event.

A return to the old politics of the demagogues with the twist that the demagogues are not running for election but are front and center to aid the candidates that are running for office.

Sarah Palin will replay that the Republicans are the party of Main Street and not the party of Wall Street.

Sarah Palin will replay that the Republicans are the party that do not wait for months to support our American Troops.

And what will the Democrats say?

Will they say the Democrats have brought back Glass Steagall to force the bankers back into the business of lending and out of the business of large bonuses?

Will they say that the Democrats have taxed like Tobacco, the large bonuses out of existence and want those who work in financial firms to work on salary like the rest of America and not on large bonuses like AIG where taxpayers had to waste 200 billion dollars because of large bonuses?

Will they say that the Democrats have pushed for recovering the taxes on millions that should have been paid by the hedge fund managers and closed that loophole?

Will they say that the President has fully explained to the nation why he said no and will not send more American troops to Afghanistan?

Will they say that the President has stopped the visas for foreign worker in a nation without jobs for America?

Will they say that the President has publicly told American corporations that sending American jobs overseas when so many Americans are unemployed is not in the interests of America?

Or will the Democrats in 2010 not be able to anything?

Posted by: bsallamack | November 4, 2009 1:26 PM | Report abuse

The moonbats have become unhinged today. Watch what transpires as Obamacare goes down in flames. I know - blame Bush!

The Democrats did not lose a 2-1 squeaker last night. They lost two huge races, saw an overall evaporation of 25 basis points of support -- and lost by nearly 500,000 cumulative votes in the three high-profile elections.

What we did not know was just how overwhelming the anti-Democrat tide would be among voters. In the three talked-about races, it was a blowout of something like 55%-42% overall in precincts that voted for Obama 56%-44% just a year ago. The raw totals will end up a tad under 2.4 million GOP votes to 1.9 million for the Democrats in round numbers.


Or put another way, Republicans won two races decided by millions of voters -- and Democrats won a small race dominated by party operatives. In addition, the GOP made some historic gains in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Washington state special elections to boot.


So don't buy into any 2-1 split-decision analysis. It was a stunning reversal of a full quarter of the electorate in one year's time.

For the record, Barack Obama "voted present" by not even watching the election returns -- let alone commenting -- as his party suffered the massive 25% reversal. (Okay, I don't believe White House reports that he didn't watch, but who could blame him a little fib considering the magnitude of the actual loss?)


The stunning stat of the night might be this: that McDonnell beat Creigh Deeds by a thousand times the margin he did in 2005. Or it might be that Christie overcame a 700,000 party voter disadvantage to win a race with about two million total voters. Or it may be that all this happened with zero references to "reaching across the aisle" or mavericks. So what does this mean?

It means Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and "big tent" politics just suffered a huge electoral defeat. Likely the same can be said of whatever this week's Obama-Baucus-Bogus-Consumer-Ponzi-Care bill is being passed around these days. To quote CNBC's politically-minded financial analyst Jerry Bowyer, the 1,900-page health care bill is "now pulp." He made that call before 8 p.m. eastern.


None of this will be in the White House spin, of course -- but at the risk of offending the sensibilities of the suddenly decorum-focused Pelosi -- any attempt by the Democrats to candy-coat or minimize what happened last night is nothing less than Hitler-esque, bunker-mentality fantasy.


Perfect assignment for the deranged drivl.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

From someone posing as Hall of Fame troll "37thandOst":

"Yesterday showed that these numbers are going back to normal - the younger voters are going back to their natural levels and the seniors came back out to vote - the seniors went back to voting as seniors do."
______

This wasn't even a midterm election; it was an offyear election. Historically, NOBODY shows up for those, especially young people and minorities. Only Goober, Gomer, and Miss Crump vote in the offyears--it's either vote or play bingo or talk to Floyd. Given those choices, they vote.

Let's wait till 2010 to reach any conclusions about Dem v. GOP trends. In any event, most analysts agree the demographic trends are such that the GOP in the long run will be an ultraconservative, whites-only Southern party, throwback to the 1948 Dixiecrats. It's almost there already.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 4, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

From the idiotic, looking-glass world of FOX:

"Here's a priceless piece of video I came across while working on a montage of Fox's coverage of NY-23 (which will be out later today):

In the video, a Fox anchor claims that not only was Dede Scozzafava "stepping aside is what's best for the party," but that she's "putting her support behind conservative candidate Matt Hoffman."

Uh, that would be Doug Hoffman. And she endorsed the Democrat, Bill Owens.

Nice try, though, Foxers!"

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"Club for Growth has been unable to elect any state-wide candidates"

I often wonder if they are interested in winning elections or simply satisfied with raising the exposure to their pet candidates. They often boost unelectable Republicans through the primaries and then disappear while the RNC has to flounder to figure out how to get this guy in office. Aside from the fact that Hoffman is too conservative for his district, he is just a horrible candidate. No presence, no charisma whatsoever.

I think they are more interested in eliminating "RINOs" than in actually winning elections. They just want to raise the profile of their guys. They are certainly doing that, but their track record in winning elections sucks.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Big Winners -- voters in NY-23 who refused to allow outsiders to shove a know-nothing wingnut down their throats.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 1:14 PM | Report abuse

It would be interesting to see which polling organization got closest to the actual result.

One thing I think we can say is that running against two opponents is a recipe for victory.

Another clear indication is that if Liberals don't get the wax out of their ears, they are headed for early retirement.

We don't want the barking mad loons like drivl and Loud and Dumb ruinning the country or making policy. they had their day in NJ and messed everything up. now they want to extend this failure to the national level. this notion was firmly established yesterday by "the only poll that matters".

Deeds won a primary against two decent opponents and get the stamp of approval from the WaPo including nonstop negative Maccacca efforts. to no avail. Voters recognized a failure who wanted to raise taxes just because. It is not all the blame of the man, it is his entire approach to governing - liberalism in a right of center location. the earmarks of the Obambi implosion.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Loser: Club for Growth. $1 million and they can't elect their conservative candidate in a district that has elected Republicans since the 1870s?

Club for Growth has been unable to elect any state-wide candidates, and they were unable to elect a candidate even after stampeding a sleepy district with money, ground support from the Right and the Faithful, a steady stream of advertising and plenty of kindly support from Fox, Palin, Beck and Armey.

I hear Scozzafava is Italian for "Eat my beans!"

Posted by: margaretmeyers | November 4, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I think conservatism is also a loser here. The one guy who didn't pretend to be a liberal Republican was the guy who lost.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

I think it is really interesting that only one person I found doing the T shirt contest got the direction of all three races right (unless my eyes glazed over, hopefully CC has an intern on this): jcw_colby

It seems like most who had Owens beating Hoffman, especially by anything near the real margin, had Corzine winning big too.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON
The “no more red/blue state” candidate Obama has proven, in just ten months, to be the most partisan — as polls attest — and polarizing figure in the last 40 years of presidential administrations, trying to socialize medicine, raise income and FICA taxes, and restructure energy policy along European cap-and-trade lines. He’s demonized conservative protest and media, run unprecedented “gorge the beast” deficits, and surrounded himself with a highly partisan and angry fringe that includes Anita Dunn and Van Jones.

The great surprise is that the veneer of the healer came off so soon, and the Chicago hard-baller emerged to establish all sorts of us/them dichotomies: Fox/Limbaugh/Tea Partiers/Town Hallers/Republicans are now unthinking, uncaring, and sometimes racist; the Chamber of Commerce, Wall Street, doctors, insurance companies, the police, etc., are no more than greedy exploiters who do everything from unnecessarily take out tonsils to stupidly stereotype blacks; abroad a “Bush did it” manicheanism has reduced American foreign policy to little more than “We will make you like us as we remind you that we also hated Bush.”

I think the general idea is to ram through a hard-Left agenda before Obama’s approval ratings hit 40 percent and the centrist Democrats bail — with the understanding that in five years, questioning institutionalized Obamacare or cap-and-trade taxes will be as blasphemous as reviewing automatic COLA Social Security payouts is today.

What we are witnessing is unique — a hubristic president has misread the reasons for his victory. He sees his win as a mandate to move America hard to the left while caricaturing opponents. The result is a growing popular rejection of Obamism and all that it entails. He may well do for the Left what Jimmy Carter did — if Republicans can return to their principles, clean up their act, and stand for something other than business as usual in Washington.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Losers:

Deeds top advisors and top campaign staff. Going negative didn't work. Outreach was non existent and media team that was so highly praised in primary came up flat. Monica Dixon, Joe Abbey. Also, non-Virginians and politicos from outside Virginia running Virginia elections.

Log Cabin/Gay Republicans: electing Cuccinelli by such a landslide should be evidence that the Republican party couldn't care less about this constituency.

Dem. Party of VA and Coordinated Campaign: Polling places across the state unstaffed, volunteers throughout state never reached out to.

Mark Warner: Sheila Johnson on stage with McDonnell- a new radical centrist on our hands? Only this time, table has been turned on Warner and Co.while Warner has to make partisan votes in Congress, McDonnell can be "bipartisan" (wink wink) in Richmond. Republicans can run good campaigns and preach being moderates as well. Why can't this continue into the future?

Winners:

Rep. Party of Virginia: redistricting is looking good and more elections around the corner.

McDonnell campaign and advisors: deflected thesis brilliantly. Staff will be hot commodity.

Democratic staffers on campaigns and in the administration: having to get those resumes polished in an unforgiving economic climate.

Posted by: ChrisD4 | November 4, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Winner: Independent voters. In Virginia, demonstrated the positive impact of presenting a candidate that is moderate and appeals to their interest. And in NY, the negative impact of running a fringe candidate focussed on the wants of the party's base.

Posted by: Steve-2 | November 4, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

The biggest loser -- snowbama.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

RT Rybak wins big in Minneapolis. With Coleman shooting for 2012, Rybak will run for governor for sure.

Could be an up-and-comer.

Posted by: JohninMpls | November 4, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

BIGGEST LOSERS- Fox News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh. The big mouths can deliver 100,000 Tea baggers to the Mall, but they can't deliver at the polls. Rushpublicans are a mirage.

Posted by: tgarahan | November 4, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

the biggest loser - liberal methodology:

"The Democratic governor there was a failure." But he was a failure because he applied tried, true, and failed Democratic policies to a state in crisis. Higher taxes and higher spending is not a recipe for reform and recovery. Under a crushing burden of income and property taxes in a recessionary economy, even the bluest of blue states will cry "uncle." Corzine's loss isn't so much a proxy for Obama's flagging personal popularity — and it still appears that the president remains personally popular — but it is a referendum on Democratic ideas. Corzine lost because his ideas failed.


the loser - blame bush, I think that has run its course.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:47 PM | Report abuse

"2) The Post's polling approach lacked credibility, and it showed. Not only were the Post's polls consistently wrong in dampening the margin between McDonnell and Deeds, the Post actively poo-pooed other polls that had a far more accurate grasp of the true margin of separation."

Dude, give me a break. WaPo had Deeds losing by 11.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 12:46 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960 writes
"Tim Pawlenty is pathetic."

Spread the word.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 12:45 PM | Report abuse

the election results doesn't matter nearly as much as what a mere 100 people think about it.

Those 100 people are the 80 Democratic Congressmen and 20 senators who represent districts or states that voted for John McCain. We can buy the MSNBC-NYT take on NY-23, Obama's popularity etc. all we like. The question is, will those 80 congressmen and 20 senators buy it? Oh, they may spout it, they may even want the liberal spin to be true. But will they act that way? Will they go out on a limb for a president whose personal popularity is not only falling, but seems to have no transitive properties whatsoever? The White House clanged the cowbell as loud as it could in New Jersey and it did nothing for Corzine. And Corzine spent millions and millions of his own dollars — dollars most of the vital 100 won't have. Bloomberg barely bought a victory for 100 million dollars.

And most importantly: Virginia. This was a historic Republican rout in a purplish, swingy, trending-Democratic state. If you're one of the 100, are you going to buy Rachel Maddow's ruby-slipper-heel-clicking spin or are you going trust your own survival instincts?

Obama may be popular, but Obamaism is in trouble.

JGold

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:41 PM | Report abuse

"Corzine was probably a lost cause, but Deeds could have done things a LOT better."

Deeds of course could have run a better campaign, but I think he was probably a lost cause too. He just doesn't match up well with the Democratic base in VA. A rural white guy, gun rights supporter from a tiny county in Southwest VA? Come on. As they say down there, that dog won't hunt. And it didn't.

As tenuous as his connections to NoVa are any more, McDonnell at least could play up his place of birth, and he knew that jobs and roads are what matter around here.

Not that McAuliffe or Moran could have won, but they would have kept more of NoVa blue.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

The Fix writes
"These two Democratic Congressman from the Commonwealth have to be beyod nervous after analyzing the election results in the governor's race. In 2008, President Barack Obama won Nye's Norfolk-area district with 51 percent and lost Perriello's Southside seat narrowly with 48 percent. Yesterday McDonnell won 62 percent in Nye's 2nd and 61 percent in Perriello's 5th. That does not bode well for either man's re-election prospects next November."


That's one possible interpretation. Perhaps there is another. The Fix has also written recently about the rise of the independent voter. Perhaps the independent voter votes not for the party, but for the candidate. So perhaps The Fix is a bit premature in predicting dire outcomes for Nye & Perriello. If The Fix's rule were valid, we'd have a Congresscritter-elect from NY 23 named Scozzofava or Hoffman, rather than Owens.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

poor loser yellowsnow, no one listens to him whining so he has to obsess over me... poor crazy loon, frantically typing all day here and no one ever listens. what a sad, lonely, wasted life.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

The other aspect of Obama's win last year which should be examined is the demographic groups which came out to vote.


For some reason, Obama was able to change the age demographics - whether it was history - Bush, the race issue or whateve, the age demographics were different last year.

Specifically, more younger people came out to vote, OK - more power to them. However, they did show up yesterday at the polls, instead they appeared to be motivated by the novelty of voting for a black man without regard for his experience or actual positions on the issues.

The other side of it, which has been underreported, is that the seniors, instead of casting votes against Obama, instead were unmotivated by McCain, and they simply stayed home. These numbers were masked by the additional younger voters at the polls.


Yesterday showed that these numbers are going back to normal - the younger voters are going back to their natural levels and the seniors came back out to vote - the seniors went back to voting as seniors do.


YES - I am going to stick by my assertion that there was an entire section of the electorate last year - when confronted with the prospect of voting for a black man which they did not want to do - instead stayed home and didn't vote instead of voting for McCain.

I really don't care that some aspect of the race discussion are considered out-of-bounds. It's like the only part of the race discussion that is OK is being a cheerleader for minorities.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

White House hoping violence in Iran won't spread

and that pretty much sums up the Obambi foreign policy.

He must be exhausted from all that hoping.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:34 PM | Report abuse

And of course, Hoffman supporters were acting like the as*holes they are:

"It's getting ugly out there.

I just got off the phone with former state Democratic Chairwoman June O'Neill, who informed me the police had been called to at least two polling sites in St. Lawrence County due to overzealous electioneering (O'Neill called it "voter intimidation") by Doug Hoffman supporters.

"We've gotten reports that people are standing there, covered with Hoffman stickers and yelling anti-choice stuff at voters," said O'Neill, a St. Lawrence native who has been running the party's GOTV effort for Bill Owens in NY-23.

"Apparently, there's some woman claiming to be a commissioner," O'Neill continued. "Commissioner of what, I don't know. She's from Texas, I think, and she won't leave."

"This is not the way we roll in the North Country."


Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 12:33 PM | Report abuse

the Baghdad Bob of the Fix is busy this morning. drivl is so clueless she thinks a win is a loss, cooling is warming, murder is choice, fees are taxes, is is not, etc.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Losing slogan: Vote me for governor, because the last two guys from my party did such a good job.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 4, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Losing slogan: Vote me for governor, because the last two guys from my party did such a good job.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 4, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

"I was thinking the biggest winner was Hayley Barbour/RGA yesterday."

Definitely. You could tell that they had a plan and implemented it well. Corzine was probably a lost cause, but Deeds could have done things a LOT better.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 12:31 PM | Report abuse

The loony barking mad moonbat liberals will conveniently overlook the fact that the Obimbo WH carefully picked the NY 23rd district for picking off. He offered that R congressman a position in the Army. why would they offer this to an R?

Because they knew that there was no bench in this district. there was no organization for running a campaign. that the locals don't run primaries and would pick either a feeble RINO or a loser.

don't forget that Barry specializes in knocking people off the ballot so he doesn't have to run an honest campaign. Even threatening the annointed Democrat was a stunning success, considering the background.

And there is no way to spin the fabulous defeat in VA and NJ. Imagine a change by over 20 points. the liberal tide is receeding faster than the Bay of Fundy.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:30 PM | Report abuse

CC -- What of the "winners" in the Fix prediction contest? (I think I may have a shot at the coveted t-shirt with my VA-Gov prediction!)

I know you've got a lot on your plate. I'm just excited!

Posted by: acasilaco | November 4, 2009 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm not surprised at the election results.

Obama's given us a Republican, Bush-lite administration.

The voters followed his lead and voted for the same.

Posted by: norriehoyt | November 4, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

This far too kind article -- the arse kissing the NYTimes always gives to wingers:

“Thank you to every single person out there that joined my team and fought back for America,” [Republican-backed rightwing loser] Mr. Hoffman said. “This one was worth the fight. And it’s only one fight in the battle, and we have to keep fighting...”

The Club for Growth, a group that promotes limited government and lower taxes, spent about $1 million promoting Mr. Hoffman. Social conservative organizations like the Susan B. Anthony List, which opposes abortion, and the National Organization for Marriage, which fights same-sex marriage laws, joined forces in support of Mr. Hoffman. They printed literature, made phone calls and flooded the district with volunteers from across the country.

On Tuesday morning, former Congresswman Musgrave stood in frigid weather for several hours outside a state office building in downtown Watertown with a group of home-schooled students passing out blue fliers that read, “Doug Hoffman shares our values!”

Ms. Musgrave said the overwhelming conservative embrace of Mr. Hoffman would show leaders in Washington that political bases should not be taken for granted. “Don’t just assume we’re yours.”

The whole circus freak coalition went all out for this one and lost. and plan to do the same all over the country. The Republlican party is in big trouble.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I'd say President Obama & the Club for Growth both deserve to be on the losing end. The Club spent heavily for Hoffman in a loss and Obama spent much of his political capital in New Jersey supporting Corzine's losing effot. New Jersey was the race that the White House staked a claim on, and they lost. The Club for Growth staked their claim on party purity by spending to rid the race of Scozzafava in support of Hoffman only to end up getting Owens elected. I would think they both have to be feeling dumb right now. Tim Pawlenty should also go into the loser category here. T-Paw, too, went to NY-23 and endorsed Hoffman. He's on the losers list here as well.

Others that should be on the winners list: Mark Kirk (Ill), Charlie Crist (Fl) & Carly Fioriona (Cali). All 3 are being challenged from the right in Republican nomination contests in 2010. All 3 got a spark of confidence last night as Hoffman, the far right candidate, lost to Owens in NY-23. This gives them more room to say "I belong as the senate nominee" in their respective races.

Posted by: reason5 | November 4, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Loser - Harry Reid's strategy of stockpiling funds to try and eviscerate whoever his opponent is next year. Corzine proved a negative strategy, backed by ample funds, just won't cut it in this environment. Harry Reid has got to re-think things are start to go positive. His similarities with Corzine, including a low positive approval rating, should be chilling.

Posted by: Dadat39 | November 4, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Among the losers, the Washington Post for several reasons:

1) The editorial board's endorsement of Deeds was no surprise, but the partisan and selectively one-sided nature of it indicated a lack of seriousness in appraising the campaign.

2) The Post's polling approach lacked credibility, and it showed. Not only were the Post's polls consistently wrong in dampening the margin between McDonnell and Deeds, the Post actively poo-pooed other polls that had a far more accurate grasp of the true margin of separation.

3) Related to #2, the Post seemed to take a 90 degree turn during the campaign in covering other poll results. In the beginning, the Post went on record saying they would not publicize other polls that they (the Post) had problems with in terms of methodology. After getting skewered over this highly subjective and arbitrary decision, the Post reversed course in the last month and was giving some limited airplay to other polls (which turned out to be more accurate than the Post's own polls). This indicated the lack of a reliable compass in guiding what the newsroom (not the editorial staff) thought was newsworthy. This kind of fumbling, bumbling, and stumbling is what hurt Deeds's credibility. It hurts the Post's as well.

4) The Post's metro section made a serious investment in pushing liberal concerns in its reporting. Beyond the Post's obsession with McDonnell's thesis, the metro staff (again, I'm not talking about the editorial board) repeatedly approached the economic and transportation plans of the candidates from the perspective of higher taxes being the only real solution. First, one wonders if these people have looked at the economic condition in Maryland (high taxes, high unemployment, a population exodus to states with lower tax burdens) as part of formulating their own worldview. Second, it is a bit disingenuous for the beat staff to regularly trot out the line that a high wall of separation exists between the editorial board and the metro staff, as if this org chart somehow gets the metro staff off the hook for bringing their own biases to their coverage.

Nobody I know expected the Post's editorial board to give McDonnell a fair shake, and that's fair enough. But the conduct of the metro staff in this campaign has been noticed by many outside the beltway. After years of the Post improving its image as a news outlet that shows at least some concern with being fair, I fear that its performance this time around will undo a good bit of that among those who are not partisan Democrats.

Posted by: mbcnewspaper | November 4, 2009 12:24 PM | Report abuse

JNDrummond


Are you going to boycott California too ???


I wonder how many States would end up on your boycott list if you include all who vote down your issue.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I don't think people care about self funding for its own sake. However, one indicator of a successful candidate is the ability to raise money from voters. The ability to get people to open their wallets in support. The money is more of an indicator than an asset. The true asset is fundraising ability. That's why self-funded campaigns don't do well. It's not because voters punish them. It's because the candidate hasn't had to go through the Darwinistic selection process of raising money. As a result, they are probably less likely to be attractive to voters. Corzine lost and Bloomberg won by a thin margin.

Another example is Doug Hoffman. The guy was awash in money, but he simply could not raise money from the people who were actually voting in the election. Owens was far better at this. Sure, Hoffman was greatly bolstered by the CFG money, but you simply can't expect a great electoral result from someone who can't raise money from voters.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 12:23 PM | Report abuse

The biggest loser of all is Comrade Obama.
He visited both Va and NJ a dozen times and campaigned for both losers big time. He and the DNC spent $10 million bucks to try to elect Comrade Corzine and Comrade Deeds, and both lost by big numbers.
The Independent voters who elect all politicians, and who voted for Comrade Obama by 60%+ in the last election, voted by 60%+ against his and the Democrap Socialist Parties candidate.
The reason?
The American people--and the registered Independent voters in particular--have figured out Comrade Obama and the Democrap Socialists Marxist agenda, and they don't like it. This election was the start of the Independent voters tide to correct their mistake, and return our country to a Representative Republican government from the brink of the Communist government--uber--alles one the Comrade Obama and the Democrap Socialists have had in mind with their nationalizations of private businesses, forced Unionization, and their Redistribution of all wealth agenda.
This same turn-around happened in 1994, when the Democrap Socialists also lost the governorships of Va and NJ, and then lost both houses of congress in the midterms.

Posted by: armpeg | November 4, 2009 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Jeffrey Drummond,

What about Washington?
Five times the population of Maine,
but it is still a great vacation spot.

It has not passed for sure, but is "everything but marriage" good enough?

Also thankfully, our latest starve the beast initiative has gone down.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/home/index.html

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

I was thinking the biggest winner was Hayley Barbour/RGA yesterday. I mean, the RGA beat Deeds down hard on the post debate press conference flop. They turned that into his water-loo. They knew McDonnell had the race well won during the final week of the campaign, and focused their attention to New Jersey & siphoning votes away from Daggett. Again, it worked perfectly driving Daggett's total down to 6%, which was once at 18%. Now, we have Republican governor elects in Virginia & New Jersey. Barbour must be licking his chops when he views 2009. Republicans have tough jobs defending: Hawii, Rhode Island, California, Nevada, Vermont & Florida. Republicans have a shot to pick up other seats: Maine, New York, Massachussets, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maryland, Ohio, Iowa, Tennessee, Kansas, Oklahoma, Colorodo, New Mexico, Illinois, Oregon & Wyoming. Of all of these seats right now Nevada, Oregon & Florida look the safest keeps. But the rest are really open for pick up for the parties and the campaign's are going to matter immensly. Barbour will be in charge of the campaign from the Republican side. He's a proven winner & a master strategist. Barbour & the RGA was the biggest winner last night.

Posted by: reason5 | November 4, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

CC you mention two of the three freshman dem reps, but you can include the other one, Mr. Connally, since McDonnell carried his district 55%-45%. He did also carry Boucher 67%-33% too. Obama should be listed on the loser list due to his constant campaigning for Corzine-I think his ads were touting an Obama-Corzine team. I do think you can include conservative interest groups in the loser category as well because they overplayed their hand in NY 23. Sure it's been in GOP hands for 130 years, but Obama carried it. Eventually my fellow conservatives will stop describing the political leanings of a consituency by the '04 races, but by the '08 races since they are more recent and reflect reality more closely (though from yesterday, not that closely) than 2 presidential elections ago

Posted by: TexasProud1 | November 4, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

On the mood inside the Oval Office: "The Audacity of Mope."

On being suckered into trying to flip the New Jersey and Virginia races to the Democrats: "The Audacity of Rope-a-Dope."

On the voters and their view of Democrats running for office just a year after the Obama triumph: "The Audacity of Nope."

You won't see those headlines, of course. President Obama will probably never be cast upon the shoals by the media that invented him, carried him aloft upon their increasingly osteoporotic shoulders for two years and still adore him fiercely with a combination of parental indulgence and a suitor's rose-colored-glasses ardor.

Don't be suckered by the reverse hype. This was a dreadful night for the president and his party -- and an unmistakable signal that voters are, at the very least, uneasy with Democratic political dominion in the United States.
JPod

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"Influential [Palin] is, but mostly with illiterates."

This is seen as elitist nowadays, how times have changed. During the last century, the left made the idea of forcing a literacy test on voters anathema.

Minority and poor white (working class) voters would be "disenfranchised". Now, do we really want to despise illiterates?

The left needs to address the question of how it might remain or become attractive to these people. The right is busy figuring it out. We can call that demagoguery or populism, or we can call it taking every person's vote seriously.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Losers - Dem contributers. spent over 10 million losing two governorships.

Barry may have to cancel a date night or two. Oh wait, we all pay for those.

but as we find out today it is no big deal, hardly worth mentioning at the WH, a nest of local issues not even worthy of his highnesses' attention.

Hey, what's on HBO. Oh look a Barack Obama Special. turn off Fox and switch the channel.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Like your list much bettr, joe -- 'the Fox' -- heh heh. Juan Williams and Chris Wallace are the dregs.

The way Wallace licked Limbaugh's arse was just so servile and unctuous it made me vomit. I couldn't even watch it for a minute.

Poor Mike Wallace. He must be turning over in his grave that his son turned out to be such a weaselly little trollop.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Corzine dumped over $120 Million into the democratic party over the past 10 years - this severly altered the balance between the parties throughout the State.


Perhaps New Jersey will go back to a more natural equilibrium between the parties now.


The democrats have also lost some corrupt bosses to convictions lately -

I would like to remind you that as recently as 1996 Bob Dole campaigned in New Jersey in October - a sign that at that late date, his campaign believed they at least had a chance at NJ's electoral votes.


Corzine was a miserable failure, that is true.


But he is also a poster boy for someone who spends a great deal of money and ends up completely out of touch with the people - in a way Obama suddenly had a great deal of money last year which they spent on a great deal of tv.

I believe that the money disparity between Obama and McCain was a much larger factor in Obama's victory last year than believed. Last year, you had a situation in which Obama was able to flood many States with tv commercials and McCain was not.


One has to wonder what the electoral college would have looked like if the money had been even between Obama and McCain - or even what if McCain had a massive money advantage and was able to overwhelm Obama with massive tv commercials.

Physics is always at work.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 4, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Surely someone has mentioned this by now, but as much as I like the man (and I sincerely do), shouldn't Barack Obama be listed as a loser after what happened in New Jersey? He campaigned three times (I think) for Corzine in heavily black and Democratic areas, but was clearly unable to motivate the base

Posted by: kdemko | November 4, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

The other day Rush Limbaugh himself said, "Forget New Jersey, Forget Virginia, the race with the most significance is in the New York 23rd." If that is the case the New York 23rd meant it was a great night for Democrats. I would rather continue to have a Democrat in the White House then a democrat in the statehouses in VA and NJ if that is the historical trend.

Deeds ran a horrible campaign from Day 1. Corzine was in trouble from Day 1. But to gain a seat that for 150 years had been held by a Republican in an off year election is a real gain.

This shows that the Republicans need Conservatives, Moderates and Independents (and Dems to stay home) to win elections not just conservatives. Purging your party never helps win elections. Because there are few idealogues 20% on each side--you need 50%+ 1 vote. I want a vigorous two party system, the Republicans need to be about different opionions not all the same.

Posted by: jmr1601 | November 4, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Winners
Owens
BHO
Mrs. Wm. J. Clinton (for focusing her pants-suited energy in the right direction)
The Golf Channel
Frank Rich (his take on the NY-23 race was Hall of Fame material)
The Fox (formerly the Fix) (for toning down--a bit--the GOP cheerleading in this space and trying to get back to facts and analysis)

Losers
Phalin (Mac actually declined her offer to campaign in VA; good move, Mac)
McAuliffe (but for his vanity campaign for Governor, Brian Moran would have been the Dem nominee and trounced Mac handily yesterday)
MASH reruns (totally unwatchable)
Chris Wallace (for giving Rush a TV forum to deliver an uninterrupted 30 minute bigoted rant agianst our President, the worse on-air screed since Buchanan's white supremacist meltdown on Dr. Rachel Maddow's show)
Juan Williams (natch)

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 4, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Everyone is going to point to something to justify their pre-determined conclusion. I will say this. Before tonight, the largest margin of Victory of the last 20 years in a VA gov race came after two terms of Dem control, and the only time in the last two generations where an incumbent NJ governor lost occured in the same election-1993. Those are facts-sure the NY race appears, on the surface, to refute that. I think the NY GOP and the tea party movement learned a valuable lesson going forward-you need to work together and not against each other. Dede had no business being the GOP nominee, but Hoffman, who was clueless about local issues, had no business being the nominee either. Either way, I would be watching over my shoulder if I was Mr. Owens.

Posted by: TexasProud1 | November 4, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

LGBT and their supporters have one effective weapon.

Boycott Maine.

I'm the 11th direct generation of a family born and bred in Maine. 5th consecutive generation of Bowdoin grads.

Ski in VT and NH. Vacation in western MA. The ocean is swimmable in MA and CT, unlike Maine.

No LL Bean, no Maine lobsters, no kids to Maine summer camps, no tourism to Kennebunk or York or Prout's Neck, no Maine blueberries, no antique stores.

Tell people why: the B&B owners, hotel owners, management at Sugarloaf and Sunday River, antique stores that send mailers, city shops and restaurants.

It's the only way to make the enlightened population become active instead of blindly passive, and make them fight really hard against gay apartheid.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey Drummond

Posted by: JNDrummond | November 4, 2009 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Pawlenty and Palin and Beck and Limbaugh and the whole motley rightwing zoo are the big losers here.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Andy: Joe Biden is definitely a winner. His visit clearly helped rally the troops. Compare that to the last veep, who was ordered to stay in his bunker for the entire campaign season last year.

Tim Pawlenty is pathetic.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

No, Obama did not campaign for any of the election losers. It is pure coincidence that his travels, on his continuing search for Americ'a best pizza and burgers, took him into states where the losers resided.

Posted by: leapin | November 4, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I would add Chris Van Hollen as a winner as well. His direction of the DCCC is going unbelievably well. He is most defintly the next in line for Mulkolski's Senate seat as soon as she retires.

I also think you should add Joe Biden as a winner. His last minute visit to Watertown was a huge boost for Owens. I think you have to count Tim Pawlenty as a loser too. The way he followed Palin by endorsing Hoffman who then turns around and loses is a double hit for him.

The thing is that I think Owens can hold this district if he plays his cards right. Hoffman will most definitly try and run again, but this time he won't have the backing of the big time national orginizations. Without that money advantage he won't be able to really go after Owens like they did in this last race.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 4, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I see two of the stooges have already polluted this thread with total ignorance.

Cc you forgot the biggest loser of all - Obama. Isn't the titular head of the losing party always also a loser.

Still no decisions. Deadlines shattered. Lib governing. Hence the election losses.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

PT Barnum couldn't even have dreamed up those freaks.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

McDonnell “spent much of the campaign trying to tie Deeds to cap-and-trade environmental legislation and pro-union legislation on Capitol Hill that is unpopular with many Virginia voters.” But rather than make the affirmative case for progressive policy reforms, Deeds responded by largely “distanc[ing] himself from Obama’s agenda, especially on health and energy policy.” Some key examples:

NOT PROGRESSIVE ON CLIMATE:
NOT PROGRESSIVE ON HEALTH CARE:
NOT PROGRESSIVE ON LABOR ISSUES:
NOT PROGRESSIVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM:

http://thinkprogress.org/

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

drindl -- i checked Palin's facebook page for some of her trenchant commentary. Not a peep. Plenty of Wall postings from her poor flock asking about her book tour, though.

PT Barnum was definitely right about some of the people and all of the time.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Obama is utterly contempuous of his destruction throughout the nation. He brags that instead of concerning himself with what the voters think, instead he watched an HBO video about, you guessed it- himself.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Yes, koolkat... astounded is the word. After palin jumped into it with both left feet and Hoffman managed to lose even with the full weight of the circus freak wingers behind him, when I saw him call her a winner I laughed out loud.

What a sycophant for someone he mistakenly dreams is 'influential.' Influential she is, but mostly with illiterates.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Deeds only lost by 300 votes last time. This time is was a total blow out. The difference- Obama. Message sent. Not clear the self absorbed liberals got it though.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

CC: After you surely astounded readers by naming Palin a Winner, you redeemed yourself by also naming her a Loser.

Good call on Mittens Romney too. He looks more statesmanlike today.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company