Election 2009: bad night for Democrats and for Obamacare
President Obama looks out the Oval Office window on October 20 (Pete Souza/White House)
Though it is dangerous to overstate and project forward the results of off-year elections, there are some ominous signs for the Democratic Party in the Republican gubernatorial wins last night in Virginia and New Jersey, most notably the decisive shift of Independent voters for the Republican candidates.
The results also call into question one of the favorite themes trumpeted by many Democrats after Obama became the first Democrat to carry the state of Virginia in 44 years: namely, that his election victory signaled an emerging “permanent Democratic majority” in American politics.
The election results last night exploded that theory. Independents, who were largely responsible for handing President Obama his presidential victory, deserted the party in droves last night, particularly in Virginia. Republican Bob McDonnell squeaked by over the same opponent for the Attorney General’s race last election; last night the same match-up resulted in a 20 point thumping of the Democrat. The Republicans also won the Attorney General and Lieutenant Governor contests as well as picking up six Democratic seats in the Virginia House of Delegates. In short, the results in Virginia thoroughly repudiated the rather tenuous theory of a new liberal realignment. Among Independent voters, the 2008 thrill of Obamania has dissipated and buyer’s remorse has clearly set in.
The election results also cast doubt on a false assurance with which many Democrats seem to have comforted themselves. The Republican Party may currently have low voter ID numbers, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into a carte blanche for Democrats to move the country in a radical leftward direction.
The election results pose grave problems for passage of Obama’s signature health care initiative this year. Prior to the election, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid signalled that passage of any bill wouldn’t occur until next year and that the Senate would not be bound by any timetables. The massive movement of Independents into the Republican column last night will make many blue dog Democrats reluctant to walk the plank for Obama on a massive restructuring of the nation’s health care delivery system, especially in light of the fact that the president didn’t seem to have any coattails.
The principal concerns expressed by voters last night in Virgina and New Jersey were the economy, jobs and taxes. With unemployment close to 10%, and in the view of Christina Romer, Obama’s economic adviser, likely to remain that way for the next year, as confirmed repeatedly by polling, most Americans do not subscribe to Obama’s view that the way out of the economic morass is to first revamp the health care system. In short, Independents view the ordering of social priorites by the White House as terribly skewed.
The gubenatorial defeats for the Democrats does not mean that voters are ready to embrace the Republican Party with open arms. Although recent Gallup polling reveals that most Americans view themeselves ideologically as conservatives, the conundrum for Republicans is that these same voters currently have no enduring affinity for the GOP. The question is whether increased conservatism, particularly among independents, will translate into heightened support for Republican candidates. The results of the mid-term elections next year will go a long way towards answering this vexing question.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Democrats Not Fired Up and Ready to Go (politicalwire.com)
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Perhaps you could explain what GOVERNORSHIPS have to do with health care reform in CONGRESS?
Interesting that you neglected to mention the two House seats, one of which was a win for the Democrats for the first time in 150 years!
As a result of those two House seat wins, the Democrats now have TWO MORE SOLID VOTES FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM.
Nice try but giant F A I L for you!
You might want to pose your question to the 40 or so blue dog Democrats up for re-election next year in Republican-leaning districts. I think they will find it very significant that a state Obama won by 16 points a year ago now went over to the Republican candidate by almost 20 points.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hi John,
Intelligent and well-reasoned analysis here though a sharp turn from my own. (See. http://trueslant.com/jerrylanson/2009/11/04/election-2009-much-ado-about-next-to-nothing/) Let me suggest a couple of qualifiers though. (1) Before Obama’s election, Virginia hadn’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate in more than 40 years. (2) The Virginia gubernatorial candidate made a point of saying he was NOT an Obama Democrat. (3) Democrats in New Jersey were plagued not only by a bad economy but also by issues of widespread governmental corruption in the state. (4) Republicans have their own problems, both in terms of those fleeing the party and the divisions within it that handed New York’s Congressional race to a Democrat in an overwhelming Republican district. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released last month and linked in my piece found that just 25 percent of Americans felt “very positive” or “somewhat positive” about the Republican Party. The number was 42 percent for Democrats.
I would agree with you that the Republican base was more fired up for this election than the Democrats. And I agree with you that the economy has much to do with it. I would say that unless the economy is starting to improve a year from now — or unless Obama and his party can make a case for what’s been done to improve it, Democrats could take a sizable hit next year. Politics in this country is fluid right now. A lot more people are not joining either political party.
Hi Jerry,
You raise some good points. Your comment that “politics in this country is fluid right now” is spot-on.
The electorate seems in a highly volatile, “A plague on both your houses”, mood. Which is why prediction is all the more dangerous, as the loss of the conservative candidate in NY’s 23rd district attests.
I agree that Corzine had to battle corruption and economic issues as well as terminal -for an incumbent – favorability ratings.
While the low favorability ratings are problematic for the Republican Party, as demonstrated last night, voters don’t have to love the party to vote for its candidates…
In response to another comment. See in context »Fair point.
In response to another comment. See in context »Democrats talk incessantly about how the GOP can’t win because their favorability is lower than that of the Dems.
There goes that fallacy.
My usual retort is that if people are scared about what the Dems are doing to the country, they may not like the Republicans much, but they do know one thing, a Republican will try to stop a Democrat. Sometimes just not being the incumbent is enough.
Bill,
I don’t buy what I’ll call your Republican talking points language (“people are scared”). I think they are discouraged, not scared. But I don’t dispute the rest of what you say. If the next election comes around and the public feels things aren’t getting better and don’t buy what’s being done to make it better, then people will vote accordingly. Only problem of deciding that now is that the election is 12 months away. And as I point out, off-year election results often are not reflected a year later. A year from now “it’s the economy, stupid,” to quote Carville, will certainly come into play again. I’d add one more thought, though. If the Republican Party veers too far to the right, some will be fearful of what IT represents and may not merely vote to “throw the bums out.”
In response to another comment. See in context »Bill,
I don’t know if you’re referring to the conversations we’ve had, but the numbers I’ve pointed out still hold true because those were Congressional numbers, not Gubernatorial numbers.
Also, and why you don’t address this is beyond me, but a Dem won in NY last night. That’s a PICKUP for them since the seat used to be Republican. So you’re right, sometimes being incumbent is not enough.
As far as John’s POV that Indies think the White House’s priorities are “terribly skewed”…again, why the Dem pickup in NY? And why did exit polls show that voters still approved of the job Obama is doing?
Basically, you guys can try to wish a GOP resurgence into existence all you want, but a couple of Governor wins isn’t a trend. Not by a long shot.
In response to another comment. See in context »See my post from this morning for the exciting answers to your questions Justin.
In response to another comment. See in context »It seems to me that Obama’s problems are not with the republicans, who are united against him, even on positions they favored a year ago, but with the progressive wing of the party, formally known as liberals. The very people who brought him to office now view him as a middle of the road, don’t rock the boat Clintonite. It is the economy stupid and anger is spreading that the very culprits who brought down the economy are being coddled by Obama. If a pollster asked me if we are on the right track my answer would be negative and I’m not about to join the opposition party or the nut baggers.
Maybe so, but it wasn’t the liberals who voted for Christie and Corzine yesterday, so it seems that there could be even more trouble than the numbers indicate. I have heard several times this year that Feingold is quite unhappy with Obama and the phrase (shhh, say it quietly) ‘primary challenge’ was used in the MSM.
In response to another comment. See in context »Mr. Kinsellagh,
Let me start by saying I think this is one of your best postings. It flowed well from beginning to end and I thought your conclusion was pretty well tempered by the facts.
Having said that I think you left out a few important points. First, this is an off-year election and turn outs were quite a bit lower than last November. This generally brings out more older, more conservative voters. The fact that the Democrats gained two seats in the House in such an unfavorable environment does not speak too badly for them or too favorably for the Republicans. More to the point, the two new Republican governors were fairly moderate (i.e. RINOs) while the “real” Republican who ran in upstate New York (on the Conservative Party ticket) lost. Virginia has been a safe Republican governorship for decades so winning that back was not a major accomplishment. Since the Republican Party is increasingly viewed as the party of the Old Confederacy, a win there does not help them a lot nationally. The New Jersey election was probably more significant but that was more about the individual candidates than Mr.Obama.
My money is saying that these elections do not tell us too much about 2010.
Ummm, McDonnell is no RINO. Very, very far from it.
In response to another comment. See in context »Mr. Losangeles,
Thank you for the compliments.
I’m not sure I agree with your assertion that both Republican gubernatorial candidates were “moderate” or RINO’s (by definition, a RINO is a liberal Democrat in Republican clothing, e.g., NY 23rd “Republican” candidate Dede Scozzafava).
McDonnell is an unabashed social conservative. The Washington Post shed a considerable amount of ink trying to peg him to a position he took in a Master’s Thesis he wrote over 20 years ago, that clashed with radical feminist orthodoxy.
McDonnell may not have trumpeted his social conservative values during the campaign, but he certainly didn’t disavow them either.
In response to another comment. See in context »Mr. Kinsellagh (& Mr. Dupray),
You are correct that Mr. McDonnell is indeed a died in the wool conservative, “my bad” as the young folks say. However that only underlines my point, the Republican Party is increasingly seen as the party of the Old Confederacy with the associated political leanings. That a conservative Republican might recapture the governorship of in the leading state of the confederacy does nothing but emphasize this perspective. In an off-year with the associated low turn out, it is no great accomplishment for Richmond to again have a very conservative governor (it is like the Democrats trumpeting the election of someone named Kennedy in Massachusetts).
In response to another comment. See in context »You just have to love the Conservative talking heads on this site.
If losing two Governors is such a blow to the Democrats why isn’t losing New York’s 23rd Congressional District such a huge blow to the Republicans?
After all, that seat has been held by a Republican for nearly a CENTURY. And to add insult to injury the Conservative Wingnuts attempted a coup by ousting the Moderate Republican that was initially running (and winning) in order to seat a candidate with more Conservative Wingnut credentials.
Why isn’t that an issue anymore? Before the election it was a huge talking point for the Wingnuts but since the loss they haven’t uttered a peep. It’s not like that seat is important or anything.
That Virginia Governor’s office was lost to the Democrats as soon as Obama was elected. For nearly the last 40 years Virginia has elected a Governor of the opposite party than the sitting President.
New Jersey is a different situation. That was a bad loss for the Dems. No spinning that loss.
Again, thanks for the “Fair and Balanced” spin. You Wingnuts are always good for a laugh after I come to this site to read Taibbi for real reporting, writing and opinion.
BTW, I’d say losing in New York is a far bigger indictment to the Conservatives (considering the circumstances) than losing Virginia and New Jersey was to the Democrats.
But what do I know, I’m only one of those Independent voters that actually decide elections.
I am also terribly disappointed with Obama. He is the ultimate talk a big game yet do very little candidate. He gets a bit of a break from me only because he is saddled with those pathetic Democrats in the Senate and House and by a Republican party that cares absolutely nothing about any meaningful reform.
You are in denial. Independents, not Conservatives, sunk the Dems. You ought to be listening to their gripes, which, come to think about it, are pretty much like those of the Conservatives.
As you said, no way to spin Jersey.
I would add that Virginia was supposed to be a purple state and McDonnell won it by the biggest margin of any Republican in history.
In response to another comment. See in context »What are you talking about? When did I say Conservatives and not Independents won Virginia and New Jersey for the Republicans?
Independents nearly always win elections. In most cases there aren’t enough Dems or Reps to win an election. The Independents typically are the deciding factor.
Vigirnia was lost to the Dems as soon as Obama won. Don’t believe me? Look it up.
Nothing to deny, I think both parties are pathetic. Only difference is that the GOP is heading the way of the Christian Conservative and they are the most despicable of all.
Ridiculous, hate fueled group that cares absolutely nothing about anyone except themselves.
See the insane teabaggers for illustration. Not one teabag protest during Bush’s insane spending spree, meaningless war and TARP bailout but as soon as Obama comes into office all those things are protest worthy.
In response to another comment. See in context »When the Dems say the NY-23 is a great example of extremist Republicans taking over and destroying the moderate wing of the Party, I just wonder why they don’t say the same thing about the Left wingers doing doing the same exact thing to their moderates.
In response to another comment. See in context »Though it is dangerous to overstate and project forward the results of off-year elections….
Indeed, but pundits and bloggers charge ahead anyway.
What does it all mean? It means Virginia and NJ now have Republican governors. What does that mean for those states? I haven’t a clue, and I live in NJ.
I suppose if there’s an opt-out clause in the healthcare reform bill and Christie goes all out on opting out, it will mean an awful lot. Until then, not so much.
So, NY-23 and CA-10 are sending Democrats to the House. What does it all mean? Again, I haven’t a clue. I guess they’ll have to find an extra seat on the Democratic side of the aisle, oh — and engrave two new nameplates. But for now, that’s it.