Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Elective Thoughts

Just some random thoughts on the Election. . .

Obama: Obama is the biggest loser last night. He put his credibility on the line in each of these races, and he showed that the public has turned on him. He also showed he couldn’t bring out his base.

New Jersey: New Jersey was the biggest disaster for Obama last night. New Jersey is the football that Lucy keeps offering the Republicans. Election after election we try to kick it, and it always gets pulled away. This time it wasn’t, and that’s a huge indictment on Obama.

Independents: Independents swung hugely in the direction of Republicans -- including the “evil extreme right winger” in Virginia. The Democrats want to claim this was simply anti-incumbency, but I didn’t hear any “throw the bums out” language, I heard anger about the left wing direction of the country.

Virginia: McDonnell in Virginia, “an evil right winger with unacceptable hard cored, evil, hateful right wing views”, pulled in independent voters at a 2-1 clip. He did it by running a positive, clear conservative campaign. Look for his campaign to become the Republican template nationwide.

New York 23: The blame for NY23 lies with two groups. By choosing a RINO (not a loyal moderate, but an obvious RINO) local Republican officials gave Scozzafava a platform from which to betray the party. Nice work jerks. Secondly, national figures who poured into NY trying to make this election bigger than it was energized the Democratic based in a way that local candidates could not have.

Blue Dogs: Get your resumes ready.

Health care: Interestingly, just as the voting began Harry Reid announced that they might not act on ObamaCare this year. The reason? Voters told pollsters that they did not see the reason to act hastily. Sorry Harry, too late.

Gay Marriage: Gay Marriage lost in liberal Maine. That means that it has lost in each of the 31 states where this issue has been put to the people. Somebody’s trying to tell you something.

RINOs: Expect the usual RINOs to run around today claiming that New York is evidence that conservatives can’t win. Look for words like “alienate voters,” descriptions of the party as “angry, white, male,” and the hand-wringing claim “no place for moderates in the party.” That said, don’t expect anyone to listen. The RINOs had their chance. Also, Virginia and New Jersey put the lie to these claims, and NY23 was the aberration -- influenced by a RINO betrayal. And don’t believe these claims anyway. There’s plenty of room for moderates in the party, just not moderates who accept every far left proposition and then endorse the Democrats when they don’t get what they want. Sorry RINOs, no sale.

Your thoughts?


Writer X said...

I actually saw the NY race to be more positive, despite Hoffman's loss. Here's a guy who wasn't on anyone's radar less than a month ago and only loses by a few percentage points. Still, NY got Owens. Is he any worse/better than Scozzawhatshername?

Another thing I found funny was that the White House reported that suddenly Obama wasn't watching any of the races. Yeah, right. Are we to believe he was watching HARDBALL reruns or something. Please.

The wins last night in Virginia and NJ should give the moderate libs in my own state pause--Mitchell and Giffords, in particular. That is a good thing. Maybe all the calls/emails/letters/tea parties are making a difference.

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, I think you're right -- NY23 in many ways shows the power of having a good conservative candidate. That they can come from out of nowhere, in the face of establishment opposition, and almost pull it off (he would have won in a 2 way race).

In many ways, I see NY23 as a warning -- not about moderates -- but about RINOs. They are the only group within the party that will not respect the will of the party. If they don't get their way, they will do everything in their power to help the Democrats.

Over all, I think this was a very encouraging night for conservatives.

patti said...

my thoughts (other than what i wrote about on my blog): wheeeeeee! followed by a buttoned-up, non-gloaty: Well Done, Everyone!

Joel Farnham said...


This is the first race that I felt it was better to have an honest Democrat elected than a dishonest Rhino. With Rhinos, you never know when they will betray you. Better a known enemy than a weak friend.

On the other news, Obama does have egg on his face. Try as his handlers might, he can't distance himself from the Virginia and New Jersey Races. I wish that he had traveled to NY23. We could have used him for our candidate. :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Patti, Wheeeee indeed!

Joel, I think you're right. The problem with the RINOs is that they are not Republicans. They are far left creatures that cloak themselves under the name "moderate" and then push their far left agenda with no loyalty to the party. Dede was obviously one of those just looking at her history.

And you can't survive as a party if you have elected officials whose loyalties are in question.

Tennessee Jed said...

Andrew - NY - 23 just amplifies your point about conservatives must take control over the Republican party. The press will, of course, spin this entirely differently.

Both New Jersey and Virginia are huge because they foreshadow just how much trouble the Dems are headed for in the next election.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, I agree. If we could have brought Hoffman out as the Republican rather than as a third party candidate, he would have won easily last night.

And you're right about the media. They'll be in full damage control mode for the next couple days because they see how bad this will be for Obama's agenda.

StanH said...

Hoffman was indeed a cool thing, even in his lose. Like a comet from the blackness of space, he creamed NY23, and knocked the Rs & Ds back on their heels. From a position of complete obscurity came within a few percentage points of winning. If there had been a legitimate primary the Conservative would have won, as a Republican , hands down! 2010, 2010, 2010...

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, I agree. And that's why I think we need (1) to start choosing all candidates by primaries and (2) closing those primaries to unregistered voters.

BevfromNYC said...

First thought: Do you or Writer X every sleep? I'm worry about you.

Obama: Oops, well, he wasn't much help, was he?

New Jersey: I was surprised that Christie won by so much. But not surprised he won. They arrested alot of Democrat political leaders a few months ago and that that left a bad smell for them.

NY23 - Owens/Scozzafava (though I like your spelling better)- not much difference. This is bad news for Gov. Patterson though. To keep a democrat as Gov., the DNC will force him not to run and that won't look very pretty.

Gay Marriage in Maine: Big surprise for such a liberal state. Gay community needs to compromise for Civil Union instead and work up to Marriage. It's hard to go against 10,000+ years of social structuring and indoctrination.

I think the tea parties, the emails, phonecalls, and letter to our representives are having an impact if for no other reason than we are paying attention and not afraid to speak up anymore. We just have to keep up the pressure.

Writer X said...

Bev, what is this new fangled thing called "sleep"?

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Sleep. . . sleep. Hmm. Doesn't ring any bells?

I heard your mayor got re-elected, but it was much closer than his $100 trillion spending should have made it?

I think you're right about the letters, the e-mails, the marches. I think they got the attention of the Republicans and the Blue Dogs -- Obama didn't notice, he was busy watching television.

BevfromNYC said...

Sleep, it's like being in a state of perpetual Non-Obama-ness...for now anyway. I expect soon he will want to invade our sleep too.

Yes, Mayor, Bloomberg has been re-elected, but by only 5% rather than the 15-19% that was projected. That is actually good news to me.

Has anyone seen the numbers of voters yet? Percentages say something, but voter turnout says more. Not even Obama could get people to the polls in an "off-year" election.

Unknown said...

Andrew: I'm already seeing the Democrat/RINO spin on NY23. It's predictable as hell. "See--you run a conservative against a good Republican, and the Democrats win." Baloney. NY23 proved only one thing. Conservatives will rebel when party bosses go into back rooms and do whatever they damn well please. The situation is New York is completely different from most of the rest of the country.

The next round of the establishment versus the activists will be quite different. Florida is probably a good example. They have a primary. The party voters (not the bosses) speak. Crist has serious opponents in the conservative wing of the party. But Crist is a conservative who made a major mistake voting for the stimulus bill. So it will be a conservative Republican running against a different conservative Republican. When the primary is over, the conservatives will join the moderates in rallying around the candidate, whichever one it is. It's not a "civil war" in the party which will destroy it. It's healthy public debate that will strengthen it. Only childish spoil-sports who refuse to support the one who wins can give the Democrats/RINOs what they want. I don't believe that will happen.

Joel Farnham said...


I am clueless about Crist. You don't think he will win the primary?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I've been looking into Crist. The blogosphere really hates him -- they see him as the biggest RINO on earth.

But most of what they are accusing him of is ridiculous. For example, they're irate that he met with the teachers union, which Jeb Bush had refused to do. Ah, so what? And he hugged Obama! Again, so what.

That said, the case against him, as I understand it, is that (1) he favored the stimulus; (2) he appointed a liberal Republican to the state supreme court as soon as opposition developed to a more conservative choice; (3) he's raised "fees"; and (4) he's apparently favored some environmental issues that developers oppose.

I don't know enough yet to know exactly what this really makes him (or if there is more), but there is more troubling thing -- he's on John McCain's list of McCaindidates.

Joel Farnham said...


Has Crist any conservative credentials?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, He largely seems to be a social conservative but a fiscal liberal.

He supports bans on gay marriage and gay adoption, supports gun rights and supports capital punishment. He has appointed two prolife judges to Florida's Supreme Court. (His appointments are considered: 2 conservatives, 2 moderates).

But he's been unwilling to make budget cuts, he supported the stimulus, he seems to oppose offshore drilling (though he's flip flopped on this), and he supports the state buying up land for environmental protection reasons.

Whether these things are conservative or not, I leave to you to decide, but he seems to be a mixed bag ideologically.

My concern is that if McCain is backing him, he's going to become a conservative basher.

Unknown said...

Joel: I make absolutely no predictions about Crist and the Florida primary. He has taken a lot of flack for some of the things that Andrew mentioned, and he certainly doesn't seem to me to be the kind of Republican I would prefer to support. But he's no liberal, and even calling him a RINO is a big stretch. He's anti-abortion, pro-gun and takes many, many conservative stands. My point is that unlike New York, where a very liberal candidate was shoved down the throats of the Republican voters, there will be an open battle for the Republican nomination in the Florida primary, and when it's over, the winner will have the support of the moderate and conservative Republican voters. That is why we need to support conservative candidates without alienating the moderates and independents. Those moderates and independents just elected two Republican governors after going for Obama just a year ago.

Were I a conservative Republican Floridian, and Crist won the primary, I would vote for him despite some misgivings. What's the alternative--elect a liberal Democrat to prove some kind of misguided point? I'm conservative, not suicidal. New York 23 was a fluke. It doesn't tell us much of anything either way except that conservatives don't like backroom deals.

rlaWTX said...

The whole "we'll show 'em by not voting, by golly" thing just irritates me. What in the blazes do you win there? The trophy for temper tantrums and turning blue when you hold your breath??

I was hoping that Hoffman would win, but the narrow margin is great!!!

I'm in a very conservative area of a pretty conservative state -- the Perry/Hutchison primary is going to get interesting -- so I don't get to make a statement with my votes generally. I live vicariously through LawHawk and such making them for me out in the liberal jungles!!

Thanks for this stuff - it's great. (Oh, and I linked the poll on my facebook - dunno if there'll be any takers, but I've done my bitsy bit.)

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, Thanks for the link! I'm hoping everyone encourages everybody they know to vote. The more votes we get, the better the results!

I don't understand not voting either. Especially since I know that many, many more people complain about the system than vote. If you don't like it, get out there and change it, don't just complain about it!!

Tam said...

I have been silently reading this blog for a long time, and per your earlier request, I am going to participate, out loud! Okay, in writing, but that is pretty loud for a hermit like me. My problem with the idea of "hate crimes" is that an entity (that we generally distrust, the government) determines who a victim can be. For example, blacks and gays are victims, but Mormons and other religious denominations seem to be acceptable targets of hate. Crimes are crimes. Too fine a point creates a very slippery slope.

Tam said...

p.s. My previous comment was intended for the poll post. Oops.

AndrewPrice said...

Tam, I'm happy to hear that you'll be speaking out! :-)

I think you're absolutely right about hate crimes. They aren't based on hate so much as they are on politics, which makes them discriminatory.

Moreover, "hate" is a thought, not an action, and punishing "hate" smacks of the thought police. The harm is the crime, not the reason the person committed it.

Post a Comment