The GOP elite’s $1 million object lesson — and the message of NY-23
Conservatives owe NY-23 candidate Doug Hoffman immeasurable gratitude. He overcame impossible odds (single digits just a month ago) to come within two points of defeating Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman had zero name recognition. National Republican Party officials dumped nearly $1 million into the race on behalf of radical leftist GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava, who then turned around, endorsed Owens and siphoned off 5 percent of the vote with her name still on the ballot after she dropped out.
Conservatives’ money went to pay for specious attack ads against Hoffman run by the NRCC like this.
Conservatives’ money went to support a GOP candidate who shares the same socialist alliances with fellow SEIU/ACORN/New Party/Working Families Party activist Patrick Gaspard, the Obama White House political director who intervened in the race to secure Scozzafava’s endorsement of Owens.
Hoffman’s candidacy illuminated the stark difference between GOP political opportunists willing to pimp out their endorsements to any old ACORN-embracing, Working Families Party-consorting, Big Labor crony who puts an “R” by her name — and movement conservatives who refuse to “mooooderate” for the politically expedient sake of mooooderation as dictated by out-of-touch Beltway party leaders. The NRCC/RNC’s $1 million debacle will cost much more than that.
As I’ve repeated many times over the last several weeks:
One thing is guaranteed at the conclusion of the NY-23 special congressional election: The Beltway Republicans who endorsed radical leftist Dede Scozzafava are going to have indelible egg stains on their faces. And GOP establishment fund-raising organizations will be the poorer for it.
To illustrate the point: This blog now has a regular feature spotlighting readers’ RNC rejected solicitation forms of the day.
Today’s rejected RNC donor form comes from reader Bud:
Which brings me to my syndicated column today.
Hoffman may have lost narrowly, but NY-23 is a much broader victory for conservatives who believe the Republican Party should stand for core limited government principles. Scozzafava, who was endorsed by far Left blogger Markos Moulitsas Zuniga and backed by Planned Parenthood, the National Education Association, and card-check-promoting trade unions, was denied the congressional seat because movement conservatives refused to support Arlen Specter in a skirt. This is a victory of principle.
Better a donkey in office that acts like a donkey than a donkey in elephant’s clothing making a complete ass of the GOP.
Moreover, NY-23 is a victory for conservatives who refuse to be marginalized in the public square by either the unhinged left or the establishment right. A humble accountant from upstate New York exposed the hypocrisy of GOP leaders trying to solicit funds from conservatives by lambasting Pelosi and the Dems’ support for high taxes, Big Labor, and bigger government — while using conservatives’ money to subsidize a high-taxing, Big Labor-pandering, bigger government radical. The repercussions will be felt well beyond NY-23′s borders. Conservatives’ disgust with the status quo has been heard and felt. They have been silent too long. They will be silent no more.
The GOP leadership knows it cannot afford to rest on its laurels, continue business as usual, and bask in yesterday’s electoral victories without confronting its abysmal abdication of principled conservative leadership in NY-23.
As Hoffman said in his concession speech, “This is only one fight in the battle.”
Onward. Upward. Rightward.
***
Who are you calling “extremist?”
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009
Here is one of the loudest messages of the 2009 off-off-year elections: Conservatives in America will no longer let their opponents define them out of the mainstream. They will not submit to Democrats. Or to the media. Or to Beltway Republican capitulationists. They will not “rebrand.” They will not sit down. They will not shut up.
Just this past weekend, Democrat Rep. Jim Moran attacked the Republican candidates for governor and attorney general in his state of Virginia as the “Taliban ticket.”
New York Times columnist Frank Rich decried the Right’s “Jacobins” and “Stalinists” who he said joined a “putsch” by supporting Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman over ACORN-embracing, Big Labor-promoting, pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, tax-and-spend Republican Dede Scozzafava in New York’s 23rd congressional special election.
And senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett told ABC’s “This Week” that the grass-roots conservative-vs.-GOP leadership battle over NY-23 showed that the Republican Party leadership was “becoming more and more extreme, and more and more marginalized.”
Let’s talk “extreme.” Valerie Jarrett is the White House official who bragged openly about recruiting disgraced Marxist rabble-rouser Van Jones for the green jobs czar post. She lavished praise on his public career and said she had followed him “for as long as he’s been active out in Oakland.” In Oakland, Jones was working to dismantle California’s juvenile justice system, pitting minorities against police officers, and crusading to free Death Row cop-killer Mumia abu Jamal.
Who are you calling “extreme?”
Jarrett’s White House colleague Patrick Gaspard, Obama’s political director who intervened in the race to convince Scozzafava to endorse the Democrat candidate Bill Owens after she dropped out, was a top organizer at the militant Local 1199 chapter of the Service Employees International Union and an activist/organizer for the New Party and the Working Families Party – both ACORN/Democratic Socialist Association front groups.
Who are you calling “extreme?”
“It’s rather telling,” Jarrett sniffed, “when the Republican Party forces out a moderate Republican and it says, I think, a great deal about where the Republican Party leadership is right now.” It’s rather telling that the White House persists with this pointless marginalization strategy as Gallup polls show conservatives continuing to outnumber moderates and liberals across America.
As I pointed out in my Oct. 16 column, there was never anything moderate about Scozzafava. There was no fiscal conservatism to balance her social radicalism. It wasn’t merely that she was “pro-choice.” But that she was a proud recipient of a pro-abortion award named after eugenics proponent Margaret Sanger.
It wasn’t merely that she favored higher government spending. But that she supported the stimulus that every single House Republican in office opposed, on top of her support for the union-expanding card-check bill, on top of her ambiguous statements on the energy tax-imposing cap-and-trade bill.
Newt Gingrich, who foolishly stood with Scozzafava until she threw herself under the bus over the weekend, piously invoked Reagan and condemned the extreme “purism” of unruly conservatives who wouldn’t keep quiet about Scozzafava’s radical Left agenda.
But conservatives are not demanding “purity.” They are simply abiding by Reagan’s own wise counsel in 1975: “A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.”
The Republican National Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee threw an estimated $900,000 down the toilet for a candidate whose core views and political alliances undermined conservatism’s fundamental beliefs in limited government from day one. It was a reckless expenditure of the GOP base’s hard-earned money and a bitter tuition bill for a teachable moment on the perils of political expediency.
The days when immoderate political operatives and feckless Beltway opportunists could define “moderation” by their own warped yardsticks without pushback are over.
***
Making sure the message sticks: More rejected RNC forms from readers.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Trump to Make ‘Major Announcement’ in Nevada; May Endorse Gingrich; Update: Romney
February 1, 2012 10:09 PM by Doug Powers
157 Comments
Florida Primary Open Thread; Update: Romney Wins
January 31, 2012 07:24 PM by Doug Powers
163 Comments
Fly Them To the Moon. Please.
January 27, 2012 12:32 AM by Michelle Malkin
114 CommentsGingrich channels open-borders SEIU; Rubio rebukes; Update:Newt retreats
January 25, 2012 10:56 AM by Michelle Malkin
155 Comments
Pelosi Doubles Down: Gingrich Won’t Be Elected — There is Something I Know
January 24, 2012 11:06 PM by Doug Powers
119 Comments
South Carolina Primary Open Thread; Update: Gingrich Wins
January 21, 2012 05:45 PM by Doug Powers
311 Comments
Gingrich Tells South Carolina Man He’d Talk to Al Sharpton
January 21, 2012 04:26 PM by Doug Powers
60 Comments
GOP 2012: Perry dropping out; Newt’s scorched-earth karma; and a Final Four debate; Update: Perry endorses “visionary” Newt
January 19, 2012 09:43 AM by Michelle Malkin
446 Comments
Categories: Newt Gingrich,NY-23,Rejected RNC solicitation of the day
I have been saying this for about 2 1/2 years. It is time to let the GOP wither away and die. We need a real conservative party for real conservatives.
NY-23 should prove this to anyone still holding on to hope that the GOP can be “reformed.” THEY DON’T WANT TO BE REFORMED. THEY THINK CONSERVATIVES ARE THE PROBLEM. THEY WANT TO BE LIKE DEDE SCOZZAFAVA.
Uh gotcha. I wasn’t trying to imply the only alternatives are socialism and anarchy.
For starters? Most economists not on the payroll of conservative thinktanks agree that what brought on the recession was deregulation of securities and a derivatives market run amok.
Need to get back to work, but stay tuned for another day and another installment of why I’m not a right wing Republican. xo
Well la-dee-DA. Neither am I.
Wrong.
It’s a victory — that we lost!!!
Yay!!!
Hail, Satan! On to Florida, dark hordes!
Excellent article Michelle. You’re spot on. Conservatives need to demand that Repub candidates toe the line on conservative principles. The dems are quite full of themselves now, and are emboldened as shown by their usual classless attacks on the core beliefs of conservatives. However, we will take back the Congress and our Country, and yesterday was just the beginning.
The polarization and toxicity levels of our modern day politics are at “off the chart” levels. Dems have their puppets in the media to do a lot of their dirty work. It is time we fight fire with fire, and I hope our candidates are ready to do it. Nothing less than the future of this Country for our children and grandchildren is at stake. I am sure I speak for many conservatives, that I would rather be left sitting on my porch clinging to my guns and religion, than to ever cast a vote for either a socialist traitor Dem, or a RINO Repub.
I love that quote. I should frame it and send it to Newt Gingrich, who I have lost almost all my respect for during the past few months.
Democrat In All But Label Only. I don’t remember who coined it, maybe Levin, but it was originally specifically a reference to Scozzafava.
Before we’re in full countdown to 2010, we need to dismantle the entire staff at RNC headquarters and start over. They are so entrenched – to the point of being incestuous, and I’m sure know all the ins/outs of running elections. However, they only thing they forgot are the core beliefs of their members. You can’t do that long before paying the piper. They either get back on track or we’ll manage without them.
This is nonsense. He lost. Period. His supporters and Ned Lamont supporters can celebrate a moral empty victory.
The goal is not to send a message or make a statement. The goal is to win.
Fozzie Bear or whatever her name is never should have been nominated, but the grass roots should have made noise before she was even selected, or at the least, yell to get her replaced on the Republican ticket.
We gave this election away.
As for the overall 2009 results, we should completely and utterly ignore them. It is a brilliant political strategy to pretend nothing happened.
Respectfully,
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
http://www.tygrrrrespress.com
Grrrrr…screwed up the link.
http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com
I left out the X. If Malcolm had done that he would just have been a guy named Malcolm.
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Yup, it’s been “re-districted” (I think I made up a new word there) many times over the years. And going by Wikipedia (always dicey), it’s been a back & forth between Dem & Rep for since at least 1900.
I think it’s hard to take away a consistent makeup of the district, especially in a year when a 3rd party candidate came “this close” to defeating both major parties.
Gonna be an interesting side note to check back on in Nov 2010.
pOINT TAKE, BUT In any competitive environment you at times take a loss in the process of learning how to win.
From a cold, hard, objective standpoint, like reviewing a game film, you will see despite many factors an accountant with little time or preparation came within three points.
There are some pretty simple, straightforward things one can learn from NY-23 and the VA governor’s race to turn the next ones into wins.
WE HAVE THE INITATIVE
I’d say it was a definite win for conservatives, Yashmak. Although Hoffman didn’t win he came close to burying both the Dem and the faux_GOP candidate. As a 3rd party run that’s a pretty good showing and portends well for conservatives in 2010 if the GOP learns it’s lesson.
But at any rate my point was that it doesn’t matter if Obama is supported by someone with a D or an R after their name. And, in fact, I reckon it would be worse to have a nominal R pushing Obama’s extremist agenda rather than a Dem.
Nor I.
I think it was Mark Steyn, about a month or two ago.
Most people here aren’t. You really haven’t been paying attention have you red state bigot?
Anyway. The only victory here is that the GOP has to have finally learned a lession about rinos. At least one can hope.
Purp, if you look at what was called the 23rd back then, for the vast majority of that time it was in NYC. The wiki page pays no attention to the geography and just gives the history of the NUMBER 23, so to speak.
Making me think of Thanksgiving. In that respect, I’m more of a breast man than a wing man.
As I sez, and you sez, Chap – it’s been evolving for some time, it’s not static.
But I think the bottom line is how the district, in whatever incarnation, has went over the years as a voting whole. Looks like it’s been “in flux” to me. Your mileage might be diff on that take, tho.
I think it’s reasonable to say, especially after last night, it’s about 50-50. I’d hazard a guess that, as with many races, the independents probably swing the vote. Would be an interesting post-mortem study when the dust settles, the spinning is done, and all the peripheral stats are in.
Who cares how the district looked in the past? Who knows what would have happened if the party had thrown in for Hoffman from day one?
The fact is that the GOP tried to run a RINO and had to capitulate to those who want a candidate with conservative principles.
Off topic, but for those who kvetched about how the site was being displayed in IE – it looks to be okay now, at least to me.
My guess is that odd momentary event when comments were showing up all in red text last night was when the fix was applied. Kind of a short-lived “burp” side effect.
I hope the comment numbering will get fixed soon.
Over 60% of the District has not been represented by a Democrat since 187 and the vast majority of it since the 1940s is “in flux”?
NOOO! I wan to be the one that gets post 1,000,000!
1,000,000…this explains why you post so often.
Can not help but thinking of this “extremely moderate” (read liberal) faction of the GOP, contrary to the civil war envisioned by Mizz Jarrett.
Akin to water chemistry, the scale forming constituents in water are mainly Calcium and Magnesium salts (an allegory to socialist and maoist viewpoints). When exposed to metal under heat (government in this scenario) these hardness elements (Calcium and Magnesium) form a hard scale weakening the metal to eventual failure.
There are two major corrective remedies for the removal of these scale producing compounds preventing further harm.
The first is through chelation when the molecules are chemically combined and remain in suspension in the water, to be removed through constant surface blowdown. In short, keep them isolated and remove a small percentage of the suspended solids constantly.
The second alternative is through chemical combinations which cause the scale producing compounds to chemically bind and precipitate out of solution to be removed through a operation called a bottom blowdown, which removes the sludge from the water as a whole.
What we need is a mixture of these two methods. The continuous surface blowdown to maintain the “moderates” in check, and a focus on an OPERATIONAL BOTTOM BLOW to remove the Snowes, Collins, RINOs at every opportunity.
The Conservative Party lost in a solidly Republican district. That is bad in my book, not good. I know there were many mitigating circumstances as to why that happened but the polls showed Hoffman ahead and then he lost.
I saw him on Hannity and he didn’t impress me. He stammered a little and just didn’t seem to project a strong image. I like the guy and certainly like what he stands for but he seemed a little timid and made me feel like he would be eaten by Congress Crtters of all stripes. I think his appearance hurt him.
However, he pointed out he wasn’t a polished pol and opened the door for others non politicans to throw their hat in the ring.
If the Conservative Party loses elections and the Democrats win, how is that a victory again? Because we are in a rebuilding year? That sounds like what my college football team says. Problem is, they have been rebuilding for 50 years and keep losing.
Uh, The only incumbent running in VA was Bolling for Lt. Governor.
Virginia governors are forbidden from serving a second term.
There was definitely an anti-leftist fervor across most of Virginia…
Take a look here.
My SIL’s BIL (I’ll give you a moment to get your heads around that one) is locked in a dead heat for mayor of Royston, GA. Last night he was trailing by one vote 223-222. They had a hand recount today which included some provisional ballots and the vote is now at 224-224. One provisional vote remains to be decided on and the deadline for that is 4:30 tomorrow. Talk about your nail-biters!
On November 4th, 2009 at 2:03 pm, T-Bone said:
Not making excuses – But I saw Hoffman on Hannity as well and concur with your assessment in that he appeared uneasy before the camera.
Well, if you’re going back to the era of Septimus Severus, I’d agree, Chap.
But, assuming a typo, I’d say you’re citing a difference that makes no difference since it’s the total district vote that decides an election. And the fact is that – looking at the Wikipedia list of NY23 Reps – the Reps were all Dem from January 3, 1979 to January 3, 1993. Is that correct or no?
At any rate, though each election has it’s own dynamics, there seems to be a long history of swing-voting in NY23. This was evidenced again last night. I think the real item of interest in the district is who the “swingers” are.
Like I said, I’d bet they are the independent voters who may or may not feel affinity for one party or another but are not married to any one party.
Unless Obama ushers in the Paradise-Nirvana Millennium before Nov. 2010, I think we’ll know what’s what for sure then. But obviously (again, after last night) it’s not a GOP lock. It will be interesting to see if Owens will go all-Obama and risk the backlash in 2010. If Owens is smart and wants to be re-elected in 2010, he’ll take the Blue Dawg route.
What makes this even more strange to figure is just that factor – it’s a “temp” job. If swearing in is in Jan, it’s barely a one-year gig.
Geez, I’ve met Hannity and he didn’t make much of an impression on me though he knows how to work a crowd. He is definitely NOT the best radio/TV host out there…
He sure did one heckuva a showing, though, Kingfish.
“you all has my infernal gratitude.”
Our great state of New York has spoken. We don’t want extremist Conservatives representing us.
This just in! NY-23 has elected its first Democrat Representative since 187. Depending on whether that is BC or AD that is a long time.
Actually, she did. A lot of her voters played a part. People voting absentee voted for her BEFORE she dropped out. In districts like NY 23, any small thing makes a difference. Hoffman may have been a “no-name” but he made more inroads in an off-year elections than any other independent I’ve ever seen.
You haven’t a clue what the hell you are talking about. Perhaps, to back up your assertions you should CITE actual EVIDENCE to back up your points. You, and many other liberal propagandists, are reaching. Just because you live in Georgia doesn’t mean you have a clue about what’s going on in NY-23, or the Upstate for that matter.
Actually, Conservatives DO represent mainstream America. They represent 40% to your 20-% of the population. This district has been hit HARD by poor economic times and people are leaving the state in droves. When you make Washington promises, you better deliver on them. That made the difference… people weren’t willing to go it alone, a tradition in the Upstate region and something you wouldn’t understand since you don’t HAIL from this region and I DO.
San Fran Nan claims VICTORY!!!
Geez, there hasn’t been a victory like this since 279 BC…
There is a vast difference between Conservatives and Extreme far right Conservative that worship the likes of Palin and Limbaugh. The extremists are no more than 10% and certainly will never represent mainstream America.
Then why do 20 to 30 million people listen to Rush Limbaugh every week?
Why do more people listen to Rush than every other opinion show on CNN and MSNBC combined?
If you believe this nonsense you are out of your mind.
I wish that older folks in NY would wise up to this. I think a lot of younger folks have, that’s for sure. I never thought that I’d ever part ways with the GOP because my entire family has voted Republican for generations.
My parents are like a lot of older folks that vote for the (R) without really doing any deep analysis, just like a lot of the people in the NY-23. In NY, the GOP runs a bit differently, because it appeals more to economic conservatives than the social conservatives.
When you have older folks blaming tough economic times on those “big bad corporations” (my mother did this), yet don’t make the connection to the onerous part that federal regulation plays in their lives, then you see the utter economic devastation that occurs in states like NY.
Until people can start making connections to the real problems they face in NY, they will never make any headway to recovery. They’ll just keep voting in people like Owens, Chucky Schumer, and Hillary Clinton.
Chaputier, DIABLO stands for Democrat In All But Label Only…e.g. Scuzzafava..a person so left-wing she makes Owens look conservative in NY-23.
Incidentally, Owens in NY-23is still vulnerable…he has to re-run for re-election in 2010..so he will only have a track record of a few months to show for it…if his brethren democrats do what
I think they will do on Health Care etc. , he will be far more vulnerable to the effect of how the nation feels about dems. than normal..the silver lining of NY-23. We can still win there, if we prepare NOW.
The RNC and local Republican Party really screwed up w/r/t NY-23. The good thing we stopped a hard left witch from getting any traction in the Republican Party…and hoffman almost WON despite the hobbling by the RNC, local Repubs, and Scuzzyfavor.
For some of you griping about last nights results, all I have to say is right now we have to fight a principle-less RNC AND the democrats AT THE SAME TIME. This work is inevitable. By supporting Hoffman -who damn near won in a Blue State -where supposedly conservatives have no draw…think of what it will be like in the future for the next conservative who isn’t hobbled the way Hoffman was. Also supporting Hoffman in NY-23 was necessary to make the current RINO mantra of the Republican leadership look foolish..How could they at all support someone further left than Owens, an dhten still expect people to donate to the RNC?
Think LONG-TERM…your enemies certainly do.
The Civil War was in 1993? Dang – first it was the “New Math”, now it’s the “New History”!
Districts are generally the same size in population. NY23 is about 654,000, which is actually a little higher than the average of 649,000.
And those extra 5,000 Acorn voters are now moving to the next election district.
I think that there is one important fact that posters, who don’t hail from NY, are missing: the tide is not on the conservative’s side in the state. I would like it to be different but that’s not the case. While there is a strong tradition of conservatism and Republicanism in the Upstate and Northern regions of New York, it doesn’t always translate easily in what constitutes an (R) or a (D).
There used to be a culture of self-reliance, people helping each other, and a distrust of government in some corners of the Upstate. That is changing with the dwindling economic prospects of the Upstate and people, especially YOUNG people (I’m one of that group) leaving in droves. The only way to survive in that part of the state is taking government handouts.
The other ugly truth is that Dems control 26 of the 29 congressional districts (I guess now it’s 27 out of 29). That’s a daunting statistic to overcome. Plus, much of the political and economic power is concentrated in Albany and NYC. It’s been like this for YEARS… and I’m sure that txvet and Chaps can attest to this.
Hoffman losing was not a WIN for conservatives. There’s no sugar coating it and it really didn’t have anything to do with him being endorsed by Rush or Sarah Palin. He wasn’t from the district, as some people have pointed out, so he may have seemed like an intruder to some. Scozzafava and Owens had name recognition and whispered sweet promises of Washington gimmee’s and treats in these people’s ears. Who really knows what the key factor was?
I think people want the easy in this district, just like the rest of the state. The Dems promise the “easy” but it hasn’t done much for the state except make it an economic black hole where not only are jobs leaving but so are people. There’s no future for many young people in the Upstate. If you can’t supply the young people with jobs, they’ll go elswhere. And they have.
NY will just continue its slide. I’m glad I’m not a part of it.
Dude…the term “NY-23″ as used in Wiki, means a totally different geographic area. There is not a single part of the geographic area that currently is called NY 23 that has been represented by a Dem since 1978. And in the great majority of it not since 1870 or earlier.
ZING!!!
General population aside, how many ACTUALLY voted in what was an off-year, special election? It definitely, from what I’m seeing of the vote counts, seems a little over 100,000 people voted if that. Definitely not the number you cite.
So, if only a small segment of the total district voting population votes… yes, any small thing like people voting for a dropped out candidate can make a difference.
and they’ll use the ‘picking apples’ as their cover…
Well…cover, yes. But it also has the side benefit as a source of income to feed and clothe their family.
Scuzzyhoffa was a bigger lib than the official Demonrat, who had the good sense to oppose the public option Marxist Medicine in a conservative district.
Anyway, I won’t forget this, that Palin and Fred were on board early, Pawlenty either read the tea leaves or has some principles for someone less than a pure conservative, that Newt Gingrich is a flat out opportunist, also a man who cheated on a dying wife, and that both the Huckster and Romney voted “present”.
If Fred and Sarah don’t run, their endorsements will carry a lot of weight with me. And Huckster, Newt and Romeny confirmed they are politicians first and foremost, conservative Americans second, if at all.
Hoffman gets to run for the official GOP nod in 2010, and with luck, the national GOP and NRCC won’t be paying for attack ads against him this time.
And every congressional district will be up, so ACORN and the SEIU’s vote fraud and intimidation efforts will be spread thinner.
LOL chap–ever the devil’s advocate.
poor little transient,acorn,migrant,knife-wielding rubbish.
About 130,000. Total eligible voters in the district is about 394,000.
To follow up, I think the average turnout t for a special election is about 20%. Though I don;t recall where I heard this.
Yet, how many of those 130,000 have yet to be counted? How many of those are from the broken machines in one of the counties? And how many of those are absentee ballots that may never be counted?
This was still an extremely close election and I wish that New York (and others who don’t have runoffs) would consider rethinking these special election laws. If no candidate reaches 50% there should be a runoff between the two main candidates. It would clear up close elections.
Yes, I know, New York doesn’t do anything that “simple.” Their election laws are antiquated and ineffective.
What I’m trying to understand is this: was turnout higher than normal, normal, or below average? Was that a factor in making this election close? Or not?
Those are ones that were counted. The number was lower, but I rounded up for the 6,000 or so absentee ballots. By NY law all proper absentee ballots are counted (Section 8-412.2). Disputed ballots are not necessarily, except in a recount.
As far as I know only 4 machines in St. Lawrence were affected. And St. Lawrence was breaking clearly for Owens anyway.
“Dude”, Chap? Well, as long as you refrain from “rad” and “gnarly”…
Yup as I say, it’s been in flux. Alaska was part of Russia until 1867. To coin a buzz term, it’s “Change”.
My point is that the only thing that means anything is which way the New York’s 23rd congressional district as a whole entity has voted over the years. The vote is not Balkanization-tallied.
Now, if you’re having a go at making some kind of a “disenfranchised” case, Chappy, there’s this to deal with:
Representatives NY-23:
Peter A. Peyser, Democratic, January 3, 1979 –January 3, 1983
Samuel S. Stratton, Democratic, January 3, 1983 –January 3, 1989
Michael R. McNulty, Democratic, January 3, 1989 – January 3rd 1993
and now, Bill Owens, Democratic (2010)
(And you’ll note these are all post-1978)
So if you’re making a “they were not represented” or they were “cut out” argument it works both ways. When a Democrat was the Representative, it was only because Republicans were “disenfranchised”. But life is tough all over.
Or it could be that people vote for the candidate they prefer, which is an strong variable in every election.
If you go solely by assumptions based on some form of party ID then there should have been no Republican president elected since at least the middle of the last century; more people ID themselves as Democrats than Republicans.
Congressional Districts are based on population of the district and not registered voters.
The average district is around 650K but they do vary in size. The Virginia 11th District had 643K people in 2000.
If you assume that 50% are residents are eligible, and 50% are registered and 50% of registered voters vote you arrive at a figure of 80,375 likely votes.
100K votes in NY-23 doesn’t seem be out of line if more than 50% of residents are of age and eligible to vote and/or voter turnout was higher than average.
In 2008, it was about 200,000. In 2006, it was about 158,000.
I did have a good time last night watching CNN. There were obviously flustered by the results. Carville was trying to spin it hard but there were a couple of others that pointed out the truth. The rest of the panel cringed when the truth was put out there.
Some said that it didn’t mean anything but was just that Republicans were more energized than Democrats. I laughed out loud at that. Weren’t Democrats more energized in the last Presidential election? So I guess that one meant nothing either.
You can’t have it both ways. Oh sorry, Carville can because the media doesn’t really challenge Democrats so they say all kinds of outlandish things and get away with it Right Pelosi? Right Obama?
You know what is r-e-a-l-l-y getting under my skin today? All of the lectures we are getting from various “conservative” bloggers to “calm down” while clutching their GOP security blanket.
If those guys are already squeamish about the GOP getting steamrolled, maybe we need to take a closer look at who these guys are and what exactly they plan to do later. There are too many “players” among us who smell like GOP operative wannabes.
If these guys can’t let us celebrate a major victory for even one day without their condescending “wisdom”, maybe we shouldn’t be listening to them at all.
Let’s keep peeling of this onion until we find out for sure who the real believers are and who are careerists just coming along for the ride.
I suspect some of these guys are fantasizing about being THE GOP hero who brings us all together again at some opportune time in some grand unholy compromise.
If you are wondering who I am referring to, just hit some of the “Buzzworthy” postings above on the right. Some of them are getting under my skin.
Indeed, Phil, conservatives are just starting to feel their oats. I imagine the Democrats hope it will all just “go away”. I’d say that’s wishful thinking and that those who are opposed to the Obamanization of our country will just keep growing in numbers like a snowball rolling down a ski slope.
I haven’t checked, but I suspect AP & Ed at HotAir are among the offending bedwetters.
Carville also said lsst night that the elections are a year away and Republicans have to stay energized for the whole year. He indicated that wouldn’t happen and that the Dem base will get energized for next November.
I suspect he is right about the Dem base. I think he is wrong to assume that Repubs won’t stay energized. In fact, I thnk they will become more energized.
My own opinion is that there was a perfect storm this last election with Bush haters, bad economy, difficult wars, MSM collusion, white guilt, weak Republican candidates, and Democratic voter fraud that all came together to favor Dems. It started in 2006 when Dems took over Congress.
No fault was laid on the Dem controlled Congress. It was all Bushs fault. Next November will be a different story. The focus will be on Dems.
I saw Hillary on Greta blaming the past for all their present woes. That storyline is still being sold. I saw Frank the word guy questioning Virginia voters and you could see that Obama voters still did not want to admit they made a mistake. They were still blaming everything on Bush. One guy rightly pointed out that Obama was in the Senate during that time and therefore shares the blame. Obama voters disagreed. They can not admit their guys failures and by extension their own failings for voting for him.
I can’t see how they can keep up this charade for another year, even with MSM collusion. The house of cards will fall and the blame put squarely on the incumbents.
People are hurting out there and cap & trade and huge deficit spending will only make it worse. If health care passes, all of us will pay more for heatlh care and pay more taxes on top of it. Our standard of living will fall, if we still have a job.
There are many illiterate and gullible citizens out there who believe the government is run by 1 person-the President. Everyone else is in an advisory position or as an underling. Congress just “rubberstamps” everything the President suggests. I have a sister like that and discussing anything political with her, is a waste of time.
I don’t see anything to celebrate about Doug Hoffman losing the election yesterday.
There is no moral victory in losing that election.
The Democrat won.
The Republicans were idiots.
The Conservative lost.
Not good!
You don’t get medals for second place in an election, and the people are the ones who will suffer for the Democrat being elected, and no “celebrating” Doug Hoffman’s run will help.
Doug Hoffman, as the true conservative, should have one that election, and New York should have Doug Hoffman represent them.
Instead New Yorkers went for the wrong choice.
Do you know that promotional advertisement “I Love New York?”
I don’t “Love” New York when it is predominantly Leftist-Democrat-Liberal.
In a time of a fawning press, Entertainment industry celebrities, and leftist education system pushing and worshipping Obama and his ilk and demonizing good people and good values I see nothing positive about Doug Hoffman losing and the Democrat winning.
Nothing.
Hoffman should have an excellent shot at NY 23 in just one year.
And hopefully the Northeastern squishes and RINOs like Steele will recognize there is a difference between a “big tent” and no tent at all, everyone is welcome.
There is a place for “moderates” like Rudolph Giuliani in the GOP.
Just not as a national candidate. It is difficult outside of rural districts in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey or New England to elect a real conservative Republican. Half a loaf, a fiscally conservative man who is socially liberal, and is less socially liberal than most Demonrats, is better than no loaf at all.
Rudy as a New York Senator or Governor would be better than any Democrat.
I draw the line at people like Olympia Snowe. She is no “moderate” Northeast Republican. She has a 12% American Conservatives Union rating for 2008. A third of what Democrat Mary Landrieu was rated at.
Scuzzyhoffa was like Snowe. Not a ‘moderate Republican’, but a full bore Demonrat claiming the title of Republican.
You have the far left and the far right. Compromise is the middle. The US typically governs in the middle. That means we take people from both sides and compromise.
Do Nancy, Harry and Barack compromise? No. They have the steering wheel cranked hard left and the pedal to the metal to run over any opposition in their way.
Repubs like McCain and Graham are trying to establish that middle moderate role. When middle compromises with hard left, you get mid left. I will settle for compromising at middle but prefer mid right. That means we need hard right as a balance.
And tell me what is wrong with hard right? Fascism & Naziism are hard left ideologies. What is hard right? You should go to church on Sundays? You should wear clothing in public? You should work hard and live good? You should benefit from your efforts instead of punished? Other than the myth perpetuated by the MSM, what is wrong with far right?
One party rule without compromise means we are heading hard left. And our country and citizens are paying for it dearly.
It’s not that difficult at all, unless you choose to be obtuse about it. And by the way, Republicans haven’t held the seat for as long as lying Nancy Pelosi and company told you they have. That they have to lie about it to try and cover their asses over this narrow win over a virtually unknown third party candidate tells you how much of a victory it is for Conservatives.
But keep living in denial. Here’s to hoping the rest of the Dems follow your lead.
Think Scozzafava is done in the GOP?
I can’t help but notice how many commenters here still can’t make the distinction between Republicans and conservatives. Two completely separate parties. The former is the largest voting bloc in the country. The latter is the 3rd party that can’t do anything right.
What Phil said. If anyone has doubts, read Rasmussen’s article from Monday. Emphasis mine.
GOP needs to either either wake up quick or die, but they are becoming irrelevant. Either way a plurality of voters are looking for genuine conservative leadership, not their RINO clowns.
I have to ask “what in the world is wrong with Sean Hannity?” He had Newt on today and was wiping the tears of poor old Newt talking about how he was so unfairly being criticised and how Newt didn’t have any idea who Deedee was?
Newt is currently spinning on Hannity’s tv show and he spun so badly on Hannity’s radio show that I can’t ever see any way I can support him again. “Blame everyone but myself” just doesn’t cut it! When did we forget Eisnhower’s “The buck stops here!” desk sign?
Actually, I think that was Truman. Regardless, it never was a part of Newtian Politics. He always was a whiner. It’s a shame there are no genuine conservatives to use for their talking heads…save Rove and Krauthammer.
I write this on all the fund raising stuff I get from Washington: “GROW A SPINE AND A PAIR THEN YOU’LL GET SOME MONEY” Republicans have no backbone. They bend over and grab the ankles all the time. I’m tired of it. They have to fight fire with fire. I don’t mean insane like half the left is, but they need to for once get their courage medal from the “great and powerful Oz”!!!
If I hear the big tent philosophy again I’m going to throw up.What’s the point of electing another Specter,Snowe,Collins or McCain when they will just go along with the Dems every time and we get the lousy legislation passed anyway.I noticed the libs are not making a big tent for the more conservative Dems.They depsise them.I think the Republicans are more interested in going to parties at The White House with Obama,than to stand on principal and Newt is one of the worst.How can anyone not see the man is a total sell out?
– purplepeep
Close, but no cigar. Isn’t that how the phrase goes? The bottom line is, that the Dems have another seat to support their agenda, widening their majority. Portensions for the future don’t help much if the dems ram through economy crippling legislation between now and then.
It’s just too bad the GOP couldn’t put forward a candidate who held fiscally conservative positions on the issues, but also carried a wide enough voter appeal to win.
Anybody seen this? http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/11/its_not_over_recanvassing_shows_ny23_race.html
Hoffman conceded too early. Leftists lie like crazy and don’t respect the electoral process. I really wonder if America’s problems can be resolved at the ballot box since leftists clearly don’t respected democratic principles.