Upsets in Virginia and New Jersey
The Republicans picked up two governor’s mansions, but not the upstate New York congressional seat. Still, two out of three wins is significant, especially since President Obama campaigned actively for Governor Corzine in New Jersey.
The lessons still seem to be about governance. People seem to still like President Obama personally,but they are less enthusiastic about the Democratic Party’s ability to govern. My advice to the Democrats in general, and President Obama specifically is to recognize that the economy is the issue which is top priority to most of the voters. That means that it is more important to rebuild the economy than to promote the agenda of various constituencies of the Democratic Party base. Time to drop the Pelosi-Reid health care bill with increased coverage and its estimated cost overruns, and look for ways to save money. Time to drop the questionable climate change treaties, and look for ways to prevent further erosion of the US industrial base and the blue collar jobs it provides. Green technology, such as wind turbines, can be developed, but not on the timetable the environmental lobby proposes, unless we wreck the economy.
The Republicans divided and failed to unite behind their party’s candidate in New York’s 23rd District. The decision to kick the moderate to the curb, and install a fiscal conservative failed. The infighting successfully elected a Democrat. Having said that, it is reasonable to point out that most voters object to the spendthrift habits which have prevailed in both parties for the past decade. It’s STILL about the economy, folks. If the Republicans recognize that they need to work to rebuild the economy without deepening the deficit, and by having a positive plan to govern, then they stand to do well in 2010. If, however, the Republicans plan to keep spending at the present rate and just run harder to the right socially, like the Democrats running to the left in 1972, then the Republicans can say goodbye to any hope of recapturing one or both houses of Congress next year.
Fellows, it’s still about the economy, stupid!
hi ,the Republicans divided and failed to unite behind their party’s candidate in New York’s 23rd District. The decision to kick the moderate to the curb, and install a fiscal conservative failed. The infighting successfully elected a Democrat. Having said that, it is reasonable to point out that most voters object to the spendthrift habits which have prevailed in both parties for the past decade. It’s STILL about the economy, folks.
The GOP still needs a message. Cut taxes and smaller government just doesn’t resonate with most voters any longer.
They need a plan. A message. A vision for going forward that people are willing to give them a shot….Like term limits, lower taxes not just cutting taxes…balanced budget, a plan to PAY OFF the debt…health care reform that really does reform the system without raping it. Coming to grips with AGW…meaning embracing the health of our planet. Green technology….green is good…its very good…its the future.
The Democrats have a plan and a message. Even though its a bad plan…they still have one.
Honestly I have to agree with the Democrats on this one….The GOP right now is the party of NO….and that is not a long term plan…it might get them a few seats in 2010…
Remember John Kerry….he mainly campaigned on “I ain’t George W. Bush” well it was a plan and it almost worked but it was not a long term plan that benefited the party.
“The Republicans divided and failed to unite behind their party’s candidate in New York’s 23rd District. The decision to kick the moderate to the curb, and install a fiscal conservative failed. ”
Dont forget, Hoffman showed up to this thing late, had no money to start with, he was “boring”, and had no political history..add to that…The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dished out more than $1.1 million on Owens’ campaign, and teachers’ unions spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to oppose the Republican and the Conservative.
so I would ususally say it goes without saying that given all these things he couldn’t pull it off, but in this case, he almost did…49-45% not too shabby under these circumstances.. He did this solely on message, and with very little time. If there are other Hoffmans out there that havea little more politics under their belt, have a similar message, and have a little more passion to their message, I say look out!
hmmmm, true. Although I’d say that the message isn’t to be thrown away – just stored for later use. And I agree about smaller gov’t not resonating. Every time they’ve voted for it, it’s grown.
Lower taxes yes….not cut taxes….cut taxes in the midst of 1 trillion deficits and potential 2o trillion national debt seems beyond stupid to almost anyone.
Smaller government? Sounds good but its no longer a real possibility unless we want to further erode jobs….curtail government spending…yes.
Like I said they need a message that resonates not….
CUT TAXES
SMALLER GOVERNMENT
FREEDOM
all great ideas…Im all for them but then Im all for having a couple 20 year olds hanging on my arm too but I dont think my main voter(wife)thinks thats such a great idea…
Yes, Hoffman was an odd choice. For all the reasons Jay C. offers, not a particularly good fit. He still did pretty well, even with all those disadvantages. Which seems to reinforce Interested’s response to Doomed – that lower taxes and smaller government are not bad ideas.
My thinking is that the economic situation is going to get worse instead of better if both parties continue to engage in deficit spending to support their base. The Republican practice Doomed points to is especially problematic, because it supports Democratic party claims that the Republicans are the ‘Party of “NO!”‘The Republicans have been doing what the Dems do – deficit spending to buy votes. The Dems do it using outright deficits to fund projects and services; the Republicans by cutting taxes without reducing government services to stay within the government’s actual available funds. The Democratic party plan is more of the same – deficit spending, with the expectation someone will deal with the crash a hundred years later after they are dead. The Republicans do the same thing, but leave spending where it is while cutting taxes.
California is about to collapse economically. It is possible that Washington and Oregon may not be too far behind their neighbor to the south. When the state has to declare bankruptcy, people may take it seriously, that they will have to arrange spending to stay within the limits of tax revenue received. That will call for honest, adult conversations about what must be provided, and what are desirable but not essential services that may be eliminated to keep within the budget. If the Republicans would actually offer a real program to do this, it might find a receptive audience.
The winners in 2010 and 2012 are going to be which ever party realizes that real America is being strangled to death by the ideological struggle that consumes Washington DC but is unknown anywhere else in the country.
Take the estate tax as an example. The right hates it because it destroys small businesses, destroys jobs, and takes wealth away from the individuals who have worked hard for it. The left likes it because the idea of the tax was to redistribute wealth to prevent the creation of an American aristocracy. The net effect however, has been to squash small businesses and line the pockets of the large insurance companies.
To see that I mean you can visit
http://estatetaxtruth.org/
The fact is that real America feels the results, and does not get hung up in the esoteric philosophical concerns that fuel the partisan divide in DC.