Interesting, non-partisan, and thorough analysis by Michael Barone. I found particularly interesting his thoughts on the ramifications for Hillary. http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneblog/home.htm -- 11/9/05 The election results There's a ritual, a kind of kabuki dance, to interpreting the results of the two gubernatorial elections, in Virginia and New Jersey, that are held the year after the presidential election. If one party wins both elections, its spin doctors claim that they are a verdict on the national administration—up if the national party's candidates win, down if (as in such elections going back now to 1989) the national party's candidates lose. The spin doctors of the other party quote Tip O'Neill's adage that "all politics is local" and say that the results were due to state and local issues and have no relevance to national politics. There's some truth on both sides. State elections are, after all, about state issues—why else would we have, as we do now, Republican governors in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont (John Kerry's three best states) and a Democratic governor in Wyoming (George W. Bush's No. 1 state in 2000 and No. 2 in 2004)? And yet the trends in national politics are sometimes echoed in the results in elections for governor. Issues that work for one party in state elections sometimes work for them in federal elections as well. I don't hold with the traditional view that governors have great power to deliver votes for their party's nominees in presidential elections. But state elections do have some implications for national politics. Democrats, after their victories in the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey, are arguing that these results, together with the national polls, show a repudiation of the Bush administration. Republicans are arguing that these were just local contests, with no national implications. They're both right and both wrong. What strikes me most about the two state elections is how similar the results were to those in 2001 in the same contests. Virginia 2001: Warner (D) 52 to 47 percent. Virginia 2005: Kaine (D) 52 to 46 percent. New Jersey 2001: McGreevey (D) 56 to 42 percent. New Jersey 2005: Corzine (D) 53 to 44 percent. Republicans appear to have won, narrowly, the other two statewide offices up in Virginia this time; they won one and lost one four years ago. Republicans went into the 2005 election with 60 of the 100 seats in the House of Delegates; they emerged with 59 votes. One thing election results can tell us a lot more about than a poll is turnout. Turnout in Virginia, with 99.67 percent of precincts reporting, was up 4 percent as against 2001 in a state where turnout increased in 2004 as compared with 2000 by 17 percent and in which population, according to census estimates, increased 5 percent in 2000-04. Turnout in New Jersey, with 97 percent of precincts reporting, was 2 percent below total 2001 turnout. Most likely the final figures will show a slight turnout increase. This in a state where presidential race turnout increased 13 percent in 2000-04 and population increased 3 percent. Caution: Sometimes turnout figures rise as more absentees are counted, etc. From these numbers, Democrats can argue that voters in the 10th- and 12th-largest states had four years of Democratic governance and liked it enough to vote for four more. Republicans can argue that their party suffered no serious slippage and did as well when their president's job rating is hovering between 35 and 40 percent as they did when his job rating was up around 75 percent (the 2001 elections were held eight weeks after September 11). But neither party seems to have registered the gains in turnout that both parties did in 2004. John Kerry got 16 percent more popular votes than Al Gore. George W. Bush got 23 percent more popular votes than he did four years before. In Virginia, Kaine seems to have gotten 4 percent more votes than Warner, the losing Republican 2 percent more votes than the losing Republican last time. In New Jersey Corzine has on the board now 8 percent fewer votes than McGreevey. It doesn't look like he'll end up with as many. The losing Republican has 2 percent more votes than the losing Republican last time. That's in line with the shift in the presidential vote in the state from 56-to-40 percent Democratic in 2000 to 53-to-47 percent Democratic in 2004. The national polls show a national electorate in flux. See this interesting article in the Washington Post cowritten by the reliable and unflappable Dan Balz. But the Virginia and New Jersey results show state electorates pretty much where they were in 2001. You could argue that means the Bush and Republican turnout and percentage increases of 2004 have disappeared. But that would still leave us as the 49 percent nation we were in 2000—and not a nation that is swinging as heavily to the Democrats as it did to the Republicans in 1993-94. Virginia The fact is that neither party had an ideal nominee in the race for governor of Virginia. Democratic Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine, the former mayor of Richmond, was too urban and personally opposed the death penalty—always a negative in Virginia. Republican Attorney General Jerry Kilgore (he resigned the job to pursue his campaign, a tradition in Virginia) was from the far southwest corner of the state, and had a heavy mountain accent and a traditional religious persona that was a liability in the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington—which moved against George W. Bush between the elections of 2000 and 2004, while the country as a whole was moving toward him. Kaine's big advantage was his identification with incumbent Gov. Mark Warner, elected in 2001 by a 52-to-47 percent margin and with a job approval rating in the vicinity of 70 percent despite having, against his 2001 promise, pushed a big tax increase through the Republican legislature. Warner campaigned in 2001 as a NASCAR fan and won big votes in rural Virginia. Kaine was not able to do as well there—it's Kilgore's home territory. But Kaine improved on Warner's showings in the suburbs—not just the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington but the suburbs of Richmond (Henrico and Chesterfield counties) and in the Hampton Roads region around Norfolk and Newport News. There's this national implication here. Supporting tax increases does not produce political death. If voters feel—as voters in traffic-clogged Northern Virginia and perhaps the other suburbs do—that higher taxes will produce goods that you want—fewer traffic jams—they will support you. Ross Douthat and Reiham Salam in their brilliant article in this week's Weekly Standard argue that tax cuts are not such a strong political plus since ordinary people aren't so heavily taxed anymore. (More on this article in forthcoming blogs.) Voters are willing to be taxed more to get what they want. At the same time, unaccountably, Kilgore declined to sign Americans for Tax Reform's pledge not to raise taxes—despite the fact that the Warner tax increases have stuffed the state's tax coffers—and he didn't promise to cut taxes either. So you could argue that he wasn't the ideal tax-cutting candidate. Even so, Republicans need to pay some attention to Douthat and Salam's argument that broad-based tax cuts aren't such great politics anymore as well as their argument that Republicans would do better to advocate different tax cuts now that tax rates are lower than they were. The Virginia result also produces a loser and a winner in Democratic presidential politics. The loser is Hillary Rodham Clinton. That's because the winner is Mark Warner, who evidently has decided not to run against Sen. George Allen next year but has instead embarked on a candidate for president. There is something faux about Warner: He portrays himself as an entrepreneur who just happened to enter politics. The fact is that he is a guy who has been interested and involved in politics all his life, who won a lottery to get a cellphone license and then made a huge fortune off it, and then used the money he earned to run against Sen. John Warner in 1996 and to get himself elected governor of Virginia in 2001. (Not entirely a faux entrepreneur, I would concede: If I had won that lottery, I would probably have frittered away the business, whereas Warner had the competence to make it successful.) Warner evidently wants to run as the moderate candidate against Hillary Rodham Clinton, as a candidate who has shown that he can win in a state that voted for George W. Bush (and indeed every Republican presidential candidate starting with 1968). He won in 2001 and, running on his coattails, Tim Kaine won in 2005. Kaine's victory gives him a pretty strong argument against Clinton—and for that matter against the Republican nominee (could it be Allen?) in 2008. This was a big win for Mark Warner. What else does Virginia tell us? It tells us something about turnout. And here the lesson is not particularly favorable to the Democrats or the Republicans. As noted above, turnout seems to have increased less than population and much less than presidential turnout increased from 2000 to 2004. Both parties surely worked hard to gin up turnout. But neither seems to have succeeded in producing what they wanted. Turnout in several independent cities (which are county equivalents in Virginia, i.e. not part of any county) was down or up minimally: Alexandria (+0.1%), Hampton (+2%), Newport News (+1%), Norfolk (-3%), Portsmouth (-6%), Roanoke (-7%). The major exception was Kaine's hometown of Richmond (+4%). Turnout was not up much in inner suburban counties and cities: Fairfax (+1%), Chesapeake (-0.0%), Virginia Beach (+3%). Exception: heavily Democratic Arlington (+8%), Republican-leaning Chesterfield (+10%). There were big turnout gains in fast-growing exurban Republican-leaning counties: Loudoun (+32%), Prince William (+14%), Spotsylvania (+19%), Stafford (+17%). But Kaine carried Loudoun and Prince William, which gave majorities to Bush in 2004, and Kilgore carried Spotsylvania and Stafford by unimpressive margins. (These numbers were calculated quickly, and I'd be grateful for correction of any errors.) In some of these numbers, there's evidence of swelling turnout among Bush haters (Arlington maybe) but little evidence of increasing black turnout (except maybe in Richmond); there's a bit of evidence of increasing Republican exurban turnout (Spotsylvania, Stafford) but not much. Kilgore's gains over 2001 in his home area of southwest Virginia (where Mark Warner won in 2001 and ran very well in the 1996 Senate race) were impressive in percentage terms but did not put nearly enough votes on the board to elect him. How does Kilgore's vote compare with Bush's? Kilgore ran behind Bush in all 11 of Virginia's congressional districts. He ran only 4 percent behind in the southwest Virginia Ninth District, his home turf, and 11 percent behind in the next-door district, the Shenendoah Valley Sixth, and the Second, which is dominated by Virginia Beach and Norfolk. In the other eight districts he ran between 6 and 9 percent behind Bush. It's not possible to compare the vote by congressional districts between 2001 and 2005, because the district lines changed in 2002. And for the moment I'm going to forgo the pleasure of comparing the results in all 95 counties and 40 independent cities. Other results I'll write more about the results in New Jersey, New York City, and California in the next few hours. Bottom line here: New Jersey looks a little more Republican in 2005 than it did in 2001, just as it looked somewhat more Republican in 2004 than it did in 2000. But in each case, the Democrat still won. New York City voted decisively against a left-wing Democrat and in favor of a liberal Democrat running on the Republican line who has wisely kept in place the police policies of Rudy Giuliani. Would you, however liberal you are, want to turn your police force over to an ally of Al Sharpton's? California voted down all the major propositions on the ballot, though some by a narrow margin. This is a stunning defeat for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and a stunning victory for the public employee unions. More later.
Wonderful! I was waiting for a thread like this. Read it and weep... A Triumph For Warner, And a Guide For His Party By Robert Barnes Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, November 9, 2005; A01 Virginia's quadrennial search for a governor featured neither charismatic personalities nor dominant policy initiatives. But Democrat Timothy M. Kaine's resounding victory over Republican Jerry W. Kilgore nonetheless provided important political lessons for the commonwealth, and maybe the country. The outcome marked what feels like a dramatic strengthening of Democratic appeal in Northern Virginia, the state's richest and most populous region. It showed that Republicans can no longer depend simply on the power of their party to win statewide and demonstrated the dangers of a negative campaign. It presented an intriguing campaign model for Democrats, in which religious faith plays an important role. And most of all it demonstrated the appeal of Gov. Mark R. Warner (D), for whom this could become the first stop of a presidential campaign. "The real asset that Kaine had was this rather astonishing popularity of Warner," said Merle Black, a professor who studies Southern politics at Emory University. George Mason University professor Mark J. Rozell agreed. "I think to a large extent [the story] is the Warner influence," said Rozell, who has closely followed the race. "He created the circumstances for a Democrat to win in a Republican-leaning state in the South." Those circumstances included a soaring approval rating that was steady across party lines and an electorate that was happy with the way the state was being governed and upset with the national trends. Virginia just one year ago awarded President Bush a large margin in his reelection campaign, but like the rest of the country, it has soured on his performance. Although Warner has been careful not to criticize Bush directly -- for that matter, his instinctual nods to bipartisanship meant he made a point of not mentioning Kilgore by name -- he made the case all the same. "If we want to make it a comparison between how things are going in Virginia and how they are going in Washington, that's a comparison I will take any day of the week," he said while campaigning for Kaine this weekend. Bush invited the judgment by scheduling an eleventh-hour campaign event with Kilgore at a Richmond airplane hangar. The final images of the campaign were Warner and Kaine rallying their troops, and Bush and Kilgore linking arms. "People were willing to accept Mark Warner's recommendation and not willing to accept George Bush's recommendation," said University of Virginia political scientist Larry J. Sabato. Black said the election could hardly have gone better for Warner as he begins to put together a national campaign. "You can imagine him on the ticket, either as the presidential candidate or the vice president, and Virginia automatically becomes a competitive state," he said. The commonwealth has not supported a Democrat for president since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. Kaine, the lieutenant governor, relied so heavily on Warner's support -- he constantly referred to the "Warner-Kaine administration" even though the two were elected separately four years ago -- that his own accomplishments in the race might tend to be overlooked. But Kaine, who slipped into office four years ago with the scantest of margins, skillfully blunted Kilgore's attempts to portray him as too liberal for conservative Virginia. Kaine becomes the first candidate since the reinstatement of the death penalty to win the governorship of a Southern state despite his personal opposition, although he has said he will carry out executions. Kaine defended himself against Kilgore's attack on the subject by saying that it is his beliefs as a deeply religious Catholic that lead him to oppose the death penalty and abortion. But he also said he would follow the law on capital punishment and advocate laws that protect the right to abortion. "The elite never really got that argument," said David Eichenbaum, one of Kaine's media advisers, referring to columnists and others who wondered how Kaine could be, in his words, "morally" opposed and yet pledge not to try to change the law. "But people who heard him got it." "I think this is an interesting test case for Democrats to see if you can run a faith-based campaign focused on values and do so as a progressive candidate in a Southern state," Rozell said. It worked, Rozell said, because of Kaine's frequent reference to his service as a missionary in Honduras while in law school and his familiarity with the language of religion. "It did not come off as calculated," he said. In his victory speech last night, Kaine told the crowd, "We proved that faith in God is a value we all can share regardless of party." That connection with voters helped Kaine when Kilgore unleashed a set of visually stunning ads that became the talk of the campaign: family members of murder victims criticizing Kaine for his opposition to the death penalty and his legal work on behalf of death row inmates. Many Democrats worried that the attacks would sink the campaign; instead, they led to a backlash and established Kilgore as the more negative campaigner in voters' minds. That partly is because Kilgore gave voters little else. Unlike successful Republican candidates such as George Allen in 1993 and James S. Gilmore III four years later, Kilgore had no signature issue to offer; his campaign was aimed at establishing his conservative credentials and trying to paint Kaine as too liberal, and it did little to attract independents and Democrats. For all the talk of political trends and outside forces, elections come down to a comparison of candidates, and Kilgore rarely seemed a confident campaigner. He avoided joint appearances with Kaine and stumbled badly in one memorable confrontation with television journalist Tim Russert as he avoided clearly stating his anti-abortion stance. Kilgore was swamped in Northern Virginia, where Kaine exceeded Warner's margins from four years ago, even in the outer suburbs. The Kilgore campaign never believed that Kaine could do as well in Northern Virginia as Warner, the businessman from Alexandria. But the Democrat got more than 70 percent of the vote in Alexandria, Arlington and Falls Church, and he got more than 60 percent in Fairfax County, home to one in seven Virginia voters. Kilgore had counted on Republicans in the outer suburbs to offset the Democratic advantage inside the Capital Beltway, but Kaine won there, too. "The old days of places like Prince William and Loudoun being automatically Republican are over," Sabato said. "Republicans are finding that you need to nominate candidates who can communicate with the suburbs." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110802241.html Things are looking grim for Republicans in '06. If I were a supporter of the current Republican Leadership (many Republicans are not, basso), I would be very worried indeed. I think we are going to see a real backlash against the Administration. Americans can't vote Bush out of office, so they will, in my opinion, do the next best thing... castrate Republican power in Congress. i can't wait! Keep D&D Civil.
The Kaine win is truly stunning. We're talking about a Democrat who is against the death penalty winning in Virginia!
overall, there seems to be a little bit for everyone in yesterdays results. i find it hard to garner too much of a trend from anything that happend. that VA elected a democratic governor is hardly surprising, given the candiates, and the fatc the elected on in 2001 as well. ah well, perhpas barrone is right, it this really does bode poorly for hillary. hey, a fella can dream, can't he?
I agree that it gives a tremendous boost to Warner leading up to '08 positioning. If that hurts Hillary, fine... it's good for the Democratic Party. We need fresh faces and strong candidates. One of the worst things to happen for Democrats going into '04 (besides Kerry getting the nomination), was the cakewalk Kerry ended up having to get the nomination. I hope we see other Democrats emerging over the next year or so. Keep D&D Civil.
I guess since this is the election thread I might as well post this here: http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5716060.html St. Paul: Coleman sweeps Kelly out of office DFLers (Democrats) punish Mayor Randy Kelly for standing with President Bush, and usher in Chris Coleman in a 69 to 31 percent landslide. Jackie Crosby, Star Tribune Last update: November 9, 2005 at 12:05 AM In a race dominated by partisan payback, St. Paul voters swept former City Council Member Chris Coleman into office Tuesday with a 69 to 31 percent victory over Mayor Randy Kelly. The 38-point margin of victory marked the worst defeat of any mayoral contender in two decades and ended a 16-year drought by DFL-endorsed candidates. "For a kid who grew up in St. Paul, this is an unbelievable honor," said Coleman, who will be the city's 45th mayor. "I love this city, and I'm proud to lead it." Kelly was gracious in defeat, even as voters punished him for endorsing President Bush in 2004. Until Tuesday, he had lost just one election during three decades in political office. "The people have spoken," he said, addressing supporters at his campaign headquarters in Bandana Square. "I say, 'Amen.' So be it." Kelly is the first incumbent to lose since 1972. That year, Charlie McCarty lost to Larry Cohen. Kelly blamed his loss on his decision to endorse Bush but said he had no regrets. "I stand by the decision," he told reporters. Kelly also thought his trip to Thailand in 2004 -- and his ongoing embrace of new Hmong immigrants -- contributed to the lopsided vote. "There is no question that being supportive of the immigrants was not popular, particularly on the East Side and Rice Street areas," said Kelly, who lives on the East Side. "But it was the right thing to do, and I don't regret doing it." Voter turnout was estimated to be about 37 percent. That's lower than the 2001 mayor's race, in which 42 percent of registered voters showed up at the polls, said Joe Mansky, Ramsey County elections manager. Voter Margaret R. Johnson, a co-owner of the Rice Street Gym, came out of the Rice Street Library and said she voted for Chris Coleman even though she supported Kelly four years ago. "And it's not just because he backed George Bush," she said. "It's the way he's run the city. All the user fees and street taxes kept going up." Christopher Hadden, a West Side resident who works at West Publishing Co., said he supported Kelly because "he stands up for his own convictions" and doesn't cling to party lines. "I'm the most familiar with him, and I think he's done a good job," Hadden said. Congratulations from Kerry The race attracted national attention as leaders from both parties came to see St. Paul as a microcosm for the country's feelings about Bush. A steady stream of well-known politicians came to town to raise money and generate excitement for the candidates. Sen. John Kerry, who hosted a fundraiser and pep rally for Coleman in October, called to congratulate the new mayor-elect, but Coleman's cell phone disconnected the call. In a written statement, Kerry said: "There was a lot at stake here in this campaign, not just in St. Paul, but for the nation. With the election of Chris Coleman as your new mayor, St. Paul has set the tone for 2006 and 2008 and built the foundation for future Democratic victories." Along with Kerry, Gen. Wesley Clark and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a former Democratic National Convention chairman, stumped for Coleman. Kelly's heavy hitters included former New York Mayors Rudy Giuliani and Ed Koch, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, former St. Paul mayor and current U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman and Gov. Tim Pawlenty. In recent days, several polls had shown a partisan backlash against Kelly over the Bush endorsement. A Star Tribune Minnesota Poll released Sunday showed that nearly two-thirds of likely voters said the Bush endorsement influenced their choice. Coleman capitalized on the widespread outrage over Kelly's endorsement of Bush as well as Kelly's friendship with Pawlenty. Coleman said those allegiances reflected Kelly's priorities and values. On Tuesday, Kelly rejected speculation that either Norm Coleman or Pawlenty talked him into endorsing Bush. He said it was his decision, and his alone. "I haven't been promised anything, nor would that be appropriate," Kelly added. Kelly called Coleman about 8:30 p.m. to offer congratulations. Surrounded by his family and campaign staff, Kelly told his supporters: "We have done our best, and I believe St. Paul is better for it," he said.
No they're not. There just happens to be a lot of Colemans in St. Paul. One of the major columnist there was Nick Coleman. Ironically Norm isn't even from Minnesota originally.
well if the dems kicked out a rep in ST. Paul, there was payback in manchester, where john kerry campaigned heavily for the loser. http://gamma.unionleader.com/article.aspx?articleId=13284a87-3963-4563-a3e3-291d031d90eb -- Surprise! It's Guinta By RILEY YATES Union Leader Staff 2 hours, 3 minutes ago Manchester — Voters looking for change handed Republican Frank Guinta a stunning upset victory in the mayor’s race yesterday, tossing three-term incumbent Democrat Robert Baines out of office. Guinta took 51 percent of the vote, winning eight of the city’s 12 wards. His 10,115 votes compared to Baines’ 9,579, or 48 percent, according to unofficial results that also included write-ins. Speaking to an elated crowd at the Black Brimmer, Guinta promised to deliver on his call to cut taxes, address violent crime and improve high school test scores. “It’s what we’ve talked about in this campaign, and it’s what I’ve pledged to you,” said Guinta, alderman for downtown Ward 3. Democrats continue to dominate the aldermanic and school boards and the welfare commissioner’s office. Two former Republican aldermen seeking to return to the board were rejected by voters — though Guinta ally Real Pinard, an independent former alderman, upset incumbent Paul Porter by nine votes in Ward 6. Long-time Alderman Mary Sysyn of Ward 4 was defeated by fellow Democrat Jerome Duval, who took 59 percent of the vote. On the school side, at-large board member Tom Donovan, a Democrat, was bounced from office. In Ward 12, Republican incumbent B.J. Perry was also upset, losing to Kelleigh Domaingue, who was recruited to run by the Democratic party. Baines conceded the mayor’s race to Guinta last night, going to the Black Brimmer to offer his congratulations. “Best of luck,” said Baines, who ran a campaign that touted his hometown roots and Manchester’s revitalization. “I will work with him hand-in-hand over these next weeks and months to ensure the everyone gets behind him.” Guinta invested more than $65,000 of his own money in his bid, offering a succinct catch phrase that highlighted six years of tax increases, a 55 percent increase in violent crime, and three high schools that failed federal testing standards. “I want to end with three numbers that I think you all know,” Guinta told supporters. “Six, fifty-five, three.” Residents cast 19,912 ballots yesterday, a 35 percent turnout that was about 2,000 lower than predicted by the city clerk. Candidates have until Friday to request recounts. Leaving the polls in Ward 4, Maria Cote of Laurel Street said she picked Guinta this time, despite voting for Baines in the past. “It’s time for a change,” said Cote, an independent who also voted for Duval. “Six years is a good, long run.” Hank Radwanski of Day Street said he went with Guinta because of taxes. “I just feel that taxes are still going up,” said Radwanski. “I get fed up with the increases. There’s got to be a better way.” Incumbent Democrat Armand Forest retained his Ward 12 alderman’s seat by 27 votes against Republican Keith Hirschmann. In Guinta’s home ward, ironworker and Democrat Pat Long beat Baines’ critic Joe Kelly Levasseur. “Seventeen weeks of meeting the residents of Ward 3 paid off,” Long said. “For seventeen weeks I was hitting the road and meeting people.” The city’s two Democratic at-large aldermen, Mike Lopez and Dan O’Neil, were each returned for another term, as was Welfare Commissioner Paul Martineau, a Democrat who faced token opposition. Incumbent Democratic Alderman Mark Roy fended off a challenge in Ward 1 by Siobhan Tautkus, winning by 401 votes. Democratic Ward 11 Alderman Hank Thibault held on by 14 votes in an unexpectedly close election with Republican Jason Cooper. Alderman Mike Garrity won by a landslide against Steven Freeman, and also helped deliver Ward 9 to Guinta, despite it being Baines’ home ward. Baines, in turn, won Guinta’s Ward 3. Garrity said he started to feel strong momentum for Guinta over the weekend as he and the candidate knocked on doors and went around the city on an ice cream truck. “People were positive to us,” said Garrity, who was Guinta’s campaign co-chairman. “And if they weren’t voting for us, they weren’t slamming doors in our faces either. They were willing to listen.” Baines campaign co-chairman Brad Cook said Baines always refused to go negative. Baines did highlight Guinta’s lack of executive experience and his work for a politician, but Baines never slammed his opponent, Cook said. “The sad truth in politics, I suppose, is negative campaigning works,” Cook said. Manchester voters have a history of bouncing incumbent mayors, said state Democratic Party chairman Kathy Sullivan. “It seems that in Manchester, voters like to rotate the people at the top,” Sullivan said. Otherwise, voters strengthened the Democratic majorities on the aldermanic and school boards, she said. “This is one of the elections where everybody has to step back and figure out what the voters are telling us,” Sullivan said. Staff Reporter Mark Hayward contributed to this report.
Actually I think he was a democratic mayor that endorsed bush in 04. So the dems kicked out one of their own.
as long as we're posting places where traditional powers are switching.. Democrats tighten grip on power across Long Island By FRANK ELTMAN Associated Press Writer http://www.newsday.com/news/local/w...ov09,0,2921751.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork November 9, 2005, 3:31 PM EST MINEOLA, N.Y. -- Kathleen Rice's upset victory over a 31-year incumbent in the race for Nassau County district attorney has completed a sweep for Democrats on Long Island, who for the first time now hold every top elected office and control the county legislatures in both Nassau and Suffolk. "I think the tide is changing," Rice said Wednesday at her campaign office, where she was celebrating her close win over Republican Denis Dillon with relatives and campaign workers. "I grew up here," said the former federal prosecutor in Philadelphia who returned to her native Long Island to challenge Dillon. "I remember a time when you couldn't admit that you were a Democrat, much less run for office as a Democrat." With Rice's victory, Democrats now hold both county executive seats, both DA positions, and are the majority party in both county legislatures _ a far cry from the 1970s, '80s and 90s, when Republicans dominated local politics. During that time, the party's one big success happened in 1980 when a little-known Hempstead town supervisor named Alfonse D'Amato was elected to the U.S. Senate. Democrats also hold four of the five congressional seats on Long Island, although none were contested on Tuesday. "Democrats are now in charge of the suburbs," said Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran Democratic strategist. Sheinkopf listed two factors for the loss of GOP domination: the movement of Democrats from New York City into the suburbs and dwindling influence of the Republican machines in suburbia. "The Republican machines simply stayed around too long. The Democrats have become the reformers, not just in Nassau and Suffolk, but in Westchester and other areas," he said. In an odd twist, the last Democrat to hold the district attorney's office in Nassau was Dillon himself, who was swept into office in post-Watergate 1974. Dillon, a passionate anti-abortion activist who was seeking a ninth term, switched allegiances to the GOP in the 1980s in a rift with Democrats over the abortion issue. "I think people overwhelmingly thought it was time for a change, just as they did 31 years ago when they elected him," Rice said. A spokeswoman in Dillon's office said the incumbent had no comment on the election. Dillon was defeated by about 8,000 votes. Also savoring victory was Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, who trounced his Republican challenger by 21 percentage points, becoming the first Democrat to be re-elected to the post in four decades. At a press conference to announce a Dec. 7 summit of school district officials to address a crisis in soaring property taxes across Long Island, Suozzi was repeatedly peppered with questions about reports he intends to challenge Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for the Democratic nomination for governor next year. Suozzi was even asked about a report that he intends to announce his candidacy in January, but he deflected the questions like a hockey goalie rejecting slapshots. "I'm going to do what's ever in the best interest of the people of Nassau County," he said. "And right now I believe it is for me to fight on the issue of school taxes." Suozzi did say the issue of school taxes "is very much affected by what goes on in Albany, but right now I'm doing that as county executive of Nassau County." Later, he was asked if he had a favorite in the race for governor: "I believe that the next governor of New York state should definitely be a Democrat."
I just wish the 'usual' suspects aren't around for the national election in '08. I dislike Kerry and Hillary, but it's almost an afterthought that both will compete for the Dem ticket. I am still holding out hope that a moderate conservative like Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel, or Lugar run for office. Some fresh new faces please, we need new people and new ideas in politics...
Nice spin. The fact that the Republicans lost in a right wing state like VA is very telling. "Conseravtives in NOVA are afraid of chrisitans with funny accents" = not very convincing.
Ran across this bit of info. Check it out! The site shows graphs of Bush's popularity across the country. Currently, Bush has a positive rating in only 6 states. http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2005/50StatePOTUS1005SortedbyApproval.htm Colorado Florida http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=1d22b8ad-5124-4f67-97f5-caad45c65bf4 Nevada Ohio New Mexico Missouri All show a dramatic drop for Bush's popularity, and they are all states he carried in '04. The Republican Leadership has to be very worried about '06. The link was associated with this article from the Washington Post. Are Democrats Riding a National Wave? By Terry M. Neal washingtonpost.com Staff Writer Thursday, November 10, 2005; 11:05 AM With key wins in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races, some Democratic leaders are all but declaring the beginning of the end for Republicans. But were Tuesday's results, which included Californians' rejection of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's four "reform" ballot initiatives, truly signs of a national wave? Or were the results a series of events based on the unique dynamics of each state? For their part, Democrats are waxing up their surfboards to ride a wave. "This portends really well for the future," said Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. "Unless George Bush reverses his policies and reaches to the middle you're going to see many more victories like this." "In the most significant test of the political environment since 2004, Americans yesterday resoundingly supported the new priorities of Democratic candidates over the status quo policies of President Bush and Republican leadership," Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in a statement Wednesday. It's hard to argue against Tuesday's elections being good news for Democrats. Democrats proved they could compete with Republicans in a red state (Virginia) while holding ground in traditional coastal strongholds that the GOP has been eyeing for gains. More importantly, it appears that Bush's power as an electoral draw is significantly diminished from the 2002 midterms, when he made a last-minute blitz around the country, helping to tip the balance in a number of close races in his party's favor. In New Jersey, a Democratic-leaning state where Republicans have been competitive in statewide races, gubernatorial candidate Jon Corzine ran ads linking Republican opponent Doug Forrester to Bush. The fact that those were seen as attack ads says something about how the political landscape has changed since last November. If Bush's poll numbers remain low, Democrats won't have to fear him coming to their states to campaign for their opponents next year. That's important, because a popular president can make a point or two difference by actively campaigning for a candidate. As of last month, Bush's approval rating was above 50 percent in only six states. But there's plenty of data to suggest that Democrats are overstating the importance of Tuesday's results. An Election Day survey by the Associated Press and Ipsos showed that only 20 percent of New Jersey voters cast ballots in favor of Corzine to demonstrate opposition to Bush. And congressional Democrats have an approval rating that rivals Bush's (according to the latest nonpartisan Pew Research Center poll, Bush and congressional Democrats approval rating was tied at just 36 percent). It's also difficult to make the case that the results in California, where voters soundly defeated four initiatives backed by Schwarzenegger, are a sign of a national wave. California is already in solid Democratic territory. And few consider Schwarzenegger and Bush to be closely allied through friendship or ideology. The California vote was the result of what happens when the bright lure of celebrity begins to take a back seat to actual governing. Californians appear to have tired of Schwarzenegger just as they tired of Democrat Gray Davis before him. Virginia is the Democrat's best case for arguing for national implications. Like many southern states, it has been solidly Republican for years. The fact that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tim Kaine won by a healthy margin of six percentage points when preelection polls were calling the race a dead heat may say something about the environment in a state that has been generally Republican for years. More important was the fact that Kaine won not only in Democratic strongholds in the Northern Virginia suburbs but in more traditionally conservative places like Virginia Beach. Kaine hitched himself to popular Democratic incumbent Mark Warner, and his victory could send an important message to national Democratic leaders who have fumbled trying to communicate a coherent agenda. For Democrats in Washington, struggling to find a message about what to say about massive federal deficits, Warner, and now the Kaine campaign, might serve as an inspiration. But the Kaine victory may have had as much to do with the changing demographics of Northern Virginia, the state's most populous area, and a backlash against GOP gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore's negative ads than anything having to do with Bush. The fact that Democrats failed to make inroads in the state's GOP-dominated legislature, and that Republicans appear to have won the two other statewide races (Republican Bob McDonnell holds the tiniest of margins over Democrat Craigh Deeds in the attorney general race, and Bill Bolling claimed the Lt. Governor's office) seem to undercut the major trend theory. The fact is, Virginia is an odd state that continues to elect Democratic governors even as it votes for Republican presidential candidates decade after decade. All in all, after the 2005 off-year elections it's better to be a Democrat. "Is it a harbinger?" University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato asked rhetorically of Tuesday's results. "Who knows? But it's unadulterated bad news for Bush and the Republican Party and great news for Democrats as they attempt to make a comeback in 2006." Ultimately, what this week's elections demonstrate is that, yes, the GOP is in trouble going into 2006. But the roots of that trouble have more to do with the way voters have rejected President Bush and the GOP agenda than any sort of broad public support for Democrats. For as much as the GOP has to fear now about 2006, much will depend on whether the Democrats can produce an agenda to capitalize on Republicans' current weaknesses. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/10/AR2005111000829.html The Democratic members of Congress aren't too popular themselves, true, but if large gains are made by Democrats in '06 due to an amazingly unpopular President, it won't be the first time an unpopular President affected Congressional elections. With no other outlet to express their displeasure with George W. Bush, the voters may very well take it out on Congressional Republicans, and they will, in my opinion. Keep D&D Civil.
Barone? Isn't that the guy from everybody loves raymond? In other news I saw today on the front page of the Globe (in the grocery store) that Bush has had a nervous breakdown. Also, Oprah and Hillary are in a bit of a tiff. Personally I think a Hillary/Winfrey ticket would stop the Republicans in '08. Have Dr Phil be the Secretary of State. 'Get real people!'
