Well....it looks like the Virginia Gov's seat will turn red. If the current 20% lead holds up, this will be a blowout. I don't know Virginia politics too well but if it is a repudiation of the Obama regime as the pundits are saying, this is a huge message the folks are saying to the Prez. Karl Rove noted that Obama won Virginia by 6%. Now the Gov seat flips red by +20%. Assuming it holds, that's a 26% swing.

At the moment the NJ is too close to call but Rove, whom I think is extremely politically savvy, notes that some early indicators are in Christie's favor. If the NJ Gov seat goes red, that will be another swing.

The NY seat races are still coming in. I'm now hearing there are some odd things going on up there with the ballots. I didn't hear any "hanging chad" stuff but some ballots were secured by a judge. Not sure what that's about.

If today's races are an indication of things to come in 2010 and 2012....Prez Obama will be a one-n-done Prez. Aside from the prospective Repub/Conservative wins, the other winner will be Sect Clinton. I think if tomorrow shows this is an early indication the folks are rejecting the Obama Administration's Amero-socialist direction, her stock inches a little higher. She doesn't even have to do anything, just watch, keep her distance from Prez Obama and smile.

Looks like a very bad evening for the liberals. I do think this will prompt them to attempt to push down their insane health care by any means necessary.

Hope the liberals up for re-election next year are watching....WH press sec Gibbs reports that Obama isn't even watching the results.

quote:

WH press sec Gibbs reports that Obama isn't even watching the results.

Yea, right...

I live in Virginia, and I'm very impressed with Bob Mcdonnell. I could see him running and possibly winning the presidency in the not so distant future...It's nice to get some of these liberals out office...

quote:

Originally posted by spotweld:

quote:

WH press sec Gibbs reports that Obama isn't even watching the results.

Yea, right...

It was either;
1. True but a mistake to say.
2. False but a mistake to say.

I guess it does enhance the POTUS aloofness.

I think it just further proves his arrogance. Thanks Gibbs for making that even more evident

The disconnect will continue.

President Obama either doesn't have the mental capacity to understand last night's results or he doesn't care, neither of which are traits I would look for in the leader of my country.

Is arrogance bred by naivety? Sometimes.

If there is no softening of the hard left stance coming from the White House we'll know that this one termer will use all means necessary to push agendas doomed to fail.

We now have three years of waste ahead of us, a total of four years of doing nothing good for our country.

It's a damn shame.

Does anyone truly believe that the nation is going to swing towards the right direction based upon these results? I do not. I don’t see too much difference between the republicans and democrats. Both spend far too much money driving our nation into debt. Both have forgotten that they are to serve the people and focus on creating and enhancing their own power base.

Sure, there are a few differences in some social issues (firearms ownership, abortion, etc) but both care more about party politics than doing what is best for the nation.

To me, ‘liberal light’ won last night. Big whoopee…

If I am happy at all it is because liberals might have fallen off their holier than thou horse. But they’ll spin it so they look good and the media will help!

I just heard on the news that President Obama didn't watch election returns last night because he was watching an HBO special about his own Presidential campaign.

He's his own best friend.

dis,

I agree, as I don't see much difference either in the 2 parties right now, but I do see a difference in Bob Mcdonnell..He's a genuine conservative...we need more like him in higher positions...my .2 cents

I believe Conservatism is on the rebound seperate from the Repub party. I didn't hear El Rushbo say this but someone else claimed he did...."after last night there are two endangered species....Rhinos and Blue Dogs". I can see that. I wonder who was listening....

I also heard a bit ago that the local Dems got permission from the DNC to spend $10 mil on the two Gov seats. Morale of the story....you don't drop $10 mil just to lose!

It also looks like Babs Boxer in Cali is going to get a Repub challenger. The challenger is/was John McCain's former economic advisor. That should be good.

quote:

I believe Conservatism is on the rebound seperate from the Repub party.

As you might expect, I respectfully disagree. Here's my "spin"

The Rs did pick up two governorships in dysfunctional states, and are doomed to failure by trying to implement a conservative agenda. Both conservative R candidates won mostly because they moved to the "center," and both rejected the support of their radical-right cohorts (e.g. Sarah Palin) in their race. Mcdonnell even tried to attach himself to the popularity of Barack Obama (even praising him in political ads), something his erstwhile D competitor failed to do . . . until it was too late to do much good. In NJ, Christie also moved to the center (also rejecting Palin support) and had the added benefit of running against a very unpopular Democrat.

OTOH, the two congressional seats (NY-23 and CA-10 were up for grabs, and were won by Democrats (Owens and Garamendi) -- and this will give Nancy Pelosi two more votes to support the Democratic Party's legislative agenda.

In NY-23, the ultra-conservative Hoffman, the FoxNews candidate, was able to pull off a loss -- even though he had the support of not only FOXNews, but also Righties such as Palin, Thompson, Pawlenty, Dick Armey, Texas Governor Rick Perry, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene, conservative talk show hacks (such as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck), as well as the Cause for Growth, the Susan B. Anthony List, which opposes abortion, and the National Organization for Marriage. And, yes, he is also one of the Teabagger Party elite.

This race was supposed to be a referendum on President Obama, and a Hoffman victory would end the D's push for health care reform by making them worry about Teaparty/Conservative challenges 2010 mid-term elections. As the ballot counting continued into the night, a Hoffman victory became more and more remote, the rhetoric changed -- and reality is now setting in.

Now we can get on with implementing some real change!

...gjd

Even the radicals in maine rejected the radical obama agenda...go read and weep mr cut and paste

I think the NY race was indicative of some of the problems within the GOP. They abandoned a "moderate" female Republican in favor of the candidate further to the right because she didn't toe the party line, and then promptly lost a district that has been Republican for the last 17 years.

They are relying on backlash against the Obama Admin to carry them to victory in the next cycle without realizing they still need to put forth a candidate that can attract more than their own party die hards. The secret isn't winning over the right, they are going to vote to the right anyway, you need to win over the independents.

quote:

Originally posted by Sparks1993:
Even the radicals in maine rejected the radical obama agenda...go read and weep mr cut and paste

Just in case you haven't been paying attention for the past few years, President Obama does not support gay marriage. I disagree with him, but nobody is perfect.

...gjd

... As to your last little dig: Nice try, but no cigar!

Okay... I'll bite

After reading NYT, Washpost, various blogs, and other media stories about the results yesterday...

And after THINKING about what I read for a little while...

I think:

a) The results were NOT about President Obama himself, but were influenced by the policies and directions of the party in power currently under review to include:
a) The stimulus bill that didn't
b) The cost of proposed Health Care, Cap & Trade, and other spending proposals; and
c) The current economic mess, unemployment, jobless recovery, government taking over of industries and bailing companies out with taxpayer moneys; leading to
d) Fear of an exploding deficit now and in the forseeable future

So many of the articles I've read - seem to get it half-right, despite their spin or bias. For me the message is:

a) Dem's slow down, pare down, and slim down the cost of your proposals - or else. We are a nation of incremental changes - not sweeping changes (absent a legitimate emergency); and don't waste a crisis on non-crisis related issues.
b) The bloom is definately off (from both sides of the spectrum) and President Obama is now more realisticly seen as just another Washington Politician - TBD whether he can be transformative or medicore in "governing"
c) Extremist (both sides) - your pursuit of "purity" is determental to you ability to win elections
d) Fiscal conservative, social moderate, small government voters are alive and well and whether RINO or Blue DOG - you'd better be aware they exist; or else

Since in voting patterns - 2010 will look more like 2009 than 2008 or 2012 (off year) for turn out and issues - and especially with the trend of indepentents (and some Democrats) moving away from the more liberal, expansionist, big government Congress and Administration - I agree the Democratic party should be worried.

But - the Republican party should not rejoice too soon. They need to use the opportunity to recruit reasonable consevative/moderate folks to run, build up their war chest to support those candidates, and get a coherent message.

They can't rely on simple anger or angst of the vast middle to remain comfortably with them no matter what...

Amercians seem to like divided government; so I do think the pendulum will swing in 2010 - as has been standard practice for most off year elections.

Best Wishes

quote:

Originally posted by Salba:
But - the Republican party should not rejoice too soon. They need to use the opportunity to recruit reasonable consevative/moderate folks to run, build up their war chest to support those candidates, and get a coherent message.

I would disagree. When some of their ideas shifted to the middle, we see what happened, they got shallaqued. Amnesty for illegals, too much spending, earmarks, compromising on bad legislation just to get something passed, etc. The list goes on. There's a couple polls out and they show out of the 3 major political leanings, the majority of folks consider themselves Conservative, followed by Indy, then Lib.

I do agree about not rejoicing. This is just the tip of the iceberg and there is much work to do going into 2010 and 2012. I suspect there is a lot of low hanging fruit out there now.

quote:

I would disagree. When some of their ideas shifted to the middle, we see what happened, they got shallaqued. Amnesty for illegals, too much spending, earmarks, compromising on bad legislation just to get something passed, etc. The list goes on. There's a couple polls out and they show out of the 3 major political leanings, the majority of folks consider themselves Conservative, followed by Indy, then Lib.

That is true to an extent, but it all comes down to fielding the right candidate unless that majority exceeds 50%, which it doesn't. If you can't field a candidate that will attract the independent vote you are going to lose, and that goes for either party.

Look at the 23rd in NY, I wouldn't have been surprised if they won with the Republican, but the conservative base wasn't willing to compromise and now the Dems picked up another seat in the House. So those conservatives can sleep at night patting themselves on the back for standing by their principles, but at the end of the day all they did was give up another vote to Pelosi.

quote:

Originally posted by geejaydee:

quote:

I believe Conservatism is on the rebound seperate from the Repub party.

As you might expect, I respectfully disagree. Here's my "spin"

The Rs did pick up two governorships in dysfunctional states, and are doomed to failure by trying to implement a conservative agenda. Both conservative R candidates won mostly because they moved to the "center," and both rejected the support of their radical-right cohorts (e.g. Sarah Palin) in their race. Mcdonnell even tried to attach himself to the popularity of Barack Obama (even praising him in political ads), something his erstwhile D competitor failed to do . . . until it was too late to do much good. In NJ, Christie also moved to the center (also rejecting Palin support) and had the added benefit of running against a very unpopular Democrat.

OTOH, the two congressional seats (NY-23 and CA-10 were up for grabs, and were won by Democrats (Owens and Garamendi) -- and this will give Nancy Pelosi two more votes to support the Democratic Party's legislative agenda.

In NY-23, the ultra-conservative Hoffman, the FoxNews candidate, was able to pull off a loss -- even though he had the support of not only FOXNews, but also Righties such as Palin, Thompson, Pawlenty, Dick Armey, Texas Governor Rick Perry, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene, conservative talk show hacks (such as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck), as well as the Cause for Growth, the Susan B. Anthony List, which opposes abortion, and the National Organization for Marriage. And, yes, he is also one of the Teabagger Party elite.

This race was supposed to be a referendum on President Obama, and a Hoffman victory would end the D's push for health care reform by making them worry about Teaparty/Conservative challenges 2010 mid-term elections. As the ballot counting continued into the night, a Hoffman victory became more and more remote, the rhetoric changed -- and reality is now setting in.

Now we can get on with implementing some real change!

...gjd

I need to get on the bang list that you guys get. This is third thread I've seen on this topic and you guys post almost exactly the same thing. Maybe I should just start watching MSNBC to get the memo's breakdown.

You guys are calling Christie and McDonnell moderates and Hoffman a "extremist" or "ultra conservative."

Yet when you compare their positions side by side by side....they're nearly identical. Pro-life, oppose gay marriage, anti-tax, anti-HC reform, etc. Take a look at their websites, they're all still up.

So I'll ask, are the endorsements what makes him an extremist? Is that it? The only thing?