Big sweep today?
posted at 9:30 am on November 3, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The Washington Times reports that Republicans hope for a big three-state sweep today — two governor’s seats and a special election for Congress. They actually leave one race out, a California special election to replace Ellen Tauscher in Congress, which the GOP has almost no hope of winning. However, an East Coast sweep would definitely send a message to Democrats ahead of next year’s midterms and this year’s votes on their radical Congressional agenda — and perhaps to a few Republicans as well:
Voters on Monday prepared to cast ballots in the first major elections since President Obama took office, offering a glimpse into how they think the president and his party have handled issues such as health care and the economy.
Republicans and their conservative allies were buoyed by late polls showing they could sweep the three biggest electoral prizes of 2009: the Virginia and New Jersey governors’ mansions and New York’s 23rd Congressional District seat.
Republican Robert F. McDonnell held a comfortable lead over Democrat R. Creigh Deeds in Virginia’s gubernatorial race with polls stoking Republican hopes of securing the top three jobs in the state for the first time since 1997.
Polling showed Mr. McDonnell had made steady gains in the final weeks among those who identified themselves as Republicans and independents while substantially cutting into the Democratic advantage in Northern Virginia, which helped Mr. Obama capture the state last year and awarded the governorship to now-Sen. Mark R. Warner in 2001 and Gov. Tim Kaine in 2005.
The California race pits statewide-election winner John Garamendi against relative unknown David Harmer in a district that went for Barack Obama by more than 20 points. It borders Nancy Pelosi’s district, and Tauscher was no centrist. The race has the same impact as NY-23 does in determining the size of Pelosi’s caucus, but it has gotten no media play simply because it looks like such a walkover. In a special election, anything can happen — but it’s hard to imagine that the Republicans can outorganize the Democrats in this race. If they do, that would send a big message to Congress: no one’s seat is safe next year.
Of the four races, only Virginia looks like a lock. Creigh Deeds ran against a 20-year-old college thesis and lost miserably. Bob McDonnell’s easy sail to victory threatens to put Virginia back in the red-state column, but it could also just indicate what a terrible candidate Deeds has been. If Virginia elects a Republican to Congress in 2012, we may be seeing a real shift, one the GOP desperately needs.
NY-23 is shaping up to be a Republican win … in a district that Democrats haven’t won in over 110 years. The only reason it’s in play is because of the foolishness of local GOP leaders, who handpicked a terrible candidate for the special election. A win by Douglas Hoffman will certainly energize the conservative grassroots, but either way, this race has made fools of the GOP establishment.
New Jersey would be a real coup for Republicans, for two reasons. First, New Jersey is solidly Democratic, but unhappy. The GOP needs an entree back into power to demonstrate how center-right governance will benefit the state and its citizens. Despite being outspent by Jon Corzine and a false-flag third-party candidate, Chris Christie is within sight of victory in the Garden State. The second reason is that Barack Obama poured himself into the Corzine campaign, practically taking it over in the final weeks. A loss here would be a big blow to his prestige and a warning about the limits of his coattails in 2010. If Obama can’t hold New Jersey, then all bets are off in Congress for the midterms and Obama’s radical domestic policy agenda.
If Christie wins, of course. Nothing is certain and few lessons can be applied until the GOP actually wins — and New Jersey and New York are not locks. I’ll predict wins across the board for the GOP on the East Coast, and a fifteen-point Garamendi win in California that will be an afterthought.
Update: If any Hot Air readers are on the ground in NY-23, drop me a line to let me know what you see.
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.
(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)
AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.
Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.
tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM
Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .
BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM
Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…
Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM
Perfect!
lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM
Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.
bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM
If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!
SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM
If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)
He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.
Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2