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:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

Been to many TEA party rallies, have you? Or are you merely engaging in rectal speak?

As usual…

JohnGalt23 on May 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM

As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.

hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?

mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM

MSNBC consensus: Obama’s speech was historic, amazing, “one of the best of his presidency”

Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?

parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM

They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.

They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.

A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.

Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM

MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.

rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Nobel Peace Prize that he totally earned a mere nine months into his presidency? Yeah, that one.

I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.

fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!

And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!

Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM

They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.

They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.

Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM

…bromides about what we’re told are President Foreign Policy’s miraculous yet still oddly unmaterialized abilities to move us drastically closer to world peace.

Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!

KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM

I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.

Do they even know or care that they are morons.

marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM

His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.

DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM

Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:

During his foreign policy speech Thursday afternoon, President Obama warned that domestic terrorism would increase in the modern age of the Internet.

“[T]his threat is not new,” Obama said. “But technology and the Internet increase its frequency and lethality.”

Obama warned Americans that materials on the Internet could influence people to commit terrorist acts.

“Today, a person can consume hateful propaganda, commit themselves to a violent agenda and learn how to kill without leaving their home,” he said.

To combat domestic terrorism, Obama reminded Americans that it was important to reach out to Muslim communities.

“The best way to prevent violent extremism is to work with the Muslim American community — which has consistently rejected terrorism — to identify signs of radicalization and partner with law enforcement when an individual is drifting towards violence,” he said. “And these partnerships can only work when we recognize that Muslims are a fundamental part of the American family.”

You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.

onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM

That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?

onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.

myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2