NY-23 is solidly Republican but not especially conservative (it voted for Barack Obama last year), and Hoffman was a relatively uncharismatic candidate with poor command of the local issues….

Owens — a conservative Democrat — was actually much closer to the average ideology of the district than the capital-C Conservative Hoffman. It was also a reminder that all politics is local (sometimes). More than 95 percent of Hoffman’s contributions came from out-of-district, and the conservative activists who tried to brand him as a modern-day Jefferson Smith never bothered to check whether he resonated particularly well with the zeitgeist of the district.

Jaibones on November 4, 2009 at 6:30 PM

True! Liberal! Fact! — For centuries NY-23 was represented by “hard-core” unicorns… but then Atlantis sank beneath the waves

People are dying. DYING!
Chuck Schick on November 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM

Screw the people… what about the cutesy cuddly itty-bitty polar bears!

Sounds creepy…what are they doing behind him?
Erich66 on November 4, 2009 at 5:08 PM

Tip-toeing through acres and acres of turds

[Jaibones on November 4, 2009 at 6:30 PM]

The people of the current NY-23 are “hardcore” but they have not always been NY-23. That’s the difference and if the meme is accurate that, for the most part, the people of the current NY-23 have never had anyone but an R Congressman since the Civil War, then that is an important point and worth keeping in mind.

She’s bitter disingenuous or delusional. I don’t care enough about Andrea Mitchell to figure out which.

ramrants on November 4, 2009 at 5:16 PM

Pelosi’s threat against the Blue Dogs is the withholding of campaign finance aid, shifting the big Dem dollars in their direction. However, if the Blue Dogs represent conservative areas already disgusted with the deficit and the weak dollar, Pelosi’s “sweetener” may have no effect on their support for her bills.

The Blue Dogs would be committing political suicide to join Pelosi’s theft of a bill in this economy. They come from conservative districts and ran their campaigns as fiscal conservatives.

“…even in hardcore Republican territory.”

Pathetic communist douchebag

I heard someone on Medved’s show today lamenting that the press continues to spew the lie that the 23rd district has been in GOP hands since the Civil War (which I have heard ad nauseum), and that it is a bald-faced lie (which I had not heard once) and that all one needed to do was pull up the Wiki reference page for the district, which lists every single office holder in history for the district.

Huh. Democrats held it from 1913-1915, 1917-1921, 1923 to 1973, and from 1979 until 1993. I guess having two liberal Republicans hold the seat for 16 years makes it “hardcore”.

lesson learned: make those young people (anybody under 50!) work a few shifts at the polls. and bring their children because, after all, we’re trying to save the Republic for them.

I’m guessing the Gays wait until after the mid-term.

Bleeds Blue on November 4, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Why do you think it’s ok to use homosexuals as political poker chips?

BadgerHawk on November 4, 2009 at 6:06 PM

I don’t. But I do think it’s OK for an elected official to leaven his or her principles with a bit of political reality. In the long run, if the progressive agenda is better served by postponing my next door neighbor’s enlistment (though he is a little old)and my cap and trade, for another year, holding onto a few marginal Democratic seats and moving into the next Congress with a more stronger hand, you have to do it. If ten blue dogs say they can vote either for health care or gay marriage before 2010, but not both, I’ll take health care now and do Defense of Marriage repeal (if that’s even remotely possible) in 2011.

Abandoning them entirely would be different.

I’m not sure where the whole “republican since the beginning of time” propaganda came from.
progressoverpeace on November 4, 2009 at 5:52 PM

At least part of it is from the probably erroneous report from the local paper. (Altho the district lines may have changed, NY-23 is still NY-23 and NY-23 is the term used…and at least in McNulty’s case, he is a Democrat and for sure represented NY-23)

And McNulty still isn’t saying bupkis.

Why does Nanny Pulloutsi insist on that teeth-on-top (practiced) smile while she spouts her talking points.

I’m guessing the Gays wait until after the mid-term.

Bleeds Blue on November 4, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Why do you think it’s ok to use homosexuals as political poker chips?