Dems take major gubernatorial races

[ QUOTE ]
Could you include a notice that your a dick in future posts you make.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you don't know "you're" from "your." So what?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
New York: Nothing to note there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, there is.

New Yorkers are going something like 5:1 as registered Dems and GOPsters respectively, yet a Republican Mayor (admittedly a "moderate" Republican) gets re-elected with a clear margin.

The Democrats have been taking New York for granted for many years now, to their peril.

[ACPlayer]

If you dont know about an election in your home state (I know about it half way across the world -- and it is not my home state) and can not cross a bridge to vote .... perhaps Eliot is making a valid point.

But then your response may indicate that you too think so.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, those local elections are certainly going to translate
into powerhouse legislation in Congress. Gooooooooo Dems!

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

"All politics is local" - Tip O'Neill

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
New Jersey: Democratic candidate wins in a solidly blue state
Virginia: Democratic candidate wins race on heels of a popular Democratic governor and a third candidate leaking votes from the Republican candidate
New York: Nothing to note there.

Wow thats just horrible for Republicans. But I understand when you have been getting drubbed like the Dems in recent elections, you take your comfort where you can. And Im ok with that. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You have no idea what "comfort" is:
[ QUOTE ]

St. Paul voters punished Mayor Randy Kelly on Tuesday for standing with President Bush a year ago, denying the Democrat a second term in Minnesota's capital city.

Former City Council member Chris Coleman, also a Democrat, routed Kelly by a more than 2-to-1 margin in unofficial returns with most precincts reporting. Ahead of the election, independent polls showed voters were primed to fire Kelly, and most cited his 2004 endorsement of the Republican president as the reason.

No sitting St. Paul mayor had lost a campaign since 1974. Kelly had a personal election streak that spanned just as long, covering his quarter-century in the Legislature and first term as mayor.

"It may sound silly, but Kelly was for Bush and I'm not,'' said retiree Audrey Guith after casting her vote for Coleman.


[/ QUOTE ]
Now, that's comfort [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

73% of the city voted for Kerry in 2004 so it should be no surprise that the Democrat voters are upset over the endorsement. That shouldn't be comfort for the anti-bush zealots.

[Beer and Pizza]

We had a status quo election:

CA - Reform initiatives of GOP rejected (maintain status quo)

OH - Reform initiatives of Democrats rejected (maintain status quo)

VA - incumbant party holds the governorship

NJ - incumbant party holds the governorship


The only statewide election that seems to buck the trend is the PA Supreme Court retention election - where a justice was defeated (for the first time in memory) [background: the court upheld a politician pay raise that was clearly prohibited by the state constitution - a judge goes down for judicial activism [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] )

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
New Jersey: Democratic candidate wins in a solidly blue state
Virginia: Democratic candidate wins race on heels of a popular Democratic governor and a third candidate leaking votes from the Republican candidate
New York: Nothing to note there.

Wow thats just horrible for Republicans. But I understand when you have been getting drubbed like the Dems in recent elections, you take your comfort where you can. And Im ok with that. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll agree that in a way you're right - in a vacuum, the Democratic wins aren't necessarily indicative of well...anything. However, two things:

1) President Bush makes an emergency stop in Virginia to stump for Kilgore - and Kilgore still looses. Under most circumstances, this is somewhat of a political gamble that could cost President Bush political capital, but as Charlie Cook noted in his Cook Report yesterday - what capital? To that end, Bush was owning the results from yesterday whether he showed up to stump or not (so it wasn't much of a gamble, in my mind). On my drive to work yesterday morning, I overheard Republican strategist Ed Rogers give a quote on NPR (which I may not capture perfectly but what I thought was relatively spot-on, even if I don't get it verbatim) - but it was something along the lines of "Even if Kilgore wins in Virginia, no one will claim it solves Bush's problems - but it would be the absence of bad, and when you're in trouble the absence of bad is the first step toward recovery."

2) Ergo, the big 'story' to emerge from yesterday's races is this: yesterday could have been (had Kilgore and Forrester and others pulled out victories) a lifejacket for Bush - his way of climbing out of the cellar. Yesterday's GOP losses just furthers the inter-party angst and pessimism. Yesterday could have stopped some of the snowballing GOP problems - and while not necessarily 'adding' to the problems, the election day losses were more or less a missed opportunity for recovery.

[Beer and Pizza]

Everything is perceived as a potential "lifejacket" for Bush. The Alito nomination is too. That is largely nonsense. When he starts withdrawing troops, his polls numbers will soar. Americans are not so shallow as to need signs and signals, real improvement will come when Bush is again recognized for doing good work. And he will be soon enough - all Presidents have ups and downs.

[ QUOTE ]
Could you include a notice that your a dick in future posts you make.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahahahahaha!

Ok, I'll tell you what. If you add a notation saying "I don't pay attention to elections and, in fact, don't even know when they are taking place," then I will add a notation saying "Lehighguy, who doesn't pay attention to elections and, in fact, doesn't even know when they are taking place, thinks I'm a dick."

Deal? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Everything is perceived as a potential "lifejacket" for Bush. The Alito nomination is too. That is largely nonsense. When he starts withdrawing troops, <u>his polls numbers will soar.</u> Americans are not so shallow as to need signs and signals, real improvement will come when Bush is again recognized for doing good work. And he will be soon enough - all Presidents have ups and downs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm definitely interested in getting some action on this prediction. Please define "soar", "withdrawal" of troops, and the time interval you believe it will take the poll numbers to "soar" following such "withdrawal". Thanks.