So, as we sit here 24 hours after the 2009 election, what exactly does this all mean and portend for the next 12 months? I think there are 2 big take-aways from this election: The Obama name has lost some of it’s shine (e.g. the Democrats are not going to be the new permanent majority) and that the Republican party has some issues they need to work out . . . bear with me on that last one.
First, it’s pretty clear that, to some limited extent, that this was a referendum on the job that Obama has (or rather hasn’t) been doing, despite the Wapo’s protest. The economy is obviously the one thing on everyone’s mind and it arguably has not gotten a lick better with the election of Obama. Yes, Obama will continue to blame this all on George Bush, but in reality, people are starting to think that line is pretty lame, at some point Obama has to own this mess and I think a year after his election is probably enough time. A 20 point swing in Virginia and a 5 point win in very blue New Jersey is a pretty fine point, people are not happy and, to some extent, they blame Obama.
From a practical point of view the effect on this is both encouraging and a warning to the GOP. First, it is encouraging because the end result is that we will almost certainly not see either Obamacare or Cap-and-trade passed this year, which means we will definitely not see it in an election year. The Blue Dogs are running scared now. In fact, the lesson of NY-23 should be clear for us all. The fact that the conservative candidate lost is not nearly as important that the Democrat who won ran as a conservative Democrat, and was in fact more conservative then the Republican who was nominated (thanks for nothing Dede). The Dems would spin that win as a rejection of conservatism, but it’s not. Owens barely won an election in which he had the full backing of the “moderate” Republican and Hoffman was a nobody who came out of no where. Should Owens and other Blue Dogs be encouraged by that or should they take that as a sign that the party is on and it’s okay to pass all the progressive legislation. I’ll let them decide, but my guess is they are not going to touch Obamacare or Cap-and-trade with a 10 foot pole.
The second take away here also serves as as warning to the Republican Party. There is very clearly some dissension amongst the GOP as evidenced by the inter-party squabble that happened in NY-23. Party machinery gave the liberal Republican the nomination and then the NRSC made the situation worse by endorsing Scozzafava and pouring a reported $900,000 into the race. You had all sorts of squishy Republicans like Newt Gingrich who also defended that decision and then it all came apart, starting with the endorsement of Hoffman by Sarah Palin.
The important lesson here which the GOP has reportedly taken to heart is that the NRSC and the national party needs to stay out of local elections. Let the people of that district or that state decide who they want to run in the primary. The fact that the NRSC has already endorsed Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio is a crying shame. Regardless of who you favor, the NRSC needs to keep their nose out of Florida’s business.
If the GOP hopes to make gains in the House or the Senate in 2010, the opportunity is there. However, in order to do so the have to do a couple of things. First and foremost they have to have a message. If they run on the “we’re not Obama” platform, they lose. That is not a message that is going to work. Conservatives and the GOP have to come up with a clear, concise platform like the ‘94 Republicans did with the Contract with America.
The second thing the GOP has to do is get some leadership. Right now it’s like a rudderless ship, Michael Steele has not been very effective and there is no real national, unifying voice. Actually, there is, Sarah Palin is about the closest thing we have to a national figure, but she isn’t running for any office in 2010, or maybe ever. I don’t know if that voice is Eric Cantor, Jim DeMint, Bobby Jindal or what, but someone has to stand up and take control of this party.
Finally, the GOP has to come together, moderates like Frum and Brooks need to keep their pie-holes shut and let the Conservatives have a voice. Most Republicans describe themselves as conservatives, we’re not all north-eastern liberal Republicans like Brooks is. Secondly, the conservatives of the party need to quit throwing hissy fits every time some RINO makes their way on the ballot. Yes we all hate RINOs, but in some jurisdictions that’s the best we can hope for. I’d rather have a squishy RINO then a Democrat any day. I know that is what the NRSC was thinking when they endorsed Scozzafava, but she was beyond a RINO, she was a progressive through and through.
If all these things happen and if Obama keeps bumbling along as he has been doing, I think there are great things in store for the GOP in 2010. If not, well, back to the drawing board . . . Bull Moose Party anyone?
November 4th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Bryan, I agree with most of what you said. All election are local and you can easily make inferences that are NOT accurate. I think to some extent the elections were a referendum on Obama but it is hard to say HOW MUCH.
The GOP needs to be able to work out their differences. Social conservatives are blamed by moderates and social conservatives accuse too many of being RINO’s.
To stay united we need to focus on a consistent message of small government, less taxes, fewer regulations and allow some dissent about social issues and in some areas to downplay the social issues while in other areas ( the south ) to be more agressive. Pushing federalism where the states decide these issues is out best strategy.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
The election results mean nothing to me because I do not live in Virginia. I do not care about the fortunes of the GOP, except I hope they go down the tubes even more so than they have. What the GOP stands for–privilege and wealth–is just the opposite of what America stands for. The only way the GOP has ever had any success has been through lies and subterfuge. We’ll see what happens in 2010, how well Fox News is able to sway the opinion of all the stupid people who live in this country, the people who don’t even realize who is truly on their side. Some dude from Australia sure ain’t.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
What the GOP stands for–privilege and wealth- KLO
that is simply not true
November 4th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
klo,
Don’t let facts get in the way of steroetypes
http://yesbuthowever.com/democrats-now-the-party-of-the-rich-and-poor-8136154/
November 4th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
On our side? I am not rich, I make 15-20k a year only. However what you and all the people who beat down on the rich forget is rich do not pay when there taxes go up we do, when microsoft was sued the price of windows went up to pay for it, and when obama got elected the once a year raise i was getting got tossed out the door due to fear of more taxes on the company. These “rich” are the people who pay the poor and the middle class, yes people who steal there riches need to be stoped but who is doing that not obama not the GOP no one. Lastlly I will be glad to see anyone who votes agenst obama care winning elections, medicare and medicade is prime examples of why this needs to be stoped, recentally my grandmother has came down with cancer, a cancer that took 4 weeks to find due to test orders set up bye medicade cause as it was told to me Medicade requires doctors to run the cheep test first even if the more expinsive test can find things faster. GoP is for the “Rich”, Dem’s are for the lazy dead beats who want everything handed to them, who is out there for the hard worker’s who do there best to provide for there famillys with out the governments help?
November 4th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
I think the dems have to popularize their message. bho didnt get elected, I think, to put a bunch of bankers, who caused to a great degree the fiscal mess that we’re in, into the white house. Let the dogs loose on the economy in the h of r; have them pretend to care about the poor and the middle class the way that they care about the wealthy.
Then, when the media cries, tell them to go south. That tactic worked during the 08 primary season, when virtually all the big deal media was pushing billary. Stop being cozy with all of the insiders so that normal people think they have a stake in the outcome.
Luckily for me, I’m in a position where economically, I dont much care what either party does; they can’t do anything to me that I can’t deal with.
Luckily for republican party, there isnt much chance that the dems would ever do anything against the wealthy and for the middle that isnt primarily symbolic.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:08 am
The results mean people are not stupid. Even those naive sheep who followed Obama see that he is just another self-loving politician.
This is how Obama is trying to solve the problem with health uninsured : force them to buy coverage. If they refuse - penalty or go to jail. Problem solved.
I say: he can solve the unemployment problem the same way. Just make mandatory for everybody to have a job. Those who don’t work cost us all lots of money. Get a job or pay a penalty. Decision making the Obama style.
Obama can even make Peace mandatory and earn his Nobel Prize.
Thank you for reading my post.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Obama would never do that Ellie, but he will make it mandatory that you have health insurance or you’ll pay a big fine. Force people to work? Naw, that’s crazy talk.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
I can just tell you that it’s going to be good next year. And Pelosi still says she won. She can’t just say that hey we haven’t being doing very well and we need some improvements, but no they think they won. Do to a botched race for congress.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
You all can analyze this all you want. What it really means is that the peeps are slowly catching on to the jug-eared little basta*d and his commie friends.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Bryan, I agree it is a crazy talk, but it is the same logic Obama uses to make health insurance mandatory.
Dems say the uninsured cost us a lot of money - this is the excuse to force mandatory insurance. Obama proposal for mandate is not solving the uninsured people’s problem. He just mandates the uninsured to stop being a problem.
The same logic used to unemployment: People who do not work cost us money. Make employment mandatory. It is crazy. The health insurance mandate is as crazy. Most of people don’t have insurance because they are out of work.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Eillie, yep, I can’t argue with anything you said. In fact, the whole Democrat Health plan does nothing to address actual costs. That’s because liberal fiscal policy (if such a thing exists) has no basis in reality or economic law. It is based upon fantasy, “caring” and greed. Greed that people want something for nothing. If you want health-insurance work your ass off for it. Get a second job, cancel the cable bill, do something, it can be had.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
actually it does address some costs.
you have to pay $1 per month at a minimum for abortion services for all women
November 5th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
i predict obamacare will pass the house soon, when is the vote? is it tomorrow?
it will be a replay of cap and trade with just enough votes to pass and as many blue dogs as possible voting “no” just to gain cover.
i just wonder how many reps will vote for it?
November 5th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
the vote is scheduled for saturday.
the funny thing is all americans will be required to get insurance.
however, illegal aliens will not be required to buy insurance.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
It’s the ultimate ponzi scheme, all the hard working, legal workers get to provide for the freeloaders and illegals, it’s a great system we got here eh?
November 5th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
America’s have been in need of a tune-up for decades. We are now getting it from a number of fronts. Bottom line……get up off your A**es and pay attention to who is running for office and VOTE.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
The whole health care reform is an attempt to secure more money coming from healthy people and more money being paid by the sick people. Instead of fixing the hole on the bottom of the sack they are going to pour more tax dollars into it. The heavier the load - the bigger the hole. The trick is to position “friends” to collect the money sipping from the ripped bag.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
That’s about the size of it Ellie.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Joe Wilson was right.
abortion will be covered
illegals will be covered
Obama is a LIAR.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Was there any doubt that abortion and coverage for illegals would be included? Of course Obama lied, that’s what he does.. In some ways I almost hope the House does pass this monstrosity. Two reasons, it has almost no chance of passing the Senate and it will make it that much easier for us to take the House back next fall. Beware any of you Blue Dogs, you will lose your job if it passes, even if you vote against it. All Democrats are going to get blamed if it gets passed and you’ll get the same that Corzine got.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Right you are Bryan Mc. It’s suicide for the dems.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
I wonder how the Fort Hood massacre will affect the vote. Dems will have to postpone the vote after such a sensitive attack in a homeland military base. People will be paying attention to the news. Dems don’t have the guts to slip the health care on Saturday. They were hoping nobody will notice.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Interesting, you really think that this Ft. Hood thing will postpone the vote? If the vote is delayed I bet it has more to do with the fact that Pelosi doesn’t have the numbers more then this Ft. Hood event.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Pelosi doesn’t have the numbers - I agree. Fort Hood is a good excuse to postpone the vote, because it is perceived as a kind of Muslim terrorist attack /although it probably is some crazy idiot/. Perception is of a terrorist act - first after 9/11. Obama calls it act of violence, but looks like it was motivated by Islamic ideology and believes of the man and his disagreement with the policies of the US in Iraq and Afganistan - pretty much terrorist act in the mind of the regular people. Obama will label it as law enforcement issue, but people will not buy the politically correct definition of the act.