NY-23 Special Election: November 3, 2009

[ag]

I mean political and ideological space. A two-party system needs two parties. Republicans are loosing in their last remaining natural strongholds in NY - and they barely have any places left that could be called their strongholds in New England.  They are simply leaving an opening for a challenge for the role of the opposition.

And no, it's not the same as Dems in the South. Between minorities, northern transplants and university/urban liberals Dems have enough support almost everywhere in the region to ensure that they are safe as the second party. Republicans in the "core Northeast" are fast approaching the point where that's not the case.

Republicans won the NJ governors' race and Westchester NY County Executive race.  They've given the supposedly popular up-and-coming Nassau County NY Executive the run for his life - and may end up beating him.  They hold the governorships in Connecticut, Vermont and Rhode Island, and US Senate Seats in Maine and New Hampshire.

Republicans are far from being unsafe as the second party in the "core Northeast" - on the federal or state levels.  In fact, signs in the local races this election point to a Republican rebirth in the NYC suburbs. Chris Dodd should be very wary.

The fact that VT has a Republican governor, who won every single county last year, actually illustrates my point rather than refuting it. Note: these are all local Republicans, winning in state-level or lower races. None of these Republicans would have to be part of R caucus in Washington or forced to take into account national party positions.  Generally, the way to succeed in the region is to project a political personality independent of the national party. Still, even the local parties aren't doing too well: in VT, RI and CT Republicans don't have enough legislative seats to sustain a veto. In fact, out of 14 legislative chambers in NY-NE Republicans control none and have a third of the seats or more, I believe, only  in 5.

Yes, so far there is no danger of marginalization in NY suburbs (and NJ is a different story all-together, it is Mid Atlantic).  However, when out of 51 House seats in NY-NE Republicans control 2, it's a sign of grave trouble.

Don't get me wrong: US party system is so stable that I won't give more than a 10% chance for a regional-party challenge to actually displace Republicans (though I am getting more and more convinced, attempts to do so will be becoming more frequent). However, unless the local Republican parties disassociate themselves from the national Republican politics in the eyes of their voters, they will be functioning under a severe handicap. Democracy needs, at least, two parties, and in NY-NE there are now 1.5.

[Lunar]

We actually had a discussion about this in my College Repub group a couple weeks ago - why we're performing terribly in the Northeast - and it's because Palin Repubs come in and don't like the Vermont/NY/ME-style Repubs and characterize them as RINOs.  Heck - if you vote with the party 50.000001% of the time - even if it's only 1 vote more with the party than with the Dems - I'll take you over a hard core Dem.

Actually voting with the party 50% of the time would be a lot more than a 1 vote difference over a 0% hardcore Democrat.

[Alexander Hamilton]

We actually had a discussion about this in my College Repub group a couple weeks ago - why we're performing terribly in the Northeast - and it's because Palin Repubs come in and don't like the Vermont/NY/ME-style Repubs and characterize them as RINOs.  Heck - if you vote with the party 50.000001% of the time - even if it's only 1 vote more with the party than with the Dems - I'll take you over a hard core Dem.

Actually voting with the party 50% of the time would be a lot more than a 1 vote difference over a 0% hardcore Democrat.

He said if it's only one more vote for the Republican side than the Democrat side. Not what you said.

[Lunar]

Folks, just as a minor point - there could be notable differences between incumbent challenges and open-seat elections right now.

It would explain a lot.

the Democrats are still straddled with that rotten egg known as VA though.

but that's a great point. 

[Sam Spade]

Folks, just as a minor point - there could be notable differences between incumbent challenges and open-seat elections right now.

It would explain a lot.

the Democrats are still straddled with that rotten egg known as VA though.

but that's a great point. 

Well, as I noted above, I still think the South/Appalachia is acting differently than the rest of the country right now.  That would explain Virginia.

Just how much differently I don't know.  But at present, today's results do not signal a wave forming, outside of the South/Appalachia, where the possibility of a regional wave is a good bit stronger.

Expect my House/Senate rankings to take this into account.

[Governor, Fmr. Chairman, Fmr. Judge, & Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

We actually had a discussion about this in my College Repub group a couple weeks ago - why we're performing terribly in the Northeast - and it's because Palin Repubs come in and don't like the Vermont/NY/ME-style Repubs and characterize them as RINOs.  Heck - if you vote with the party 50.000001% of the time - even if it's only 1 vote more with the party than with the Dems - I'll take you over a hard core Dem.

Actually voting with the party 50% of the time would be a lot more than a 1 vote difference over a 0% hardcore Democrat.

My point was - I'll take whoever sides with me more, even if it's only by 1 vote out of 1,000.

[Lunar]

I know what you meant, but I was simply pointing out that 50% [what most activists find unacceptable] is actually a hell of a lot if the alternative is likely 0%.

Folks, just as a minor point - there could be notable differences between incumbent challenges and open-seat elections right now.

It would explain a lot.

the Democrats are still straddled with that rotten egg known as VA though.

but that's a great point.  

Well, as I noted above, I still think the South/Appalachia is acting differently than the rest of the country right now.  That would explain Virginia.

Just how much differently I don't know.  But at present, today's results do not signal a wave forming, outside of the South/Appalachia, where the possibility of a regional wave is a good bit stronger.

Expect my House/Senate rankings to take this into account.

I assume McDonnell still demolished Deeds in the more Northern-oriented suburbs and whatnot too.  But Deeds actual margin of victory was exaggerated by a demoralized base and poorly run campaign.

If you're right, the GOP will have solid shots at both West Virginia and Arkansas (the former is obviously assuming something, but they have a decent candidate waiting in the wings in WV), and is not in as much trouble in LA, NC, KY, MO, etc.  Florida...I'm not sure how that figures this late at night due to the GOP primary.  My suspicion is that Rubio would beat Meek even if he is successful in primarying Crist. 

I'll tell you what though, Chris Dodd isn't going to like those results in New Jersey tonight.

[Mr.Phips]

I know what you meant, but I was simply pointing out that 50% [what most activists find unacceptable] is actually a hell of a lot if the alternative is likely 0%.

Folks, just as a minor point - there could be notable differences between incumbent challenges and open-seat elections right now.

It would explain a lot.

the Democrats are still straddled with that rotten egg known as VA though.

but that's a great point.  

Well, as I noted above, I still think the South/Appalachia is acting differently than the rest of the country right now.  That would explain Virginia.

Just how much differently I don't know.  But at present, today's results do not signal a wave forming, outside of the South/Appalachia, where the possibility of a regional wave is a good bit stronger.

Expect my House/Senate rankings to take this into account.

I assume McDonnell still demolished Deeds in the more Northern-oriented suburbs and whatnot too.  But Deeds actual margin of victory was exaggerated by a demoralized base and poorly run campaign.

If you're right, the GOP will have solid shots at both West Virginia and Arkansas (the former is obviously assuming something, but they have a decent candidate waiting in the wings in WV), and is not in as much trouble in LA, NC, KY, MO, etc.  Florida...I'm not sure how that figures this late at night due to the GOP primary.  My suspicion is that Rubio would beat Meek even if he is successful in primarying Crist. 

I'll tell you what though, Chris Dodd isn't going to like those results in New Jersey tonight.

The New Jersey results were really more anti-Corzine than anything else.  If you look down ballot, Democrats pretty much held steady. 

[Governor, Fmr. Chairman, Fmr. Judge, & Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

50.01% is always acceptable when the alternative is 49.99%.

Now, would I like it to be 100% (with my views, not the party's - since I differ with the party on several issues)?  Sure.  Will that ever happen? No.

[cinyc]

Scozzafava's support in the unofficial results may have been transposed or aggregated with Hoffman or Owens' in at least 3 Monroe County and 1 Jefferson County precincts - the two counties where precinct-level data is available.  For example, it's unlikely she received 154 votes in Wilna 21-05 (Jefferson) when her next highest total in any Jefferson precinct was 36.  Ditto Sullivan-02, Fenner and Hamilton-03 (Madison), where she supposedly received 251, 248 and 79 votes, respectively, despite not receiving more than 36 votes in the rest of the county.  Hoffman supposedly received 0 votes in those precincts.

Assuming those votes are Hoffman's, that would net him 725 votes (he supposedly received 7 votes in Wilna 21-05).

In Jefferson County, Hoffman also supposedly received 0 votes in Alexandria (02-03), Leray (11-05),  Philadelphia (16-02), Watertown City (13-02) and Watertown City (14-02).  I doubt that.  Lyme (13-01) hasn't reported, despite the AP claiming county results are all-in.

Unless this pattern persists in other counties, the result won't change.  But Hoffman's tally should go up a bit at the expense of Scozzafava - at least until absentees are added.

I'm still trying to unravel the Hamilton and Fulton county mysteries - where Scozzafava received double-digit support.  Neither county's website separately reports results - so all we have is the AP tally.  AP reports 20/24 precincts reporting in Fulton, yet turnout would be an abysmal 13.78% if true.  Maybe the largest towns are still out.  

According to the APs tally, the percentage turnout in Hamilton County actually slightly exceeded 2006 CD turnout, which is a bit bizarre.  It's the only county where that's true so far.  Perhaps they've already counted absentees.  It's a very small county.

[Sam Spade]

Folks, just as a minor point - there could be notable differences between incumbent challenges and open-seat elections right now.

It would explain a lot.

the Democrats are still straddled with that rotten egg known as VA though.

but that's a great point.  

Well, as I noted above, I still think the South/Appalachia is acting differently than the rest of the country right now.  That would explain Virginia.

Just how much differently I don't know.  But at present, today's results do not signal a wave forming, outside of the South/Appalachia, where the possibility of a regional wave is a good bit stronger.

Expect my House/Senate rankings to take this into account.

I assume McDonnell still demolished Deeds in the more Northern-oriented suburbs and whatnot too.  But Deeds actual margin of victory was exaggerated by a demoralized base and poorly run campaign.

Well, McDonnell did get 52% in Fairfax County and, as I pointed out before, the map looks scary similar to another historical map.  In other words, it feels like Independent/moderate movement to me

2009 PRELIMINARY



MYSTERY MAP



How much better do you think a properly-run Dem campaign could have gotten in terms of # of votes and %?  

In raw numbers, the actual number of voters who turned out is likely going to be exactly the same as 2005 - 2.1 million.  

There is some slight variation in the numbers - more voters turned out in Republican-leaning exurb counties than in Democratic-leaning center cities, but I doubt any additional turnout a la 2005 would amount to more than a couple of percent statewide, at most.  Coal country turnout was awful compared to 2005, but that doesn't matter in the numbers.

If you're right, the GOP will have solid shots at both West Virginia and Arkansas (the former is obviously assuming something, but they have a decent candidate waiting in the wings in WV), and is not in as much trouble in LA, NC, KY, MO, etc.  Florida...I'm not sure how that figures this late at night due to the GOP primary.  My suspicion is that Rubio would beat Meek even if he is successful in primarying Crist. 

I'll tell you what though, Chris Dodd isn't going to like those results in New Jersey tonight.

WV isn't up next year.  I already think Lincoln is probably dead in the water.  I am generally unsure on my Appalachia observation - it just feels like that is what is going on, but it could just be low turnout.  I want a special Congressional election before being sure.  I am dead sure on the South, especially the rural South.

Another point of observation to watch now that I think of it - formerly GOP suburbs in the South and Southwest that moved to the Dems during the 2005-2008 period (especially the South).  Pretty much all suburbs in VA would fall into this category.  This would also mean - watch Colorado and Nevada (maybe New Mexico too).

I agree on Chris Dodd.

[Tender Branson]

More of St. Lawrence in. Updated figures:

Owens: 49.4%
Hoffman: 45.0%
Dede: 5.6%

[cinyc]

This explains the low Fulton County numbers:

NewsChannel 9 has learned voting machines in Fulton County, which is a part of the 23rd Congressional District, have been impounded, after the machines were not working property, the Fulton County Board of Elections confirms.

The county was forced to switch over to paper ballots.

They were not planning on counting any votes Tuesday night. We’re told by the Board of Elections, the paper ballots cannot be touched until the absentee ballots are opened a week from Tuesday.

--Snip--

[cinyc]

Last snapshot tonight, with 92.86% in (or likely, less - I don't believe the AP's claim that 83% of Fulton County is in with 13.8% turnout):

[Mr. Allan Abraham]

it just feels like that is what is going on, but it could just be low turnout.

Well in practice there may not be a massive difference between sharp swings of actual voters and depressed turnout - especially if the latter holds as a medium-term pattern (though it's too early to say on that, obviously) - even if the emotions behind the two are quite different.