By DHinMI
Congratulations to new governors elect Tim Kaine and John Corzine. Much will be spun on potentential national implications, with Dems saying these were referendums on Bush and the Republicans, Republicans saying they hinged on local concerns in VA or that Forrester ran a bad campaign in NJ. And both sides are right.
But for a "purer" indication of what today's elections mean, we'll probably need to wait until later Wednesday, when we can get a full accounting for what happened in the legislative races. In 2004 Democrats posted a national net gain of 64 legislative seats, and flipped control of more chambers than the Republicans. When you compensate for the Texas redistricting, the Congressional outcome was a net zero. We lost Seats in the Senate, but in places where Dems haven't done well in Presidential years, primarily in the South. And an incumbent President barely topped 50%. Hardly a transforming election in terms of the message from the electorate.
But we're probably coming up on a major, landmark election. It won't be a transforming election like we had in the period of 1932-36. But it could certainly be an election that breaks the back of the majority party's momentum, like 1966 when the backlash against LBJ cut short the Great Society reforms, or 1938 when FDR's court packing ended the Second New Deal. But unlike those elections, when Dems lost dozens of Congressional seats but still easily held control (because their majorities were over 100 seats), this would be a backlash against a narrow majority that acted like they had a 100 seat majority when in fact it's majority was only 30 seats.
An early indicator of whether we're on pace for a landmark election will be the legislative races. Dems hold both chambers of the NJ legislature, Repubs both chambers of the VA legislature. There's almost no way the VA House of Delegates will flip; the Republican held a 61-37 majority. But Kagro X's whack-job delegate lost in previously solidly Republican Loudoun County, and he lost big, so it's possible the Republican majority could be dramatically cut. And if we see significant losses--like a Dem gain of more than 6-8 seats--it would be safe to say the Republican troubles went beyond a bad campaign or weak candidate at the top of the ticket. In New Jersey, where Dem troubles with corruption charges stemming back to the McGreevey administration administration were supposed to hurt Corzine, any gains would probably hold significant meaning.
So, celebrate a nice pair of top-of-the-ticket wins in the gubernatorial races, and a very heartening win for gay rights in Maine. But if you want to know if there was any significant national meaning in Tuesday's results, look for those legislative results.
My quick count suggests it will end 39-56 with 5 independent or other party candidates winning. Not a big pick-up. My methodology was to scroll through the results as fast as I could, so it's possible I made a mistake or two. I didn't slow down enough to note whether there were significant numbers of precincts unreported in any race.
Posted by: falcone | November 09, 2005 at 01:37
1938 when FDR's court packing ended the Second New Deal.
I assume you mean FDR's attempted court packing? And was the bad Dem year really attributable to that? FDR's plan fell apart and then Justice van Devanter retired in the middle of `37, rendering it moot.
Maybe I'm not as up on my history as I should be, but was court-packing alone really such a huge national issues a year and a half later?
Posted by: DavidNYC | November 09, 2005 at 01:37
Looks to me like the Dems' net gain was one seat, while one independent also knocked off a GOPer. Not much motion in the ocean, as they say.
Posted by: DavidNYC | November 09, 2005 at 01:52
The motion is an undercurrent.:
Motion enough for me. My district got the job done.
Posted by: Kagro X | November 09, 2005 at 08:43
Let me also repeat for the record that the Republicans spent an enormous amount of money defending Dick Black's seat in a solidly GOP county, and lost.
As I've reported elsewhere, I was robo-polled and robo-called four times by Grover Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform on this single Delegate race. Why?
I also received two versions of the cut-and-paste "Tim Kaine" abortion calls, put out by "Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC," which turns out to be wholly funded by the Republican Governors' Association. How many millions were wasted on that?
Until this morning, I thought the "contest every district" crowd would have been shouting from the rooftops about that, no matter what the numbers showed in terms of control of the legislature. But key members of that team have less to celebrate today than we do, because they unfortunately committed themselves to advocating Tim Kaine's defeat. And why? Because he embarrassed a blogger by removing his ads.
So, where's this whole blogosphere thing going, folks?
Posted by: Kagro X | November 09, 2005 at 09:47
Let Me tell you about St. Paul Minnesota. Backstory and all.
Till Yesterday, the Mayor was Randy Kelly who had a 35 year history in the State Legislature as a Conservative DFL'er, and who was recruited by recently re-baptized Norm Coleman, retiring Mayor of St. Paul to run for his place in 2001. Kelly won narrowly.
In 2002, Kelly decided not to endorse in the Senate Race -- Wellstone versus Norm Coleman. Then when Wellstone died, he suddenly endorsed Norm Coleman against Mondale. Pulled local party assets out at the last minute contributing to Mondale's loss.
OK -- Brilliant. So in 2004 Kelly decides that even though he still claims to be a DFL'er, he will endorse Goerge Bush on the grounds that if the President and administration in DC is Republican, you need Juice in DC. In a sense it keeps the bill collector away from the door, as with the Hockey team on strike, the new arena that Norm Coleman built is way in the red, and lots of Presidential visits that use the venue help the bottom line.
So then comes Mayor Re-election day. His opponent was Chris Coleman (no relationship to Norm) -- Chris is related to the former Majority leader of the State Senate, and he is a former city council member. Given what they talked as issues during the campaign, not much difference. Except that small matter of being joined at the hip with Norm Coleman and endorsing George Bush.
Results -- one of the biggest landslides in Minnesota History. Chris Coleman won by 30 points. Turn out in St. Paul was twice what it was in the rest of the state.
Give folk a way to say what they mean and they will take it. St. Paul is a moderately conservative DFL city -- it was Gene McCarthy's base when he served in the House -- it is Catholic and Irish. But break DFL ranks overtly, and even the best of the Irish get sent home down by thirty.
Out here in the heartland there is a backlash and it is huge. We need to comprehend all of its dynamics.
Posted by: Sara | November 09, 2005 at 13:27
Well, Sara, as sombody whose grandfather was known to everyone as Paddy, I know a thing or two about the Irish penchant for grudges; Irish Alzheimers, after all, is when the only thing you can remember are the grudges.
And it looks like the good citizens got all Irish on Mayor Kelly in a way that any good Irishman would regret.
Sometimes loyalty is a negative, as with Bush's refusal to fire anyone in his administration who's screwed up. But other times loyalty is something to be honored and celebrated. This is obviously a case of the latter.
Posted by: DHinMI | November 09, 2005 at 16:28
Very good post. Did you share it with daily kos? You should.
Posted by: Armando | November 09, 2005 at 20:51