MaxedOutMama
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
The Fat Man's Got Coattails
This is some pretty major ass-whup.
The governorships are way more important than people think, and they are rolling hard GOP.
But looking at some of these crossover (suburban/urban) districts in places like NJ, I'd say this is a major and persistent turn. MSNBC has the best map.
When the rustbelt goes red, the Dems are in trouble. Major trouble. Michigan opted for a Republican governor and a bunch of the House seems to be turning red.
This isn't a temporary thing. There's not much that will do this except property and state taxes which just flip the electorate in some places. And what's going to change by 2012? See, once the stable center starts to feel economically threatened by taxation from any level, they flip tax-averse local, state and federal. It's a correlator.
That's the Reagan Democrats, resurrected.
As for the South - well, I guess DU is going to have to start cussing and demanding secession again, but this time they'll have to pack up Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and probably PA to send off with the TEAFederacy. There won't be much left of the progressive bloc.
This reprise of the War Between The States appears to be likely to have a very different ending.
In 2008, thin, stylish, glib and gloriously innumerate was in. In 2010 and 2012, apparently out-of-shape, blunt, aggressive nerds are in. Snyder in MI literally ran a nerd campaign.
Maureen Dowd will never, ever figure this one out. Because she'd have to date Chris Christie to catch a clue, and he's married, and I think he and his wife are quite close. So no dice.
PS: The underlying election was much more red than shows in the national numbers. See, for example, this DU thread.
There was never any way I could see that the GOP could take the Senate. Mostly it was Republican seats up for re-election in the Senate, because the Dems gained over the last two election cycles so there were far more Republican seats up for reelection than Dems even with the lopsided Dem Senate majority.
There were 40 Dem residual Senate seats to 23 residual Senate seats. This should have meant that Republicans would lose an additional seat or two, but given the wave they gained big. Currently it's 51-46 with three open. I figured the Rs would be lucky indeed to come out with 47 and they may get that. With bloc union voting for the Dems, it is very difficult to unseat many Democratic senators.
And how could Reid possibly lose? Because the unions are all looking for federal bailouts to preserve jobs and pensions, they will be a powerful force in the next three elections. And they'll be a powerful Democratic force. Unfortunately for the Dems, the rest of the population is going to be frantic to avoid losing their Social Security by shifting federal funding toward state, local and private unions, so this will be a brawl to the death.
However in 2012, the math will shift favorably toward GOP gains in the Senate.
PPS: I forgot by far the best election story. Reversing the "better red than dead" motto of their youths, the CA liberal electorate chose a dead Dem over a live Republican.
The governorships are way more important than people think, and they are rolling hard GOP.
But looking at some of these crossover (suburban/urban) districts in places like NJ, I'd say this is a major and persistent turn. MSNBC has the best map.
When the rustbelt goes red, the Dems are in trouble. Major trouble. Michigan opted for a Republican governor and a bunch of the House seems to be turning red.
This isn't a temporary thing. There's not much that will do this except property and state taxes which just flip the electorate in some places. And what's going to change by 2012? See, once the stable center starts to feel economically threatened by taxation from any level, they flip tax-averse local, state and federal. It's a correlator.
That's the Reagan Democrats, resurrected.
As for the South - well, I guess DU is going to have to start cussing and demanding secession again, but this time they'll have to pack up Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and probably PA to send off with the TEAFederacy. There won't be much left of the progressive bloc.
This reprise of the War Between The States appears to be likely to have a very different ending.
In 2008, thin, stylish, glib and gloriously innumerate was in. In 2010 and 2012, apparently out-of-shape, blunt, aggressive nerds are in. Snyder in MI literally ran a nerd campaign.
Maureen Dowd will never, ever figure this one out. Because she'd have to date Chris Christie to catch a clue, and he's married, and I think he and his wife are quite close. So no dice.
PS: The underlying election was much more red than shows in the national numbers. See, for example, this DU thread.
There was never any way I could see that the GOP could take the Senate. Mostly it was Republican seats up for re-election in the Senate, because the Dems gained over the last two election cycles so there were far more Republican seats up for reelection than Dems even with the lopsided Dem Senate majority.
There were 40 Dem residual Senate seats to 23 residual Senate seats. This should have meant that Republicans would lose an additional seat or two, but given the wave they gained big. Currently it's 51-46 with three open. I figured the Rs would be lucky indeed to come out with 47 and they may get that. With bloc union voting for the Dems, it is very difficult to unseat many Democratic senators.
And how could Reid possibly lose? Because the unions are all looking for federal bailouts to preserve jobs and pensions, they will be a powerful force in the next three elections. And they'll be a powerful Democratic force. Unfortunately for the Dems, the rest of the population is going to be frantic to avoid losing their Social Security by shifting federal funding toward state, local and private unions, so this will be a brawl to the death.
However in 2012, the math will shift favorably toward GOP gains in the Senate.
PPS: I forgot by far the best election story. Reversing the "better red than dead" motto of their youths, the CA liberal electorate chose a dead Dem over a live Republican.
Comments:
<< Home
What this tells me is that short term thinking will
override planning for the long haul. My guess is that
House Republicans will over reach on social issues
and side with business on economic issues. No new taxes, but no policies to help American labor.
Sporkfed
override planning for the long haul. My guess is that
House Republicans will over reach on social issues
and side with business on economic issues. No new taxes, but no policies to help American labor.
Sporkfed
# posted by 
: 4:59 AM
: 4:59 AM
Re nerd campaign: reminds me of the old joke.
Q: What do you call a nerd after you graduate?
A: "Boss."
It makes me happy to know that a nerd candidate has finally won office. It gives me hope for the rest of nerd-kind, including myself. Perhaps my children (who are nerd-geek hybrids) may one day be able to overcome anti-nerd prejudice. ;)
Q: What do you call a nerd after you graduate?
A: "Boss."
It makes me happy to know that a nerd candidate has finally won office. It gives me hope for the rest of nerd-kind, including myself. Perhaps my children (who are nerd-geek hybrids) may one day be able to overcome anti-nerd prejudice. ;)
Spork and John - I have no clue what is likely to happen. It will be very interesting to see if the GOP leadership can pay attention to the voters.
The voters said they elected a party that they distrust and dislike. It's thin ice for the GOP unless those people really work hard to get something done for the people.
Anything could happen in 2012, but a tax-and-spend set of policies aren't going to win it.
People are craving good and serious government. We do have the low expectations.
I think the GOP and Obama might cooperate on some jobs-type issues. They both have an election in two years. But otherwise, it may be gridlock.
The voters said they elected a party that they distrust and dislike. It's thin ice for the GOP unless those people really work hard to get something done for the people.
Anything could happen in 2012, but a tax-and-spend set of policies aren't going to win it.
People are craving good and serious government. We do have the low expectations.
I think the GOP and Obama might cooperate on some jobs-type issues. They both have an election in two years. But otherwise, it may be gridlock.
Jaime Herrerra (r) took Brian Baird's old seat. And there are still two too close to call races out here--the Murray/Rossi dustup in WA state and the Oregon governorship--Kitzhaber/Dudley. Both of those would have easily gone Dem in a normal year. It will likely be weeks before those two races are sorted out.
And WA state managed to see through the "income tax for the rich" that they tried to sneak through.
And WA state managed to see through the "income tax for the rich" that they tried to sneak through.
Teri,
I think the West Coast is toast. During the big campaigns in California, and the ones you mention, the Democrat candidates explicitly ran on a "more of the same" platform. More taxes, more spending, more Federal power. Most anywhere else in the country they'd have lost badly, but they won handily in CA, and are at 50% in OR and WA.
That speaks of an electorate that is either unable or unwilling to reverse course before the system crashes.
I think the West Coast is toast. During the big campaigns in California, and the ones you mention, the Democrat candidates explicitly ran on a "more of the same" platform. More taxes, more spending, more Federal power. Most anywhere else in the country they'd have lost badly, but they won handily in CA, and are at 50% in OR and WA.
That speaks of an electorate that is either unable or unwilling to reverse course before the system crashes.
In Minnesota we appear to have elected a depressive alcoholic dilettante department-store heir who promised to soak the wealthy (his money is safely in low-tax South Dakota). And we gave the Republicans control of both houses of the legislature for the first time in 40 years. Times are strange.
Neil, you're correct.
Out here we're waiting until King County, WA and Multnomah County, OR have found enough ballots in the backs of clerk's cars ...
Out here we're waiting until King County, WA and Multnomah County, OR have found enough ballots in the backs of clerk's cars ...
John - it's not finding the ballots, it's finding a variety of pens with which to mark them. You know how crappy most pens are now.
It looks odd when everybody used the same green felt-tip.
It looks odd when everybody used the same green felt-tip.
Gordon, aw, come on. Give more.
Teri, are people in WA digging in, or trying to dig out, or just wandering in confused circles?
Teri, are people in WA digging in, or trying to dig out, or just wandering in confused circles?
The plan and simple truth is both WA and OR are controlled by the cities. Multnomah county (where Portland, OR is) has 30% of the vote for the state. It's a similar deal in WA state, where Puget Sound (Seattle area) can overrule everything else. Plus, we have this interesting law, where the top two vote getter in the primary face runoff regardless of party. Makes it easier for Dems to face dems in the election.
It would be nice if the repubs could come up with someone else to run besides Rossi. He's not really someone I enjoy voting for.
Post a Comment
It would be nice if the repubs could come up with someone else to run besides Rossi. He's not really someone I enjoy voting for.
<< Home
