A "Special" Addiction
I love politics! Especially elections. And last night we were given the rare treat of an August special election between GOPer Jean Schmidt and Dem Paul Hackett for the US Congress seat in Ohio's 2nd District (near Cinci). Schmidt pulled off a 4 point victory winning 52-48. To put some perspective on this, Bush won with 64% and Rob Portman (our new Trade Rep and previous GOP officehoder in the 2nd) won with 70% in 2004. A large lead in a 'safe' seat was squandered. Today the Dems are glowing with happiness about how this sets up a political tsunami in 2006 that will be on par with 1974 and 1994. If the 12 generic GOP points squandered by Schmidt holds up nation wide, they are right.
But...
This election wasn't a referendum on Bush and the national GOP in particular. It was certainly an issue, but one of many. First, let's give some credit where credit is due. An old sports cliche is that the only important stat is W's. Last night the GOP put a W on the board and held an open seat. In real politique, the Dems gained no additional power last night.
This election was about...
The Iraq War - Hackett is an Iraq war vet. He is personally against the war and endeared himself to liberals with his harsh words of Bush and the war. This helped him raise beaucoup bucks as a minor cause celeb from the Dean/Micheal Moore wing of the left. Back in the 2nd, he ran clips of Bush praising the troups for serving and then coming onscreen to say how proud he was to answer that call. Hackett did a masterful job of using his views to raise money, and his biography of being a Marine vet to appeal to the GOP dominated and military sympathetic district.
This strategy may have worked had Rush Limbaugh not spent the bulk of his show exposing the contradictions, or the half million the NRCC dumped in the final days. If Dems could do this nation wide in multiple places, they can water down what Rush was able to accomplish by focusing his show on one election. However, how many anti-war, liberal, marine corp, Iraq vets can they recruit and run? My guess is not many. I would also consider this the largest factor in making this election close, but not a factor Dems can easily replicate in 2006.
The Suckiest Bunch of Sucks who ever Sucked (aka - The Ohio GOP Leadership) - Ohio has about the lousiest bunch of Republicans running their party and state. Sen. Voinovich is best known for crying on the senate floor - literally weeping - while discussing his opposition to Bush nominee John Bolton to the UN. Sen. Mike DeWine most recently made news when he joined the "Gang of 14" to give Harry Reid a victory in the Filibuster compromise. A few weeks later, his son Pat DeWine who had been leading the polls in the Republican primary for this very seat, dropped from 1st to a distant 3rd - all of which attributed to holding the name DeWine. Then there is Gov. Taft who led his legistlative majorities into a tax raising bonanza. Schmidt, being a good party girl and a bad conservative, voted for a few of these tax hikes.
This crappy GOP leadership has been a huge issue in Ohio and helped to suppress GOP turnout. In the GOP primary, there were 45,000 voters. In the actual election, the GOP recieved only 59,000. You generally expect a doubling or even tripling of turnout in the general over the primary. Hackett went from 15,000 in the primary to 55,000 in the general.
The Iraq war helped get Hackett votes, the GOP Leadership capped Schmidt's support. Unfortunately for the Dems, this is another condition that won't be replicated nation wide. In most states, the GOP leadership is fairly decent. Even in MN where Pawlenty caved to miniscule tax hikes on cigarettes - at least he caved and can point to Dean Johnson as the bad guy. Taft and the Ohio GOP led the charge for massive tax hikes. I'll give the Dems credit for creating these conditions in many states, but the antipathy found in Ohio is unique.
Open Seat and Special Elections- Open seats always tend to be closer. The fact that the GOP was not running an incumbent meant that the new GOPer would be hard pressed to perform as well as the popular incumbent. Since this was a special election, turnout would be low. This district averages 300,000 voters in Presidential years, 200,000 in off years, and this election only brought out 114,000. Those 114,000 tend to be harder left or right. If you can get your base out, you can win in any district. Even the dems who lost in the previous years 70-30 to Portman still had similiar vote totals as Schmidt. Now this is encouraging to Dems. It suggests that they won't have to work as hard to turn out their voters. GOP beware - the dems are motivated and will show up to vote.
But in the end, that's the only national advantage Dems currently have. Newsflash: Democrats vote for Democrats.
But...
This election wasn't a referendum on Bush and the national GOP in particular. It was certainly an issue, but one of many. First, let's give some credit where credit is due. An old sports cliche is that the only important stat is W's. Last night the GOP put a W on the board and held an open seat. In real politique, the Dems gained no additional power last night.
This election was about...
The Iraq War - Hackett is an Iraq war vet. He is personally against the war and endeared himself to liberals with his harsh words of Bush and the war. This helped him raise beaucoup bucks as a minor cause celeb from the Dean/Micheal Moore wing of the left. Back in the 2nd, he ran clips of Bush praising the troups for serving and then coming onscreen to say how proud he was to answer that call. Hackett did a masterful job of using his views to raise money, and his biography of being a Marine vet to appeal to the GOP dominated and military sympathetic district.
This strategy may have worked had Rush Limbaugh not spent the bulk of his show exposing the contradictions, or the half million the NRCC dumped in the final days. If Dems could do this nation wide in multiple places, they can water down what Rush was able to accomplish by focusing his show on one election. However, how many anti-war, liberal, marine corp, Iraq vets can they recruit and run? My guess is not many. I would also consider this the largest factor in making this election close, but not a factor Dems can easily replicate in 2006.
The Suckiest Bunch of Sucks who ever Sucked (aka - The Ohio GOP Leadership) - Ohio has about the lousiest bunch of Republicans running their party and state. Sen. Voinovich is best known for crying on the senate floor - literally weeping - while discussing his opposition to Bush nominee John Bolton to the UN. Sen. Mike DeWine most recently made news when he joined the "Gang of 14" to give Harry Reid a victory in the Filibuster compromise. A few weeks later, his son Pat DeWine who had been leading the polls in the Republican primary for this very seat, dropped from 1st to a distant 3rd - all of which attributed to holding the name DeWine. Then there is Gov. Taft who led his legistlative majorities into a tax raising bonanza. Schmidt, being a good party girl and a bad conservative, voted for a few of these tax hikes.
This crappy GOP leadership has been a huge issue in Ohio and helped to suppress GOP turnout. In the GOP primary, there were 45,000 voters. In the actual election, the GOP recieved only 59,000. You generally expect a doubling or even tripling of turnout in the general over the primary. Hackett went from 15,000 in the primary to 55,000 in the general.
The Iraq war helped get Hackett votes, the GOP Leadership capped Schmidt's support. Unfortunately for the Dems, this is another condition that won't be replicated nation wide. In most states, the GOP leadership is fairly decent. Even in MN where Pawlenty caved to miniscule tax hikes on cigarettes - at least he caved and can point to Dean Johnson as the bad guy. Taft and the Ohio GOP led the charge for massive tax hikes. I'll give the Dems credit for creating these conditions in many states, but the antipathy found in Ohio is unique.
Open Seat and Special Elections- Open seats always tend to be closer. The fact that the GOP was not running an incumbent meant that the new GOPer would be hard pressed to perform as well as the popular incumbent. Since this was a special election, turnout would be low. This district averages 300,000 voters in Presidential years, 200,000 in off years, and this election only brought out 114,000. Those 114,000 tend to be harder left or right. If you can get your base out, you can win in any district. Even the dems who lost in the previous years 70-30 to Portman still had similiar vote totals as Schmidt. Now this is encouraging to Dems. It suggests that they won't have to work as hard to turn out their voters. GOP beware - the dems are motivated and will show up to vote.
But in the end, that's the only national advantage Dems currently have. Newsflash: Democrats vote for Democrats.
posted by Bill Gilles | 11:01 AM
3 Comments:
Good posting. Now do one on the space situation, and the fact that this is the first time Americans have cared about non-tragic space travel since Apollo something.
Wow, an actual, readable, quality post.
What the Hell Gilles?
Did I read that correctly--you did some of your comparison calculations with a hybrid 4 cyl and a non-hybrid 6 cyl? That's apples and oranges.
Hell of a Saints game last night. See you in October.
Post a Comment
<< Home