Republican Jim Tedisco has conceded in the race to replace Kirsten Gillibrand in New York's 20th Congressional District, making Scott Murphy the newest Congressman from the Hudson Valley region.
Democrats, certainly, have reason to have an extra round of drinks tonight. But keep in mind the advice that I issued before:From an analytical standpoint, whether Scott Murphy remains ahead of Jim Tedisco after absentee ballots are counted (and that is anything but a sure thing) is largely immaterial. [...] When elections are decided by hundredths of a percentage point, there is a lot of luck involved.
That is, first, whether Murphy lost by 400 votes or won by 400 votes does not significantly alter the "meaning" of this election. If he had won by 40,000 votes, or 14,000 votes, or maybe even 4,000 votes, that might have required a different interpretation. But winning by a fraction of a point is not much different than losing by a fraction of a point.
[The] default expectation is that a district like NY-20 should indeed be a toss-up -- which is exactly what we wound up getting. The contest turned out about the same .... as we might have expected it to had it been held on November 4th.
The status quo, in other words, was more or less preserved.
And second, a very narrow victory (by either candidate!) is about par for the course in this district based on what we saw in 2006 and 2008. Now, that probably does qualify as good news for the Democrats, since 2006 and 2008 were very good elections for them. The party controlling the White House almost always loses ground in off-year elections, so merely preserving the conditions of 2006/08 would be a very good result for the Democrats. However, as Michael Barone suggested, NY-20 is a somewhat atypical district in which Obama may have had relatively few coattails, and therefore may not be a leading indicator for what Democrats can expect in 2010. These results need to be balanced against others post-election elections like LA-2 and the Georgia Senate runoff, which contained pretty good news for Republicans.
If there is a better reason for Democrats to feel cheerful this Friday, it is from the 1Q Senate fundraising totals. I didn't realize this when I posted those figures yesterday, but Democrats performed way better than Republicans across the board in the First Quarter, raising a collective $31 million (or $27 million if one does not count Texas, where there is not officially a senate race yet) to the Republicans' $12 million.
4.24.2009
Murphy Wins in NY-20: Let the Spin Begin!
@ 6:15 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
79 comments
First
Hmm, Maybe someone should send this article to Norm Coleman? Seems like he may be able to learn from it!
Is there any way to account for the facts that Murphy was a relative unknown while Tedisco was already an important politician?
Exactly, this should've been in the BAG for Tedisco. Name recognition, opponent virtually unknown, Republican district, and special elections (lower turnout) always favor Republicans. The fact that it was close with the GOP having a 5 star candidate is great news for Democrats.
Yeah, but it does bring up mixed feelings for me.
On the one hand, Michael Steele si a goner, and this will throw the GOP leadership into chaos for a while. Particularly if he thump the 'why not just make Rush your leader and drop all pretenses?" drum.
On the other hand, Steele was so easy to fuck with. He practically fucked with himself, and just needed a little nudge here and again to kick start the comedy hour whenever he showed up in the press. I'm kind of sad, because the next guy might not be as incompetent.
Paterson and Schumer really screwed the pooch when they shat on JFK's daughter and made this an open seat. Tedisco was the overwhelming favorite, Murphy was an unknown and considered a longshot. To close the gap took some doing. To win is some achievement, most of all for Murphy.
http://www.dailykostv.com/w/001229/
SHHHH! Sane thinking that this was a tie might let Steele keep his job! WE WON!
Pack your bags, Michael Steele!
@ PorridgeGun
Paterson and Schumer really screwed the pooch when they shat on JFK's daughterSchumer was involved in that fiasco?
PG,
I disagree. Turning Caroline Kennedy down is not shitting on JFK's memory any more than not appointing Andrew Cuomo would have been a slap in the face to Mario Cuomo.
If you think about it, while Andrew and Caroline are both legacy candidates, Andrew has political experience and something of a track record. Caroline doesn't have anything except the family name.
She,d come to hate the job, too. She's a very private person, and being a federal level elected official means you have to live in a fishbowl. And the press isn't going to take it easy on her just because she's rich and has a good family name. This is a bloodsport, not croquet.
An open contest was smart after the Blagojevich fallout. Frankly, I would like to see a complete end to all gubernatorial appointments to federal level Legislators. Look at the Roland Burris situation-he's massively in debt, deeply distrusted (even though he most likely hasn't done anything wrong), and is a sure bet to lose the primary fight in 2010. Murphy, despite having a limited amount of time to make his mark in DC, has at least managed to win an election against overwhelming odds-this works very well in his favor come 2010.
Listen, Caroline Kennedy is a fine human being, a good person who, if she works up a little bit of experience before she runs for office again, might make an excellent politician. As it stands right now, it looks to ordinary people like she expects to inherit power rather than earn it. Primogeniture is an old world form of political succession. We would do well not to employ it here.
Statler, the issue wasn't that Paterson didn't appoint Caroline Kennedy; it's that he was responsible for (and later admitted responsibility for and apologized for) leaking unnecessary deprecatory personal information about Caroline. I thought she lacked the requisite experience to be a qualified or likely good choice for the position, but I resented the ugliness of what Paterson and his staff did to her.
Living in NY-20 district, I had some numbers to crunch, thanks to a project that is compiling 2008 Presidential election results by congressional district.
While Obama squeaked by McCain by 10,000 votes, Gillibrand blew away her Republican opponant 62/38%. She outpolled Obama by 10,000 votes even though the congressional race received 38,000 votes than the presidential race.
So it appears that while NY-20 has a preponderance of Republican voters, they are voting R only on national or state-wide elections. The 38K discrepancy between the presidential and congressional vote may mean a couple of things: 1) people don't care as much about their Representative as they do about the president OR
2) The Republicans voted for McCain for President, but didn't couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Democrat, so they just didn't vote.
NY-20 might still be a R+1 district. But Gillibrand's record of beating a long term republican her first election and then blowing away her opponent in the 2008 election, means that NY-20 is going solidly blue or that incumbency trumps party loyalty.
If Murphy manages constituent services as well as Gillibrand did he'll have a leg up on the 2012 election. And we can be sure this district is going to get a little "pork" to keep NY-20 Blue for many election cycles.
Schumer is new yorks senior senator.During Hilary`s term,you wouldnt know it. She got all the attention and he grew very frustrated.Finally,he saw his chance in the spotlight when she was made sec. of state.He was horrified to see Cuomo and Kennedy being pushed for the seat.Once again he would have to take a back seat to these people even though he was senior. This was something he would not tolerate. He leaned heavily on Patterson to nominate Gillebrand knowing full well he would be able to dominate her and acheive all the glory he had for so long pursued
I'm betting intrade is going to have an option to bet on steel ether stepping down or getting 0 confidence voted out (whats the word for that?)
"That is, first, whether Murphy lost by 400 votes or won by 400 votes does not significantly alter the "meaning" of this election."
This strikes me as a narrow reading. Following redistricting, the 20th was a reliably Republican district until 2006, when Gillibrand trounced the incumbent. She won handily last fall, and now a relative unknown has held the fort (albeit narrowly). The 20th is shaping up as another lost Republican seat in the northeast.
This is another tightening of the Democratic boa constrictor stranglehold on the House.
@K: All of that is true, but it would all still be more or less true if Murphy had lost by 400 votes.
At least, except for the part where he's now an incumbent. How much is that worth for special-election winners in the House?
The timing of the election stunted voter turn out. The negative campaign by Tedisco may have produced a greater margin of victory for Murphy had it been run in November.
The prior GOP candidates were at best inept, including 1 charged by his wife as abusive, there went the women vote. Gillibrant's victory was more of the unwillingness to support bad choice Republicans.
It is my contention that voters are more concerned with the quality of the candidate than party affiliation.
I don't think this spells the end of Michael Steele. It was a slow moving defeat (essentially a tie), not a dramatic one which likely would have been disastrous for him.
And as this Politico artice notes "...Steele has begun to tamp down criticism about his early performance. The party posted solid fundraising numbers for the first quarter, and Steele has largely avoided the foot-in-mouth gaffes that plagued his first weeks at the helm." Fox News agrees which is obviously even more telling since that's, like, the network of Republicans and stuff.
So I think Steele will be around for awhile - he's bringing in money and not causing major drama at the moment, whereas giving him the boot certainly would case major drama.
Paging Micheal Steele,
Paging Micheal Steele,
Ya'll lost another one,
Get ready to kiss limpballs FAT posterior,
To try to save your job for a while longer.
Paging Micheal Steele,
Ya'll lost another one ....
Oh yea, .... Senator Al will be seated also .....
I think Minnesota's (but formerly New York's) Mr. Coleman needs to consider some of what Tedisco stated today in his concession, specifically:
This was a close campaign every step of the way. Ultimately, it became clear that the numbers were not going our way and that the time had come to step aside and ensure that the next Congressman be seated as quickly as possible. [Emphasis added]
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
This is GREAT NEWS!!! For NORM COLEMAN!!!
@ Mike in Maryland:
What Coleman SHOULD do or NEEDS to do has never been a factor for him. At this point, he wins simply by prolonging the inevitable seating of Franken and he has the full backing of the Repub party in doing this. His goal now is PURELY to postpone that as long as possible, not to win the seat.
Given that, there is no way he concedes until ALL legal remedies are exhausted. And even then, he's not likely to make any "concession" speach.
@ Nate: But winning by a fraction of a point is not much different than losing by a fraction of a point.It may not be much different but it sure is much better. Just ask Scott Murphy :)
Why are you guys saying PACK YOUR BAGS? Don't you want an incompetent leading the GOP?
It may be indicative of the "status quo" but if that means republicans continue to lose districts where they enjoy a registration advantage, then I can see where dems consider it a good sign. If the status quo resembles anything remotely like 2006 or 2008 then the reps are in for some serious trouble.
I think that this election was more about people voting against the Republican party than for Murphy. I'm glad he won and I think he will do a good job. But, I also think that this should worry the Republicans about what is going to happen in 2010.
Brandon said...
Hmm, Maybe someone should send this article to Norm Coleman? Seems like he may be able to learn from it!
------------
I doubt it. And to make matters worse, I just read that the MNSC can't be bothered to put this on their docket until June! Another two months without a representative MN. Is it time for you to be in the streets yet?
Mardi,
That may in fact be the only way you can get this matter resolved. Pawlenty will refuse to sign that certificate as long as it doesn't cost him any votes when he runs for re-election. If you can get him to see things differently, you don't need to drag this out in the courts.
Demonstrations, letters to the editor, raising hell with your state level legislators and the governor's office, bombarding them with phone calls, emails and petitions is probably the only way to force Pawlenty to act.
Until you do, he'll toe the GOP line. And that party line is "delay Franken's seating as long as possible"
Yep,The Minnesota Supremes have scheduled the oral arguments for June 1.So it looks like Pawlenty is off the hook until mid-to-late June.What a bummer!
The details can be found here.
Anyone who reads the Star-Tribune article linked in Opus 132's post, there is a reference to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee launching a website called "It's Over, Norm," that is seeking to gather a 100,000-name e-mail petition calling for Coleman to concede. The URL to that DSCC petition is:
http://www.democratsenators.org/o/4/t/90/tellafriend.jsp?tell_a_friend_KEY=255
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Correction:
The direct link to the DSCC petition is:
http://www.dscc.org/giveitupnorm?petition_KEY=138
The URL I gave in that previous post is for passing the information to friends and others.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Statler,
If it's only Pawlenty that's holding things up, why has Ritchie (a Democrat) refused to sign the certificate as well? Why does the Minnesota chairman of the DFL say he's ok with Coleman taking this to the MNSC? Why do you only claim it's the Republican who has to sign and hasn't that's holding things up, while saying nothing about the Democrat who has to sign and also hasn't???
In an aside, I'd also wonder why the chairman is saying he's fine (and fully with Coleman's rights and within the rules), while at the same time talking about the petition the MN DFL set up a similar petition to put pressure on Coleman to give up?
And @Opus, I agree (I think) with your point, that it's kind of sick that it's going to only start at that date you mentioned. Coleman should be allowed to take it to the MNSC, but it should also be heard quickly.
Ritchie cannot sign unless Pawlenty agrees to without coming across as partisan. I guarantee you that if Pawlenty drops his opposition, Ritchie will too, instantly.
As for the DFL, what are they going to say, they oppose Coleman's legal right to appeal? Of course not. And Coleman should have the right to appeal, although Pawlenty should sign the thing at least provisionally so Minnesota can have some representation in the Senate. Klebuchar's getting lonely up there.
Think Frank Schaeffer of the Huffington Post summed it up best:
"The word 'evangelical' became synonymous with Republican. And then it became synonymous with right-wing Republican. Picture Christ. Christ is bearing the burden of being identified exclusively with evangelicals. And then evangelicals jump on his back carrying the burdens of the Republican Party. And the Republican Party is driven to the right by those very same evangelicals who bring their moralistic crusades on everything from gay rights to abortion to the table. When those things fail or they are hypocritically used, for example, as fund raising measures rather than actually doing something about the issue, they indulge in hatred or homophobic behavior.
All of a sudden, Christ has the Republican Party, the evangelicals and their hatred and their failed policies on his back. Thus, who is going to be looking at Jesus Christ any more as a religious figure or the Son of God or even as a prophet? What they are seeing is the Republican Party. And what they are seeing is economic failure. And what they are seeing is social programs that don't work. And so essentially the cart not only flipped and drove the horse, the horse disappeared altogether. All that is left is this stalled cart of Republican right-wing failure.”
Shane said...
Why does the Minnesota chairman of the DFL say he's ok with Coleman taking this to the MNSC?
Maybe because the MNSC has already ruled that when Minnesota state law states the cert can be signed after the final appeal has been given it's day in court, and final appeal means including appeal to the MNSC, so the final appeal under state law has not yet occurred?
Maybe the chairman of the DFL is just following the law, something that seems to be foreign to the GOOPers?
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
@Shane,
I don't think that anyone denies that Coleman is within his rights to take his appeal to the MN supreme court. MN state law explicitly states that it is his right to do so. No one can sign off on the certificate to seat Franken until the process as defined by MN state law has been seen through to its conclusion. I will admit that any criticism of Pawlenty is premature at this point, because we don't know what he will do once the MN state supreme court rules (presumably in Franken's favor). Most people assume he will tow the party line and refuse to sign off on the certificate, and right or wrong, that is the source of their criticism.
Regardless of what Coleman's rights are, however, I do think it is legitimate to pressure him to not pursue his rights and concede. Pretty much everyone but the most partisan of legal experts agree that his case is hopeless. It is pretty clear that the only reason he is dragging the process out as long as possible is to prevent the Dems from getting the a 59th vote in a chamber that requires 60 votes for cloture. But is that really in the interest of Minnesotans at this point in time, when this Congress is dealing with very weighty issues that are likely to shape politics in this country for years to come? Is it right to deny Minnesotans their full representation in Congress at this critical point in American history because it happens to be good strategy for the national Republican party?
It is certainly Coleman's right to see this through to the end, but with rights come the expectation that those rights will be used responsibly. Is Coleman being irresponsible by pursuing his case to the end even though the outcome at this point is almost certain? Maybe, maybe not, but the Democratic party in MN is not out of line in making the case that it is irresponsible in their petition for his concession.
@Statler: Ritchie has come out and explained exactly why he wouldn't sign. Which is exactly why Pawlenty is saying he isn't signing yet. And I think Eric has it right--Pawlenty's being criticized for something that hasn't happened yet, and won't for two months.
@Eric: I can understand what you're saying, but it does seem a little hypocritical and partisan to acknowledge it's within Coleman's rights, but still call for him not to. I just have a natural tendency to think that it's best to get things right--to be honest, I think it was bad that the FL recount had to be done within 10 days. Kind of ironic that the problem there was the legislated speed and the problem in MN is the legislated lack of speed.
and @MiM: congrats for picking out the one thing you think you can answer, instead of the main point of the post. The rhetorical question is the one you choose to answer...
Off topic, but Republicans are now officially moonbat nuts. They really want to secede, but call liberals un-American! AMAZING!
DailyKOS poll:
US: 61
Independent nation: 35
Democrats: US 82, Ind 15
Republicans: US 48, Ind 48
Independents: US 55, Ind 40
Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Rick Perry's suggestion that Texas may need to leave the United States?
Approve: 37
Disapprove: 58
Democrats: Approve 16, Disapprove 80
Republicans: Approve 51, Disapprove 44
Independents: Approve 43, Disapprove 50
I should have also noted those are Texas only numbers...
Final off topic poll of the day (remember when this was a polling site and we did this daily?):
Obama is kicking ass and taking names and the American people seem to know it:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/117853/First-100-Days-Obama-Meets-Exceeds-Expectations.aspx?CSTS=alert
Shane said...
congrats for picking out the one thing you think you can answer, instead of the main point of the post.
Until the MNSC rules, or Coleman drops out, there legally is no cert to sign. It might physically exist, but legally it doesn't exist until it legally exists (i.e., when the law says it exists). The law states when all appeals have reached their conclusion, or all but one candidate has conceded the race, a cert exists. The MNSC interprets state law to mean when all appeals, if any, to the MNSC have been heard and ruled upon, is when all appeals have reached a conclusion.
Besides, if the MNSC says the cert cannot be signed until all appeals (within the state) have reached their conclusion, Ritchie signing the cert is jumping the gun, as all appeals have not reached conclusion. If Ritchie signed the cert before the MNSC reached an opinion, the MNSC might consider that a slap in the face. If you don't know, judges do not appreciate slaps in the face.
Further, if the cert doesn't legally exist until the MNSC rules, Ritchie would be signing a piece of paper for no reason, as it is not a legal cert. He'd have to sign again (the now legal cert) after the MNSC ruling.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Re: The Texan poll stuff
I had a legitimate laugh out loud moment the other day when I saw a TV commercial advertising vactioning in Texas, sponsored by their board of tourism. Their offical slogan is "Texas - it's Like a Whole Other Country".
OMG! You are correct, Texas is truly like a whole 'nother coubtry - let's give them their wish!
http://www.traveltex.com/Index.aspx
For Nate!
I am an occasional reader of your web site and have great respect for your choices of topics/issues for analysis and discussion.
I have been active in a number of CD races in the NYS capital district/mid-hudson area over the last 30 years and have a "little" insight from that experience from an enviromental and labor perspective.
One possible omission (I say possible, because I haven't read all the postings and responses) from your analysis of a significant factor in Murphy's success is no reference to the capital district having one of the highest concentrations of organized labor per capita in the country and the role of organized labor in putting boots on the ground.
That is quantifiable to a certain extent.
The Capital District has a number of active and informed enviromental activists in established enviromental organiztions. In these organizations are some good organizers with long mailing lists of activists in communities throughout the district. The leaders in many of these groups have been active behind the scenes for Murphy--that, agreed, is less quantifiable and more difficult to verify.
PEF/encon activist
And now the pressure will mount on Coleman to do the right thing and go off to green pastures...
It is clear that Pawlenty has sufficient legal cover to delay certification until the MNSC has issued a final ruling.
However, does anyone doubt that if the situation were reversed and it was Coleman with the lead, that T-PAW would have found more than sufficient justification to issue at least a provisional certification to seat the republican senator? Personally, I have little doubt that such a certification would have been issued months ago, after the first recount providing that the stars were aligned in the correct partisan direction at that time.
NY 20 is the MOST republican district in NY. It was gerrymandered to be a safe republican seat so the districts next to it would be held by democratic representatives. If the GOP can't win here, they wont win at all statewide north of the mason-dixon line.
I want Michael Steele to keep his job - I'm still eagerly awaiting to see his new Hip-Hop version of the Republican Party that he promised!
Nate, a win is a win, regardless of the margin of victory. The headline MURPHY WINS is worth far more to the Democrats both politically and psychologically than the number of votes by which he won.
Headlines like DEMOCRAT WINS IN PREVIOUSLY SOLID GOP SEAT has the impact of a steamroller. By 2010 and margin of victory will be forgotten, but the fact that it was a victory will be recalled all too clearly.
It will also give the Democrats another seat defended by an incumbent, a not-small advantage.
I'll bet the GOP brass hounded and browbeat Tedisco not to concede, it having become a point of policy with them not to give up an election while there is any smarmy trick left unplayed.
Maybe we can persuade Steve Tedisco to call Norm Coleman...
dre7861...
I too want to see Michael Steele keep his job. What could be better for the DFemocrats than for the GOP to have a chairman unloved by a good half of his own party? Steele is like a festering sore, and the longer he remains, the better for all GOP opponents everywhere.
Er—should be Democrats. DFemocrats were in the movie Mars Needs Women…
wv nodyness: What the GOP is up to when no one is looking...
For all of you who want to sign the "It's Over Norm Coleman" petition, here is the link. (MiM's URL was for forwarding the petition to your contacts.)
ferlessgirbil - the 20th congressional district isn't the most conservative district in NYS. The 3rd, 13th, 19th, 24th, 26th, and 29th congressional districts are more conservative than the 20th.
Pragmatus said...
For all of you who want to sign the "It's Over Norm Coleman" petition, here is the link. (MiM's URL was for forwarding the petition to your contacts.)
Pragmatus,
I noticed the erroneous URL I originally posted, which is why I posted a few minutes later with a correction to the URL.
At least I'm willing to admit errors, unlike some (unnamed) person or persons on this site, at least one of whom, I understand, is using GreaseMonkey so as to ignore my posts, among others.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Eric wrote:
"I will admit that any criticism of Pawlenty is premature at this point, because we don't know what he will do once the MN state supreme court rules (presumably in Franken's favor)."
While we don't know what Pawlenty will do, it is very telling that he hasn't made a public statement that he will sign the certificate once the MNSC has made their decision.
That would hardly be unreasonable of him.
We also know that Coleman can file at least three cases in federal court challenging the recount. Each has a chance for an appeal, and of stays to signing the certificate. Cornyn was correct in saying that Coleman could tie this thing up for years.
Now, MN State Law specifies that the Governor and SOS sign the certificate after state courts have ruled. Pawlenty could, however, set a higher bar and insist that the federal court cases be settled first. That would mean another MNSC decision to force Pawlenty to sign the cert, and further delays.
It depends on how far Pawlenty wants to go, but he hasn't made any statement that he will abide by the MNSC's ruling.
It also concerns me that Coleman's federal suits could establish precedents that could tie up many future elections in court, and not just in MN. Put any State's electoral system under the microscope and you will find some kind of ugliness that some attorney could spin into something big.
@Saint Dude:
"It is clear that Pawlenty has sufficient legal cover to delay certification until the MNSC has issued a final ruling.
However, does anyone doubt that if the situation were reversed and it was Coleman with the lead, that T-PAW would have found more than sufficient justification to issue at least a provisional certification to seat the republican senator? Personally, I have little doubt that such a certification would have been issued months ago, after the first recount providing that the stars were aligned in the correct partisan direction at that time."
Translation: I am imagining a situation where Pawlenty is doing something bad, and therefore because I'm imagining it, he's evil.
Honestly, I can admit that both sides do things that are politically expedient at times, and it *could* be the case that Pawlenty would sign the certificate in the reversed case. Though MiM claims it doesn't exist until the MNSC rules, so it would be impossible for anyone to sign. I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is true, then no, your scenario in which Pawlenty signs couldn't happen.
And @Todd, my personal hope is that the MNSC rules at the same time about whether the certificate should be signed. They know it's an issue and I would hope they address it in their ruling. Perhaps Pawlenty is waiting for that, although your criticism of Pawlenty is the only one I've seen grounded in fact.
Miochael Steele is bad, but think how much worse it could be for them. If Steele leaves they are almost assured to elect a right wing, Rush loving crazy. The cairman from SC maybe? Kayton "I love Fox and Rush" Dawson.
http://www.scgop.com/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/26/gop-chair-attacked-with-f_n_160991.html
@Shane-
I never said, or even implied that T-Paw is "evil" as you presuppose in your "translation".
All I implied is that the ongoing drama in Minnesota is purely partisan in nature. It has nothing to do with determining the will of the voters (that has already been determined), or making sure that everything has been legally up to snuff (that has been more than demonstrated over the last couple of months). At this stage, Coleman has no path to victory, and his legal gambits are purely a ploy on the part of the national party to keep a duly elected democratic senator from being seated for as long as possible.
Perhaps I should put this another way. What do you think would have happened in this case if Minnesota had democratic governor? I would suggest, just like in the "evil T-Paw" example, that he would have already certified.
I will also further posit that whatever the MNSC decides in this matter is immaterial - providing they don't pull some miracle Coleman victory out of the nether regions. As long as Coleman still trails, the lawsuits will continue, and T-Paw will continue to withhold certification. Does that make him evil? I wouldn't say so. Does that make him a bottom feeding partisan politician? Sure does.
All in all, this whole case sets a horrifying precedent. If all of this were simply about counting all the votes, achieving perfect accuracy and uniformity in every election, and preserving the legal rights of every challenger to the bitter end, what is to keep each and every reasonably close election from being dragged through the courts for years on end? Why would anyone ever concede?
Never mind, I will answer that one for you. They would concede because they would not be funded by the national parties to drag their contests out to absurdity, unless there was a perceived strategic reason for doing so.
Oh, I do hope they replace Steele with Alan Keyes. Only Keyes is crazy enough to lead the GOP to complete and irrevocable destruction. He has that special talent for alienating even the most die hard party loyalist within moments of opening his mouth.
Please,
Oh please
Elect Alan Keyes
to head the GOP
and bring them to their knees
The status quo, in other words, was more or less preserved.It seems to me that if the status quo from Nov. 5, 2008 was preserved four or five months later even without Barack Obama's name on the ticket, then that says something quite striking. Specifically, it says something very positive about the Democrats' likely ability to perform in the 2010 elections.
NY-20 was represented by the late Gerry Solomon for 20 years.(1978-1998). Solomon- the old fart who got into a shouting match with Patrick Kennedy over the assault weapons ban debate. My wife lives by herself in a small rural town in upstate NY - she has the right to defend herself and don't you forget it. When Solomon retired. he was succeeded by John Sweeney. Sweeney who during the 2000 Presidential Race went down to Florida and interfered with the Statewide Recount. NY-20 was redistricted to become more Republican. Sweeney lost his seat in 2006 due to a domestic violence incident.
This "victory" of Murphy's has gotten surprisingly little play. Tedisco was smart in conceding. My takeaway is that Tedisco made a formerly Democratic (RINO) District competitive. Bully for him. Not much coattails for Obama.
That's my spin!
PeteKent01 (follow me on twitter)
@Saint Dude:Perhaps "I should put this another way. What do you think would have happened in this case if Minnesota had democratic governor? I would suggest, just like in the "evil T-Paw" example, that he would have already certified."
Sad to argue that the Democrats wouldn't actually follow the law. At least Pawlenty has the law plainly on his side (and Ritchie has said as much). But I'll just say I would hope your wild guess would be incorrect.
"I will also further posit that whatever the MNSC decides in this matter is immaterial - providing they don't pull some miracle Coleman victory out of the nether regions. As long as Coleman still trails, the lawsuits will continue, and T-Paw will continue to withhold certification."
And if that happens then you have a point. Until then, you're just pulling things out of your ass--which was what I was saying to begin with. If you can't see that, maybe your head is where your guesses are.
To answer your last question better than you did, there is a good reason--most of the time there's going to be another election, and you don't want to leave a bitter taste. I believe Nate had an article showing that Coleman pretty much didn't have any other options for elected office. That won't be true for most close elections. So Coleman could be doing this for his political life, rather than for the party. Doesn't make it better or worse, just takes away a bit of the conspiracy theory aspects of the motivations.
Sometimes I just have to jump in...
nkpolitics1279 said:
"My wife lives by herself in a small rural town in upstate NY - she has the right to defend herself and don't you forget it."
Excuse me for asking, but if she's your wife, why does she live by herself?
Statler, it's quite a stretch for Alan Keyes to become the RNC chair because that would require actually winning the RNC election.
Alan Keyes doesn't do very well at elections. Maybe he's allergic to winning elections? Or maybe he likes to run just for the exercise? Or he was born without the win gene? Maybe his religion forbids winning?
What if he won the RNC chair and dropped dead from the shock of winning? His children would be orphans! (Well, except for the daughter he disowned; the rest would be orphans, yes.) You'd be able to sleep at night knowing you wished for orphans?
But yeah, Alan Keyes for RNC, sweet. :)
Keyes should be thanked for making it so easy to get Obama into office. He ran the worst statewide campaign in IL history against him.
You guys! nkpolitics was quoting former Representative Solomon!
In other news - bull ina supermarket:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/25/bull-irish-supermarket-shop-footage
And the world as we know may end as millions die in a pandemic, or not:
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-fg-mexico-swineflu26-2009apr26,0,389929.story
The split of the republican party may occur as early as 2012. The Palin and Huckabee nutball social conservatives are at odds with the true conservatives and the party leaders who see the coming demographic shifts and the requirement that they change.
The 2012 primary might be alot more fun than I thought...Palin v Huntsman...the past v the future.
Still no sunspots today :(
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/sunspots/
Where is everybody? I remember we used to have 50 posts during the election by now.
NATE - please take a look at these numbers from Pew showing the only repubs left are the nutballs. These need a brighter light, 538 would be fitting:
http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/773-2.gif
Oh Bradford, Oh Dermott,
There is a solution. Keyes doesn't have to be elected. Rod Blagojevich can simply appoint Keyes the head of the GOP.
Keyes' very special talents are what the GOP really needs now. Only Keyes can stand up in front of a diverse audience and manage to deeply and personally insult every single member of that audience with a single phrase. When it comes to political implosion, the man is practically a god. He commands the awe of the politically suicidal int he same way that Nijinsky managed to get a crowd of aging opera enthusiasts to violently riot through the streets of Paris.In another hundred years, Keyes's ability to piss the world off will still be legendary, in the same way that Nijinsky and Stravinsky are still talked about in performing arts classes, a hundred years after they got a thousand people wearing tuxedos and ball gowns to rip the cobblestones physically out of the streets and throw them at each other.
Please
Oh Please
Appoint Alan Keyes
to show the GOP
they haven't learned anything
shane:
The other Eric nailed the question of rights, vs taking advantage of those rights.
I have a right to eat at McD's 3 times a day until I die from liver failure. Reasonable people would recommend I desist; and if my health affected others it would be irresponsible of me to pursue my dietary proclivities.
Bradford wrote:
"The split of the republican party may occur as early as 2012. The Palin and Huckabee nutball social conservatives are at odds with the true conservatives and the party leaders who see the coming demographic shifts and the requirement that they change."
The GOP can run extreme ("nutball") candidates in reliably "red" states and win. In fact, I fully expect this to happen in 2010. These victories, in an "artificial environment", could very well serve to persuade (i.e. delude) Republicans that extreme candidates can win in "purple" states or even on the national level.
We already see moderate Republicans facing serious primary threats. Once the moderates are purged, look for the GOP leadership to contend that this proves that moderation is a losing strategy.
The GOP is now closer to a religion than it is to a traditional political organisation.
One of the tools of a religion is to employ self-fulfilling prophecies.
Another tool is the promise of immense rewards to those who "keep the faith" even when reason would indicate a different outcome is likely.
Yet another is the creation of a "persecution complex" that frees the disciples from adherence to the rules because the game is "fixed".
Do we not see the Republican Party employing all three of these tools currently?
I don't see "the true conservatives and the party leaders who see the coming demographic shifts" as having much of a chance against The Faith.
Statler, I have to tell you “Blagojevich can appoint Keyes” made my coffee come out my nose. Best laugh in a while.
So I looked it up. Section 8 chapter 11 of the RNC charter clearly states
“
Democrat appointment of RNC chair is strictly limited to three conditions:
1) Democrat appointer must be heading to prison, or
2) Costa Rica
3) Pay-to-Play checks/money orders payable to Fearless Leader Lush Rimbaugh
“
This is good news for Alan Keyes, and lagniappe - no orphans. ;)
@ Nate: I didn't realize this when I posted those figures yesterday, but Democrats performed way better than Republicans across the board in the First Quarter, raising a collective $31 million (or $27 million if one does not count Texas, where there is not officially a senate race yet) to the Republicans' $12 million.
Nate, you should know that the congressional party in power ALWAYS raises more money. Lobbyists know where the power is and adjust their donations accordingly.
OK -- you made me give up meat already! Please replace the butchered cow's head with something that doesn't make me gag. I know -- a disemboweled cucumber? A headless cabbage?
gucci replica handbags
men gucci shoes
Gucci men sneakers
Gucci men moccasins
gucci women sneakers
gucci women boots
Gucci men boots
Gucci
Gucci shop
Gucci bags
Gucci shoes
Replica GUCCI SHOES
wholesale gucci shoes
cheap Gucci handbags
Gucci ON sale
Gucci Belts
Gucci small accessories
Gucci hats & scarves
Gucci wallets
Gucci Handbags
Women Gucci shoes
Men Gucci shoes
discount gucci shoes
cheap Gucci shoes
Post a Comment