Tonight's big lesson
by kos
Share this on Twitter - Tonight's big lesson Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 09:32:52 PM PST
There will be much number-crunching tomorrow, but preliminary numbers (at least in Virginia) show that GOP turnout remained the same as last year, but Democratic turnout collapsed. This is a base problem, and this is what Democrats better take from tonight:

If you abandon Democratic principles in a bid for unnecessary "bipartisanship", you will lose votes.
If you water down reform in favor of Blue Dogs and their corporate benefactors, you will lose votes.
If you forget why you were elected -- health care, financial services, energy policy and immigration reform -- you will lose votes.
Tonight proved conclusively that we're not going to turn out just because you have a (D) next to your name, or because Obama tells us to. We'll turn out if we feel it's worth our time and effort to vote, and we'll work hard to make sure others turn out if you inspire us with bold and decisive action.

The choice is yours. Give us a reason to vote for you, or we sit home. And you aren't going to make up the margins with conservative voters. They already know exactly who they're voting for, and it ain't you.

turnout in New Jersey was THE LOWEST IN HISTORY

that is what needs to be taken into account

Core Democrats stayed home instead of holding their nose and voting

for all his $$$, Bloomberg won by 4 points

Steele's spin is ridiculous! Support for Christie in NJ is issue specific and non-transferrable.

the fat lard ball only won because Corzine was disliked

it was an anti-Corzine vote

the tub of fat goo ikiness was just as hated as Corzine was and only won because it was an anti-Corzine

as fatboy won't lower taxes and has no ideas in his airhead, he will be a one term vat of nothing

especially as 90% of NJ's other offices is democratic, so they won't let anything he does pass

Huffington is making a mistake that I heard liberal talking heads make this morning.

The elections (in New Jersey and Virginia) were affected by a lower than 2008 turnout...
surprise!...because there was not a young black candidate energizing those two sections
of the Obama Democrat Coalition. You just do not have African-Americans turning out in
record numbers (historically record) for white liberals. And, you don't have fired-up
college students, gays, anti-war and pro-choice coalitions getting excited either...they
were governors races...governor's don't end wars...directly offer or affect national legislation
or change policies of federal agencies.

Therefore, the governors elections were not a statement on the Obama Coalition's demise
on the national level, only that it does not transend state elections when the economy,(and
especially unemployment) lumped in with high state taxes and reductions (required) in state
budgets (because of looming deficits) occur.

If Democrat Liberals actually can cause themselves to "believe" these elections are calling
them further left, and away from The Blue Dogs, they do so at their own risk...just as the
Republicans in New York pulled a little far back from their liberal candidate in the last
weeks of that race (NY23) allowing the stable Democrat his chance. Now we will see how he votes.
And, if it is down the party line...as a talking head said this a.m. - "when you get to D.C. rent, don't buy."

Anyway, that's my take...and NY23 did give Democrats Congressional bragging rights to somewhat
offset the whipping In VA and the loss in NJ...so nobody walked away from the fight without their
blood being splattered.

Now we will listen to the splinter groups translate the outcomes to their benefit...while wise folks
should remember that old James Carville saying: "It's the Economy stupid!"

it takes a village of idiots to ruin Obama

Hope you like Jeb

he will be your alternative

I'll add one more if we run establishment dems instead of progressives who don't run an effective campaign strategy we get burned and that's what happened to Deeds yesterday.

IMO we tend to make too many excuses when we lose, instead of playing to win...
We let the Republicans frame the issues, and are more reactive than pro-active.

and republicans frame the spin all the time (including the dino's who spin republican spin)

Obama needs to have changed the name of his healthplan from the start

on the other hand, ALL results are great for Obama personally, because the republicans are eating themselves into a Barry Goldwater type defeat in 2012...Obama will win 500 electoral votes
however, that won't get anything passed

We shall see...

In Houston we have a runoff for mayor between Parker and Locke.

The candidate that billed himself as a "True" Conservative came in 4th!

Well yes, but not all the time. After all, Obama won. And he is likely to win in 3 years. No guarantees.

Before you sneer, remember how much of a dead duck Bill Clinton looked like in 1994, and this isn't even 10% of that...

I plan to vote for him in three years...
Like a previous poster said, He needs better PR people...

He also needs to re-do some of his previous appointments...and distance himself from the, "Groupthink"
of the Foreign Relations Council...

Possibly the best true public servant in this state.

Wish he were our governor.

What other outstanding liberal progressive democrats are there in the Congress?

I think he is smart like Clinton and will adjust when he has to. But I also think he sees certain things as much bigger than his own career, unlike Clinton. Clinton did the right thing the majority of the time, but too many times he came first.

I think that Obama may dial back a bit on his agenda and make some compromises, but he is still going to push it. And once he gets some kind of healthcare and climate change bills you will some relaxation on his part. Not too much, but some...

I really don't see too many places where he has been wrong on foreign policy yet. A few places, and I sometimes wonder if he is going to come through on a few things where he should, but overall he seems to be getting it right...

2013 will be the year
there are no further races after it

though I am still tempted to think he should serve one term now, and always be on the forefront as the years go on,
to be ready to serve his 2nd term

He is young enough, he could be a threat to run for 12 more elections afterward if he wanted too

I also think he will after his 2 terms go for Supreme Court

You ought to follow the news better or be less blindly partisan, Arneoker ....

He was called a weak leader just this morning by the Palestineans after Abbas announced he would not run for election because America (Obama and HILLARY) is favoring Israel .....

And then, of course, there is Pakistan ....

But, hey, why delve into specifics if they are going to undermine your position here, Arneoker ....

And so ...

Well we all have our views on these things don't we? (I would take the views of foreign leaders, even those who I respect such as Abbas, with a grain of salt. They have their own consituencies to worry about.) And we discuss them all the time. Personally I think those discussions tend to go better with more logic and less pheneromes, but maybe that's just me...

I think Obama is too caught up in the Snocroft-Kissinger-Albright web that represents a continuity
of the Regan-Bush-Clinton-Bush Foreign Policy...I'm still waiting for a change I can believe in...

I'm missing the logic of what you are saying here, Arneoker ...

Say, is there truth to the rumor swirling all through CYBERSPACE, Arneoker, that you used to wrestle in the WWF under the nom de guerre of OLAF THE BIG SWEDE?