Opinion
Vote reveals weakness in both parties
November 10, 2009
Advertisement
Republicans are celebrating two high-profile electoral successes last Tuesday; Democrats are licking their wounds. But the results and dynamics revealed long-term problems for both national parties.
For the Democrats, diminished enthusiasm among independent, young and minority voters raises questions about whether the coalition that elected President Barack Obama will help the party fend off significant losses in next year’s more important midterm congressional and state elections.
It was a major factor in the party losing the Virginia and New Jersey governorships.
For the Republicans, the aggressive stance of its conservative base and resulting fallout suggests the GOP may be headed down a historical path in which an energized base takes control of a defeated party with disastrous national results, at least in the short term.
The split created by that effort gave the Democrats an unexpected victory in a closely watched upstate New York special congressional election.
Off-year elections, especially in so few places, can only hint about the future. Obama’s failure to prevent GOP victories in Virginia and New Jersey suggests a limit to his coattails that might unsettle Democratic senators and congressman seeking to enact his legislative proposals, especially health care reform. Yet exit polls also showed that voters said Obama was a minor factor.
In Virginia, Republican Bob McDonnell ran a good campaign that attracted independents, while Democrat Creigh Deeds ran a poor one that turned off Obama Democrats. In New Jersey, Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine’s unpopularity proved too big a hurdle in a race where a third candidate’s support faded, as often happens in the stretch.
In each state, the electorate was significantly different from last year’s, with proportionately more older voters and fewer minorities and younger voters. The bad news for Democrats next year is that such smaller turnouts are the norm in most mid-term elections.
A bigger question may be the impact on legislators in close races, often jittery about controversial votes. But Deeds’ poor showing might remind vulnerable Democrats there is little to gain through separation from Obama since a successful president can help mobilize the base and raise funds, even if he lacks measurable coattails.
For the Republicans, Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman’s defeat in the New York congressional race seems unlikely to deter conservatives who contend that the party must offer a clear choice.
But as happened, a rightward swing might drive away moderates and replicate a potentially perilous pattern. Three times in the past half-century, a party’s national defeat prompted its base to seek greater ideological purity in the next election.
In two cases, the outcome was a resounding defeat.
Sen. Barry Goldwater’s conservative followers in 1964 vowed to offer “a choice not an echo” after John Kennedy’s narrow 1960 presidential victory. Goldwater carried just six states, but Republicans rebounded in 1968 with a more centrist approach.
In 1972, fervent anti-Vietnam War Democrats spearheaded liberal Sen. George McGovern’s nomination. He won just one state and the District of Columbia. But in 1976, the far more conservative Jimmy Carter enabled Democrats to regain the presidency.
In the exception, Ronald Reagan led a conservative takeover in 1980 that unseated Carter, whose presidency was undercut by inflation at home and weak leadership abroad.
GOP conservatives hope to follow that example in 2012. Success may hinge on a public sufficiently disaffected with Obama and a Republican candidate like Reagan whose personal appeal extends beyond his ideological appeal to the base.
Whether any prospective Republican fits that definition remains to be seen. So does the ultimate public verdict on Obama, who remains more popular than his policies.
A more fruitful GOP course may be that of the two gubernatorial winners. Despite conservative roots, McDonnell played down social issues and focused on economic subjects like jobs and spending, as did Christie.
Their success suggests a way Republicans can woo the independents and less committed partisans they’ll need to win in the future.
Top ads RSS
Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services
- Oread cell towers raise concerns September 30, 2009 · 147 comments
- Nation has right to ask ‘why?’ November 21, 2009 · 68 comments
- Shelter needed November 22, 2009 · 32 comments
- Blog: Kennedy Vs The Catholic Church At Twenty Paces November 22, 2009 · 7 comments
- Blog: Palin Book Could Be Your Cheapest Source For Winter Fuel November 20, 2009 · 100 comments
- KU coach kinder, gentler November 22, 2009 · 25 comments
- Wright’s role clarified November 21, 2009 · 21 comments
- Construction on the Oread Inn is moving forward. The high-end hotel is slated for a January or Febru 8 comments
- Forced insurance raises constitutional issue November 19, 2009 · 56 comments
- 6News provides a sneak peak at Lawrence from the top of the under-construction Oread hotel. 1 comment
- Pride of LHS Marching Lions: Band looks back on winning season November 22, 2009
- Atheist student groups bloom on college campuses November 22, 2009
- Wright’s role clarified November 21, 2009
- The cowboy way: Williamstown church ministry draws unique following November 21, 2009
- Trial could help restore American pride, honor November 22, 2009
- Man-O-Pause: Biological changes with aging strike men as well November 22, 2009
- Minding your manners November 22, 2009
- Kansas’ Taylor bounces back from ‘freak night’ November 22, 2009
- Calendar Girl: Cheer coach master of time management November 23, 2009
- Bankruptcies November 15, 2009
10 November 2009
at 6:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
Two good options suggested here: 1) Sarah Palin should start the Christian Identity Party and let the Republicans return to reality after decades in the wildnerness; or, 2) This is a chance for the Libertarians to create a real national movement and to get a platform together large numbers of independents can support. The two-party system is broken, but it's up to voters to demand better. So far, we have proven we'll only vote for those who conceal or soften the hard truths we are facing. Go, go, Sarah, your people are waiting!
10 November 2009
at 8 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…
Living near New Jersey I've been bombarded with ads regarding the Christie/Corzine race, and let me tell you, if half of what was said about Christie is true the guy is as corrupt as they come. Corzine was a failure, but NJ is not going to be much better off under Christie. The GOP could have run just about anyone against Corzine and won.
10 November 2009
at 8:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…
Getto I agree about this being a chance for Libertarians—one hurdle for us is ballot access. A lot of money has to be spent just to get Libertarian candidates on the ballot that the other two parties don't have to spend. This last election, though, we were able to meet the minimum %'s on a lot more ballots to ensure that Libertarian candidates will be on the ballot next time around, so we can spend more dollars on campaigning instead. Of course the hardest part is finding viable candidates—I get e-mails sent out to all members asking for anyone to run for any office. Maybe I should run for county commissioner or dog catcher or something…
10 November 2009
at 8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…
Which party had a candidate for governor get shown the door last week despite 5 campaign appearances by a sitting President?
10 November 2009
at 8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
This is one of the best political essays I've read in years. Leubsdorf lays out some excellent points, sticks to the subject at hand, and doesn't pick up a machete and leads us into the tangled jungle of “CrazyLand” like Pitts and (especially) Thomas do.
One thing to remember about Reagan is that despite some pretty massive policy failures, throughout the 1980s he always had two character traits that carried him through:
1) Congeniality
2) Broad appeal
In short, he was a nice guy. That's something that is clearly lacking in the current GOP/Neoconservative hot mess of blithering idiots, dehydrated Barbie dolls, and weeping, psychotic media pundits.
Right now, I can think of exactly one elected GOP incumbent who would have broad appeal. He's also demonstrated a fair amount of congeniality. He'll be out of office in a couple of years. And in perhaps the strangest twist of deja vu… his career path has, so far, mirrored that of Ronald Reagan.
Too bad there's a constitutional roadblock in his way—I'd vote for him.
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
10 November 2009
at 9:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
“Too bad there's a constitutional roadblock in his way—I'd vote for him.”
Really? What do you like about him?
10 November 2009
at 9:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
headdoctor (Anonymous) says…
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
Two good options suggested here: 1) Sarah Palin should start the Christian Identity Party and let the Republicans return to reality after decades in the wildnerness; or, 2) This is a chance for the Libertarians to create a real national movement and to get a platform together large numbers of independents can support.
__________________________________________________
I can only hope this comment of yours was tongue in cheek and not serious. Sara Palin couldn't start anything but a negative news article and the Libertarians of modern times are as delusional with their pipe dreams as the modern day Republicans. If you think we are trying to dig out of a melt down now try the experience after either a Palin party or Libertarian was in office. The only benefit I could see is the Democrats and Republicans would be fighting the newcomer so hard they in Washington couldn't get anything done.
10 November 2009
at 9:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
Made_In_China: Agreed about Palin! This is a big opportunity for Palin and the obsessive-compulsive theocrats. Let 'em find a few cabins out in the woods and have their little meetings.
Lib_One, I'm not sure I understand your issues with ballot access. I studied a little of this in early 2008, when I actually thought Ron Paul was going to “follow through.” If I remember correctly, getting on the ballot in each state can be accomplished by either a) paying a fee; or b) getting enough registered voters in that state to sign a petition. I think that only has to be like 1% or 2% of registered voters. People signing the petition aren't actually *supporting* your candidate, but just affirming their right to have their name printed on the ballot.
I'll remind you again of a little history: In 1988 … without computers, without the internet, without cell phones or “smart phones” … a black woman managed to do just that. Lenora Fulani appeared on the ballot in all 50 states that November.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenora_F…
And let's not forget that four years later, Ross Perot got 19% of the vote—and that's after dropping out of the race for several weeks, only to jump back in that October.
Looking at the uphill battles that Fulani and Perot fought, and contrasting them with all the *advantages* that Ron Paul was sitting on in early 2008, it's pretty easy to see why a lot of Paul's supporters feel like they were left at the altar.
The Libertarians, “3rd party” candidates, independents etc. just need one good, identifiable person with good ideas… who'll actually follow through to the end. That's all it takes.
Is there such a person out there?
—Ag
10 November 2009
at 9:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
Lib_One: I don't subscribe to any California newspapers, but from what I remember, he's consistently placed people and policies above party affiliation. True, some of the things he pushed for were overturned by ballot initiatives a few years back—but that kind of thing can happen in any state.
If anyone outside of the two major parties is going to make a strong showing in 2012, they need to have a consistent record that forges an individual path of leadership, rather than a drone-like march through the ruts of the Democrats or Republicans.
10 November 2009
at 10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
“I remember correctly, getting on the ballot in each state can be accomplished by either a) paying a fee; or b) getting enough registered voters in that state to sign a petition. I think that only has to be like 1% or 2% of registered voters.”
This is true. But getting petitions signed takes a lot of work and coordination. It's not like you hand out a bunch and ask people to send them around and mail it back to you. And yes, people signing the petition aren't actually supporting the candidate, but try explaining that someone who doesn't want to be bothered in the first place and probably has little to no idea what the Libertarian party stands for. A lot of people only know us as the party that wants to legalize pot or some other single issue we get labeled with.
Regardless, I'm not saying it's impossible to get on the ballot either, just that it's one more hurdle in the process that the Libertarian party won't have to face as much in the next elections because of our success in 2008.
I don't know much about what's going on in Cali, but all I hear is negative things like the budget crisis and how they are having a state-wide yard sale. But I also here there are procedural problems like having to have a 2/3's vote on certain issues or something of that nature, so I don't really know. However, if Arnold is as he says he is—fiscally conservative and socially liberal—I suppose that's someone I could support.
11 November 2009
at 1:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
LoveThsLife (Anonymous) says…
I personally don't like Palin. However, I do like Mitt Romney..if he would have won the GOP primary I would have seriously considered voting for him.