Republicans won, Conservative Hoffman lost…now what?
The November 3rd 2009 elections are over. Republican Bob McDonnell won big in Virginia. Republican Chris Christie won in New Jersey. Conservative Doug Hoffman lost in New York.
The results of these races are being interpreted in a variety of ways. Conservatives are claiming a victory of sorts and hope this is a turning point for the Republican Party (The Other McCain: Hoffmania will continue, Riehl World View: What went wrong and what went right, Michelle Malkin: The GOP elite’s million dollar object lesson). Nancy Pelosi has also claimed victory, as have several sites on the left (Liberal Values: Democrat wins in NY 23, Huffington Post: The Lesson of Doug Hoffman)
So which is it? Did conservatives win or does this mean conservatives can’t win? Does this mean liberals are in trouble or the Republican Party is in trouble? Right now, honestly, I don’t think anyone really knows. Republicans won in the races for Governor in New Jersey and Virginia. Add to that the fact that a Maine voted to repeal their same sex marriage law and things sound good for the Republican Party. Democrats will point out, though, Virginia is a traditionally Republican state and New Jersey’s economy was in shambles. So these victories may be more about local issues and politics than national politics.
Doug Hoffman accomplished a lot in a short period of time. However, much like Notre Dame nearly beating USC earlier this year, the effort was noble and impressive, but a loss is still a loss. Now there is one more Democrat in Congress. Granted, if Scozzafava had won, you still would’ve had one more Democrat in Congress.
What does this all mean? I can tell you what I think it means, but what I think isn’t going to make any difference in the big picture. What these races mean will be determined by what the people in Washington D.C. take them to mean. Will these races be enough to get some conservative Democrats, or Democrats from conservative areas to back off a bit from their offensively huge health care bill (picture in link, thanks Daley Gator)? There is some evidence that the NRSC may not be in such a rush to endorse candidates without a run-off in the future. There is already a problem with that though, as Erick Erickson points out, in a key race in Florida, the NRSC has already committed to backing “moderate” Charlie Crist over the more conservative Marc Rubio. What does it mean? What have we learned? Is anyone in D.C paying attention? Let’s just see how things play out over the next little while. At least I’m not alone though, Allahpundit doesn’t seem sure what it all means either (Hot Air: Steele says it was a botched process)
November 5th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
Thanks for the link but my view at Liberal Values is not that anyone won this week but that these elections have little predictive value as to future elections. The Republicans obviously won the two races for governor while the Congressional Democrats won in picking up two new House members but neither predicts anything about what will happen next year. The NY 23 race might have some predictive value if this is the start of a trend towards sacrificing moderate seats in blue states to achieve ideological purity.
Well, I apologize if that was your intent. A large portion of your entry does talk about the (lack of) predictive value for these elections. However, it then goes on to hold up the Hoffman loss as an example of how the Republican Party is becoming a fringe party made up of extremist like Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. This sounds a lot like claiming the Hoffman loss as a victory for the left.
November 6th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
As a Republican who has been castigated and nearly driven out of my party by the right wing, I hope this means that republicans can win, but not if they are ultra conservative. Until we can focus on the economy, taxes, business, etc, without all the religious hoopla defining the party, Republicans will not be able to make any real difference.