Victory in New York City
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here. Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]
And wow, this WaPo article is full of a lot of hard truths:
Bob Turner, the winner, cast the election as a referendum on Obama’s stewardship of the economy and, in the state’s 9th Congressional District, which has a large population of Orthodox Jewish voters, the president’s position on Israel.
Turner, 70, a retired cable television executive who has never served in elective office, defeated Democratic State Assemblyman David Weprin, 55, who has two decades of public service experience, to fill the seat left vacant when Anthony Weiner (D) resigned in disgrace in June after more than 12 years in the House.
The defeat came as Republicans trounced Democrats in another special House election Tuesday, in northern Nevada, where — with almost 10 percent of the districts reporting — Republican Mark Amodei led Democrat Kate Marshall, 56 percent to 39 percent.
In both contests, the GOP pulled ahead by linking the Democratic candidate to Obama and his handling of the economy. Both Republican contenders urged voters to “send a message” to the president.
In the two weeks leading up to Tuesday’s elections, Democrats conceded that they could not win in Nevada — essentially a Republican seat reverting to form after some competitive races by Democrats, including Obama in 2008.
New York was a different story. National Democrats poured more than $500,000 into a last-ditch effort to save the seat and deployed former president Bill Clinton and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) to try to mobilize voters.
All those big guns and big money, and fake robocalls claiming that Jews for Jesus supported Turner, and the Democrats still lost.
IN NEW YORK CITY!
As the song goes:
If I can make it there,
I’d make it anywhere
Come on, come through,
New York, New York.
On the other hand, if you see a liberal spinning this, trying to convince you that this is not a real sign of trouble…
Let them talk. Seriously, let them. Let them fool themselves. Just like they rationalized away Scott Brown’s victory. Let them. I would rather they believe that this is not the bellwether that it is.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
Yes, yes!
And, ha ha!
Comment by Random — 9/13/2011 @ 11:07 pm
There was a hurricane, there was a blackout, there was a baseball game on TV, it wasn’t a referendum on Obama, the Democrat was a flawed candidate, voters were just confused by Democrat messaging, the Tea Party nazis obstructionists cheated, people were voting against their own interest, voters are stupid, global warming scrambled peoples’ brains, the results are just a fluke,………………
Comment by daleyrocks — 9/13/2011 @ 11:30 pm
This is one of the keys. Obama and his policies have infuriated American Jews. Seeing all the insults he has unleashed on them during his presidency, and listed chronologically in this one article by Dan Senor is breathtaking.
This is a preview of what President Obama might face in his re-election campaign with a demographic group that voted overwhelmingly for him in 2008. And it could affect the electoral map, given the battleground states—such as Florida and Pennsylvania—with significant Jewish populations. In another ominous barometer for the Obama campaign, its Jewish fund-raising has deeply eroded: One poll by McLaughlin & Associates found that of Jewish donors who donated to Mr. Obama in 2008, only 64% have already donated or plan to donate to his re-election campaign
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904353504576568710341742174.html?KEYWORDS=why+obama+is+losing+the+jewish+vote
Comment by elissa — 9/13/2011 @ 11:34 pm
Except that Orthodox Jews didn’t. Well, some did, but most didn’t. They tend to vote Republican in presidential races, and sometimes in statewide races, but Democrat in local ones. This was an exception, because Turner successfully turned it into a referendum on 0bama, while Weprin tried desperately and failed to make it about him.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/13/2011 @ 11:48 pm
What I meant to say is that Orthodox Jews are not a reliable indicator for how secular Jews will vote. There’s a huge cultural divide between the two.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/13/2011 @ 11:50 pm
Milhouse– I think Senor’s article was written as a result of tonight’s vote in NY9,, but was meant to paint a much broader picture of 2012 and to include more than just the Orthodox segment. The fundraising issue alone is very significant. Barry’s problems with many Jewish voters are not going to evaporate between now and next November. It’s more than just his foreign policy. He’s got many of them squarely in his taxation gun sights, too.
Comment by elissa — 9/14/2011 @ 12:01 am
I hope he’s right.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 12:03 am
Still more than 10 percent of the precincts have yet to report in, and RS McCain reports dead people have been mailed absentee ballots. People who have been dead for years. With less than 4800 votes separating the two, it could still see some hinky stuff going on.
Comment by John Hitchcock — 9/14/2011 @ 12:14 am
John- don’t be such a h8er.
Comment by elissa — 9/14/2011 @ 12:18 am
Bush’s Fault!
Comment by BfC — 9/14/2011 @ 3:08 am
Check out the DOUR photo of Turner CNN is running on their main page. They aren’t liking this at all.
Ha ha!
Comment by Random — 9/14/2011 @ 3:42 am
Check out the DOUR photo of Turner CNN is running on their main page. They aren’t liking this at all.
Ha ha!
Comment by Random — 9/14/2011 @ 3:42 am
Heh – they must’ve gotten a lot of feedback on that already (or someone corrected the results of someone’s temper tantrum) cause the pic is all happy now.
The media really does think people are stupid.
Comment by no one you know — 9/14/2011 @ 4:38 am
I hope he’s right.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 12:03 am
Me too. And thanks, elissa, for the link.
Comment by no one you know — 9/14/2011 @ 4:39 am
A smart pol, like Bill Clinton, would move to the center without even thinking about it. We are blessed that The One isn’t that sharp.
Comment by Bugg — 9/14/2011 @ 4:43 am
Comment by happyfeet — 9/14/2011 @ 4:48 am
“I have a gift’ Obama was want to say, to Reid, here’s the bit I didn’t know about Turner:
http://yourjewishnews.com/10914.aspx
Comment by ian cormac — 9/14/2011 @ 4:50 am
B-but he wants to do away with medicare I thought?
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 6:15 am
I’ll believe this isn’t a fluke when I see the results of the November 2012 election. American Jewish voters aren’t known for voting in their self-interest.
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 9/14/2011 @ 6:22 am
And way out west, there’s this:
“If there was any question about the breadth and magnitude of the plunge in President Obama’s job-approval rating this summer, consider this new data point: For the first time, fewer than half of voters in deep-blue California approve of the job Obama is doing, according to a new Field Poll released early Wednesday.
Just 46 percent of voters approve of the job Obama is doing, while 44 percent disapprove. That is eight points lower than the previous Field Poll, conducted in June.
Obama has lost ground among all groups. His approval rating is 10 points lower among Democrats, 2 points lower among Republicans, and a whopping 13 points lower among independents, down to 45 percent among that key group.
Obama has lost 10 percent of men and 6 percent of women. His approval rating is nine points lower among white voters and three points down among Hispanics. It dropped 6 points among voters aged 18-29, 10 points among voters in their 30s, 7 points among voters in their 40s, 8 points among voters aged 50-64, and 10 points among voters over 65.
California voters are increasingly pessimistic about the direction of the country. Just 21 percent of voters — and 16 percent of independents — think the country is on the right track.”
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/09/obamas-approval-1.php
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 9/14/2011 @ 6:26 am
Crony capitialism is not capitalism…………..get it through your thick skull palin haters.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 6:27 am
This video illustrates what happened to the Dems in NY-9.
Comment by Michael Ejercito — 9/14/2011 @ 6:35 am
I’m at a loss for clever words, the facts speak so eloquently for themselves. The only thing Democrats can do now is to push the same old lies, deceptions, and phony spending programs that voters have rejected. How sad.
Democrats are reaping the bitter rewards of a long campaign of arrogance and deceit. Nancy Pelosi’s high handed dismissal of legitimate questions about ObamaCare with her pronouncement that we had to pass the legislation before we could find out what’s in it will stand as a monument to future generations of how surely does the arrogance of power clearly display itself immediately prior to a great fall.
Comment by ropelight — 9/14/2011 @ 6:40 am
That and Michelle’s expensive vacations on the taxpayer’s dime.
Comment by ropelight — 9/14/2011 @ 6:43 am
For debbi washerwoman shultz and the DNC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FxDzlitBoc
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 9/14/2011 @ 6:47 am
Congrats doh! :p
Comment by tifosa — 9/14/2011 @ 6:52 am
While the election is a disaster for NY-9 Democrats, the biggest disaster is that thousands of Jewish voters discovered if they pulled the R lever, lightning bolts wouldn’t strike them blind.
Comment by Corky Boyd — 9/14/2011 @ 7:13 am
what… they pull that lever, they should go blind?
HaShem. he doesn’t work that way.
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 9/14/2011 @ 7:41 am
Don’t get cocky, kid.
Comment by Kevin M — 9/14/2011 @ 8:02 am
I’m not a Dave Weigel fan — which is why I’ll link Mickey Kaus — but both rightly note the really fun part of this is that Mediscare and SocSecScare were a big fail for the Dems.
Comment by Karl — 9/14/2011 @ 8:10 am
When they try to compare this to the recent Dem win in NY-26, remind them that the Democrat won with 46% of the vote in a district that Cook rates R+6 (meaning they expect a two-party election to go 53R-47D).
The Democrats numbers were expected and the Republican’s were split with a (phony) tea party candidate, allowing 46% to stand up. Hardly an upset, and only indicative of Tea Party influence.
Comment by Kevin M — 9/14/2011 @ 8:15 am
The more observant/conservative a voter’s religious views are, the more likely they are to vote for conservative candidates. Add to that the Democrats open disdain for silly religious people and you have increasing polarization.
Why should Jews differ?
Comment by Kevin M — 9/14/2011 @ 8:19 am
Jews and Israel are much like Blacks with Obama. You get 95% plus approvals no matter what is going on. So Milhouse, you point is flat out wrong.
Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z — 9/14/2011 @ 8:49 am
“…Both Republican contenders urged voters to “send a message” to the president…”
If it’s not on TOTUS, he’ll never read it.
Understanding it is a whole ‘nuther question!
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! — 9/14/2011 @ 8:50 am
#20, it is actually socialism by definition.
Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z — 9/14/2011 @ 8:50 am
My general reaction to NY-09, and NV-02:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
It couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of dolts.
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! — 9/14/2011 @ 8:58 am
Something that needs to be understood about Jewish voters:
The “Liberal” Jews tend to be pretty much standard socialists – except for supporting Israel.
The Haredi Jews tend to be pretty much standard conservatives – except for hating Israel.
There is a small realm of Orthodox Jews who are social conservatives, fiscal liberals, and support Israel.
In this election Turner was the pro-Israel social conservative, while Weprin was the pro-Israel social liberal and fiscal socialist.
The Orthodox and some Haredi voted for Turner because Weprin voted for gay marriage in the State legislature. (Neturei Karta still opposed Turner, and probably stayed home.)
Enough “Liberal” Jews voted for Turner because Weprin was tied to Obama’s anti-Israel policies, and some actually wanted jobs again.
Don’t expect either group to avoid the Democrats in the future. A lot is going to depend on how much the next Democrat they have to vote for is tied into Obama, and how much social baggage they bring from other offices they have held.
Comment by Sam — 9/14/2011 @ 9:22 am
By what conceivable definition of either term is crony capitalism in any way identical to socialism?
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 10:44 am
Excuse me? Haredim have theological problems with the Zionist movement, and therefore shun such zionist symbols as the Israeli flag and anthem, but they are the sector that most passionately supports the state itself.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 10:47 am
If the state ‘owns’ the means of production, really it’s the rulers who own everything, picking winners and losers and generally having a hyper concentrated wealth in the ruling class, only they pretend they don’t own it.
It’s the most twisted and corrupt version of ‘capitalism’.
Capitalism is just a marxist word. A trick. It is simply the way of nature that you can’t build a company without assets of some kind.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 10:49 am
“Neturei Karta” in NY consists of perhaps 20 people, most of whom are not US citizens.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 10:49 am
Crony capitialism is marxism.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 10:49 am
“Crony capitalism” has a definition, and it’s very different from socialism. Capitalism also has a definition, and is very different from both; capitalism is the economic system that results when people are free to conduct their affairs without fear of force or fraud. When people know that if anyone beats them up or steals from them they can call the police and have it stopped, and if anyone cheats them they can go to court and get justice, when the only way to get someone else’s property is to persuade them to give it to you, whatever results is capitalism.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 10:52 am
No, crony capitalism is Marcosism.
Comment by Milhouse — 9/14/2011 @ 10:53 am
Well of course it is. That’s the point. People come up with different semantics.
Is socialism REALLY the state owning the means of production?
No. That’s just semantics to cover what’s really happening.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 10:55 am
I hope Mr. Turner sent Patterico a thank you letter.
Comment by papertiger — 9/14/2011 @ 11:06 am
==No, crony capitalism is Marcosism==
It’s ladies’ shoes?
Comment by elissa — 9/14/2011 @ 11:06 am
In the 20th-Century, “crony capitalism” is more associated with the dictates of Fascism as practiced by Mussolini than any other ideology.
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 11:13 am
STFU.
Neturei Karta is an ultra-left communist group.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 11:14 am
#37, Milhouse,
In Socialism, the Government seeks to exclusively control certain segments of the economy and many times via Private Ownership. In this relationship, the Government provides certainty to this companies in exchange for loyalty to the government itself. Defense Industries are a great example. It is capitalism in a sense but inbred. There is private enterprise but not competition per-se. And when Competition erupts the business is usually earned via bribes and political donations. Like Solyndra.
Crony Capitalism is not Communism b/c in communism all factors of production are owned by the government itself.
Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z — 9/14/2011 @ 2:53 pm
Mussolini was far-left.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 2:55 pm
Socialism does not mandate ownership of the means of production — just the control of certain means for purpose of the State.
The State control this means of production but allows private enterprise to earn its economic rents. Unfortunately, those decisions by the State are many times driven by bribery and political donations tot he pet causes of State.
Communism mandates ownership by the state of all means of production. It does not encourage or tolerate the concept of corporations earning money.
Come on guys, get with the program. Communism is not Socialism and no system is purely anyone of the above.
Capitalist countries have elements of Socialism and Marxism as it applies to the means of production. Pure capitalism has no gov.t interference whereas Communism total with Socialism somewhere in between.
Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z — 9/14/2011 @ 3:00 pm
Eye twitches.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 3:01 pm
But Mussolini was not a communist. He was a nationalist who believed the State needed control of vast swaths of the economy.
But Benito pretty much left small business to itself and it is one of the reasons Italy’s dynamic economic sectors are mid to small sized companies. Like Germany’s mittlestat also.
Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z — 9/14/2011 @ 3:02 pm
I disagree. That’s just semantics. In every case, someone controls/owns things. They just rename who is in power, and how that power is gained. With communism, rulers take everything by force and are simply violent and oppressive corporations. At least if you put semantics aside.
Capitalism is a completely abstract and phony way to view what is nature, and it’s a marxist concept for that specific purpose.
In all cases, someone gets to enjoy the fruit of someone’s labor. In ‘capitalism’, that might just be the person who actually created the fruit. That’s the only real difference.
In socialism, somewhat more polite communists use the power of the state (guns) to gain power and wealth and support their loyal base while taking from the earners.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:04 pm
How is Capitialism marxism?
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 3:06 pm
Fascism is lefty so Mussolini was a lefty.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 3:06 pm
The word. Just the word.
Capitalism is actually just nature. If you want to sell some bread… well, you need to have some wheat and an oven. That’s not really ‘capitalism’ so much as basic metaphysics.
The word capitalism was coined by Marx himself.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:08 pm
Oh I get it.
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 3:09 pm
No, Dustin, in a Communist state, The State owns everything. Individuals are only allowed to use something, whether it is a farm, a house, a shop.
Plus, all income goes to The State, and everyone receives an allowance:
From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.
It is just that the “needs” of the nomenklatura are so much greater than those of the proletariet.
Mussolini and the Fascists allowed private ownership, but the economy was directed by The State. In this he was, like his best-bud Adolf, a “National Socialist”; whereas Uncle Joe was an “International Socialist” in that the workings of The State and The Party was to further the International Goals of Communism.
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 3:12 pm
Mussolini was a lefty like Hitler……………are you assuming they were not?
Comment by DohBiden — 9/14/2011 @ 3:13 pm
Marx was concerned with defining a battle between Labor and Capital; so he had to have “Capitalists”.
Though Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations talked of capital and capitalists, the modern conception of a Capitalist had to wait until the blooming of the Industrial Revolution where large amounts of capital were required to establish and sustain industrial production in contrast to the mercantile system of small producers prior to the IR. Thus, Marx!
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 3:20 pm
But it’s not really the state that owns it. It’s those running the state, who generally live quite nicely.
The state is an abstraction.
I obviously understand what communism claims to be about, but it’s not true. It’s a trick for thugs to take the wealth and effort of a nation and use it for their own ends.
In many ways, they are like a hyper-evil twist on crony capitalism.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:21 pm
Doh, No! They are both National Socialists, and thusly of The Left. They just weren’t Commies, who they considered their enemies for political power, who were further to the Left.
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 3:22 pm
And he talked about it like it was a force of nature, practically. Which was inherently honest.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:22 pm
Dustin: Well you get a lot of authoritarianism/totalitarianism mixed in too.
The Left loves imposing the authority of the state, they just do it in various ways and degrees of severity.
Communism, as practiced in the 20th-Century, is heavy on total control of the populace.
The perfect example of “crony capitalism” was the period after the fall of the Soviet Union, where all of the apparatchiks/nomenklatura staked-out little fiefdoms for themselves (usually what areas of the economy that The Party had assigned to them – The Party imploded, they became “entrepreneurs”); ultimately consolidating into the Russian Mafia system of semi-state controlled corporations that funnel funds directly into the pockets of the thugs at the top of the pyramid, like Putin.
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 3:29 pm
The state is an abstraction.
Tell that to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn!
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 3:33 pm
Yes, Drew. You get what I’m trying to say perfectly.
Of course, the morons at the bottom actually believe in communism as defined in dictionaries, but that’s just a joke. It isn’t even possible.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:35 pm
Still more than 10 percent of the precincts have yet to report in, and RS McCain reports dead people have been mailed absentee ballots. People who have been dead for years.
Nothing unusual about that, since people don’t gte removed from the voting lists very easily.
This was just simply the basis for a court order impounding all absentee ballots, which turned out not to be necessary to decide the race.
A bigger problem is family members of deceased individuals filling out and mailing back the absentee ballots.
This became a big problem in 1998 during the recount in the race for New York State Attorney General between Republican incumbent Dennis C. Vacco and Democratic candidate Eliot L. Spitzer.
(Spitzer had run in 1994 but came in last in the primary. His 1994 campaign was financed by a loan from his father. That loan evaded or violated campaign finance laws since he really didn;t have the means to pay it back)
Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 9/14/2011 @ 3:36 pm
Do dead people request absentee ballots often?
It is completely impossible for this to legally occur.
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:37 pm
Comment by Dustin — 9/14/2011 @ 3:35 pm
Sort of like the VRWC joke that Leftists read Marx/Lenin; Conservatives understand Marx/Lenin!
Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks ! — 9/14/2011 @ 3:43 pm
_______________________________________________
California voters are increasingly pessimistic about the direction of the country.
That sentiment has been evident in California for several years, to well before the election when George Bush beat John Kerry, to well before the recall of Democrat Governor Grey Davis from office. And yet enough voters in America’s version of Greece/France/Mexico/Venezuela/Spain have blindly and nonsensically voted for a mostly full slate of liberals/Democrats since at least the late 1990s.
However, to be fair to Spain, enough Spaniards finally booted out the Socialists in their country’s most recent elections, while enough French people a few years ago did vote for a non-leftist (I won’t even label Nicolas Sarkozy “conservative”) to be their president instead of the Socialist.
So if the past is any guide, California may end up like a wonderful, heart-warming mixture of a bit of Greece, a bit of Mexico, with some Venezuela thrown in for good measure.
Comment by Mark — 9/14/2011 @ 5:26 pm
Several cartoons were pubvlished this month in the New York Daily News about this election
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/galleries/bramhalls_world_for_september_2011/bramhalls_world_for_september_2011.html
Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 9/15/2011 @ 4:44 pm
The true impact will be loss of campaign contributions and intimidation of Liberals in Congress. Weprin had Obama hung around his neck like an old toilet seat. It’s going to be the template for success against every incumbent who voted for ObamaCare, the stimulus, or the takeovers.
Comment by Arch — 9/16/2011 @ 1:53 pm