POL: Local Elections = Referendum on Bush?

[albionmoonlight]

So some states are having local elections today, and the news media is portraying the results as a potential referendum on Bush. If Dems win these elections, apparently we all now hate Bush, and if Repubs win, then we all still love Bush.

Is it me, or is that not really accurate? All politics is local, right? I personally think that Bush has been one of the worst presidents of all time. And maybe I would let that influence my voting when deciding who to send to Congress.

But I can't see why my opinion of Bush would effect who I would choose as Governor of my state. Or whether I would support a state ballot initiative or not. Or, indeed, affect my thinking on any state level election.

Am I wrong to think that the media is trying to make too much of these local races? Or are people really voting for their governor based on whether they think that the Harriet Miers situation was handled well?

[Ksyrup]

Yeah, I love the doom-and-gloom headline on CNN.com ("Election may reflect GOP struggles"). And then they suggest in the blurb that the mayoral elections in such conservative bastions as Detroit, San Diego, Atlanta, Boston and NY are going to determine whether the country has become anti-Bush. OK.

[Glengoyne]

...

Am I wrong to think that the media is trying to make too much of these local races? ...
Nope. I think that is the gist of it.

[Ryche]

We have one example in Minnesota where that might be the case. The now mayor of St. Paul, a lifelong Democrat, endorsed Bush. He's now projected to lose his mayoral race by at least 20 percentage points. Of course, the city is probably 70% Democrat anyway, so the result is hardly surprising.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Is it me, or is that not really accurate? All politics is local, right?

I'd say you're much more right than wrong, about the only places where I see a possible indicator at all would be maybe the NYC Mayoral & the VA Gov. And those are only indicators if there's a clear "Bush = all Republicans" signal & I'm not sure is that's case -- for example, I'd vote for Bush in a heartbeat tomorrow but hell would freeze over before I voted for my incumbent Rep. governor.

[Bee]

I'd say you're much more right than wrong, about the only places where I see a possible indicator at all would be maybe the NYC Mayoral & the VA Gov. And those are only indicators if there's a clear "Bush = all Republicans" signal & I'm not sure is that's case -- for example, I'd vote for Bush in a heartbeat tomorrow but hell would freeze over before I voted for my incumbent Rep. governor.

But you're informed about what's going on...the general public just goes to the polls and votes their emotions. Sometimes that's based on hot button local issues and sometimes that's based on national issues. I think that Bush is experiencing a degree of backlash right now for some of his decisions (not to the degree the media plays it out though). I think that backlash may influence enough voters to swing close races where there's not a lot of hot local issues that are on people's minds. So as far as that goes, I think what the media is saying probably has some degree of validity, but like most things you hear from the media you have to take it with a grain of salt.

[JonInMiddleGA]

But you're informed about what's going on...the general public just goes to the polls and votes their emotions.

But wouldn't that make it less likely to be an reliable indicator of, well, just about anything?

[Bee]

But wouldn't that make it less likely to be an reliable indicator of, well, just about anything?

Possibly, but what I was getting at was it's more likely that someone less informed and emotional to go in and say "I think Bush messed up, so I'm going to vote for the democrat" even if they are generally more in line with the Republican candidate. Where you or I would look at the candidate and the issues and make a decision based on which one closest follows our beliefs. I tend to think there's a lot more emotional voters out there than informed ones like those who come here.

[Dutch]

Here's Yahoo! News' choice on their website. Could the DNC have done a better job of writing this article? You think it was written by moveon.org or peaceandjustice, but no, it was written by the Associated Press. Ugh.



Voters Decide Between Bloomberg, Ferrer

By SARA KUGLER, Associated Press Writer

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051108/ap_on_el_st_lo/ny_mayor_s_race

NEW YORK - New Yorkers began casting their votes for mayor before sunrise Tuesday, just hours after incumbent Mayor Michael Bloomberg ended his final day of campaigning on a high point — from atop the Empire State Building.

The appearance more than 1,000 feet above the city's streets was a fitting finish for a re-election machine that appeared limitless in every way, with no expense spared, nonstop advertising and sky-high poll numbers against Democrat Fernando Ferrer.

Ferrer, who has been outspent about 10 times over by Bloomberg, tried to convince voters that the billionaire incumbent's personal spending on the race was "obscene," and repeatedly reminded the city that the mayor was a Republican who had campaigned for President Bush.

But even in predominantly Democratic New York, many remained unconvinced.

Ben Faulkner, 31, a lawyer who had voted Democrat all his life, crossed party lines for the first time Tuesday. Asked if it bothered him to vote for a Republican, Faulkner said, "Not for Bloomberg. ... He's not really a Republican."

Zenel Haxhaj, a 40-year-old South Bronx Democrat, also voted for Bloomberg, reasoning: "I figure you re-elect him if he hasn't done anything wrong."

Despite trailing Bloomberg in the latest poll by a painful 38 points, Ferrer promised Monday to surprise naysayers. The former Bronx borough president called in an all-star list of national Democrats — including formerPresident Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama — to support him in his final days of campaigning.

Ferrer, who has tried to portray Bloomberg as an elitist who abandoned middle-class New Yorkers to cater to the interests of the wealthy, arrived early Tuesday at his polling place with his wife, daughter and two grandchildren. The mayor, also voting early Tuesday, has argued that Ferrer is a complainer who never offers real solutions.

Ferrer's message on the forgotten middle-class hit home with Hortense Davis, a retired union official and registered Democrat, who said she was voting for Ferrer because "maybe the economy will turn around."

"There's too much unemployment" under Bloomberg, she said. "We need to bring the lower middle class back into the city."

Diane Martella, a Democrat who voted for Ferrer in the West Village, said Ferrer's claim that there are two New Yorks — one for the rich, and another for the poor — rang true.

"I wish he did have a chance, because I think he's right. There are two New Yorks, and I think he could do something about it, and Bloomberg's never going to. Because he doesn't know there's two New Yorks, and he doesn't care. He doesn't have to care, he has so much money," said Martella, a medical transcriber.

Andrea Daniel, 38, voted in the Bronx for Ferrer because "we need some housing, we need some jobs. He's the one who will do that for us."

She said party loyalty played a part in her decision, "but I think he might win. He has a chance."

At a morning campaign stop Tuesday at the Stage Deli in midtown Manhattan, Bloomberg was presented with a 10-ounce, $12.95 hamburger bearing his name: The Mayor Michael Bloomberger.

"I will say that I'm pleased that you didn't put my name next to the chopped liver," the mayor quipped.

Outside, he posed for pictures with tourists and shook hands with construction workers, some wearing Bloomberg campaign stickers.

Asked how he thought he'd do after the polls closed, the mayor said, "I'd be thrilled if I won by one vote or more."

On Monday, Ferrer insisted he was in a "tremendously optimistic mood" as he campaigned in Manhattan's Chelsea neighborhood with Obama and the Rev.Al Sharpton. Obama said voters should ignore the dismal pre-election opinion polls.

"What they should do is think about what's in their hearts," he said.

Though polls consistently found him lagging, Ferrer was still promising an "immense surprise." The Democrat is making his third run for City Hall, and would be the city's first Latino mayor if elected.

Battling what he has described as Bloomberg's "brick wall" of endless spending, Ferrer waged his campaign with fewer workers, a smaller volunteer operation and a skimpy advertising budget. Ferrer relied on public matching funds and was predicted to spend about a tenth of the mayor's total, which is likely to break his 2001 record of $74 million.

Toward the end of the day Monday, the differences in the candidates' paths were clear. As Ferrer hit a rush-hour subway stop and headed to his last pre-election fund-raiser, a relaxed and happy Bloomberg played bingo and went bowling with volunteers.

Still, despite his perceived lead, Bloomberg was out early Monday and campaigned in all five boroughs.

"I know you're going to win," said one woman, standing in a yard with several of her friends in the Bronx, where former Mayor Ed Koch joined Bloomberg.

"Let's not take that for granted," he told her. "Come out and vote tomorrow."

His resource-rich campaign even provided a shuttle service to cart elderly or disabled voters to the polls. The service was just one part of his campaign's relentless get-out-the-vote drive, which reached millions of people by knocking on doors, writing letters and handing out literature.

___

Associated Press Writers Jim Fitzgerald, Adam Goldman, Samantha Gross, Deepti Hajela, Ula Ilnytzky, Karen Matthews and Amy Westfeldt contributed to this report.

[terpkristin]

I don't believe that an election going to the Democratic nominee or the Republican nominee indicates whether the country is against Bush or for Bush (respectively).

I *DO* believe that a person being a Republican candidate and having Bush come to help them campaign for them MAY hurt them, given the latest approval numbers for Bush. In that vein, it will be interesting to see the outcome of the Virginia gubernetorial election tonight/tomorrow. Bush made a last-minute stop at a Kilgore (Republican nominee) rally last night, and I read somewhere today that some high-ranking officials within the party are afraid that Bush's appearance (and approval of Kilgore) may in fact hurt the Kilgore campaign--a feeling that if Bush supports him, maybe he's not that great a person. I could certainly see how that would happen, and admittedly, VA seems to be a VERY tight race. We'll see how it turns out.

/tk

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, I think the media is hyping up this local election = poll on Bush for ratings. Really the races in NJ and Virginia aren't going to be decided on whether or not the people like Bush. There are far other issues involved. And the NYC Mayor race is going to be a landslide, so I'm not sure why it's getting so much coverage (FWIW, the guy in Dutch's article is right, Bloomberg really isn't a 'national' Republican, he's probably to the left of a 'Northeastern Republican'. After all he was a Democrat up to the point he decided to run for mayor as a Republican).

[QuikSand]

To me, the biggest joke of all is that it's who wins that supposedly tell the whole story. If you listen closely, you'll essentially hear that if the Dem in VA wins 51-49, then Bush is up the creek, but if the Rep wins VA 51-49, Bush is A-okay. Both are nonsense, of course, even if national impressions of the parties do have some significant sway in the outcomes (which I think is true).

From what I have read, most analysts have judged that the decline in popularity of Mr Bush and the GOP have cost the Republican candidate in Virginia about 5-8 points in recent months, making what was once thought to be a fairly easy win into a photo finish. That is the real story (that he isn't wining by 8 points), not whether he wins or loses by a point or two.

Of course, I have heard the trend is the opposite in NJ, but that's a weird race with two very wealthy candidates, might not reflect much of anything.

[ISiddiqui]

And in NJ, the Republican candidate is pro-choice (though I'm not sure if he is for late term abortion).

[sachmo71]

The long lines at the polls that I saw here in my community made me happy. Maybe people are going to stop letting everyone else worry about their future, tell the media that it's not their call who does what, and take responsibility.

Or maybe I'm naive. :)

[terpkristin]

With 84% of the precints reporting in Virginia, the latest numbers I saw were 51% for the Democrat (Kaine) to 46% for the Republican (Kilgore). I believe the AP has already called the win for Kaine.

They were going into the race virtually neck-and-neck. Of course, there are factors to include such as voter turnout, but I wonder if President Bush's support (particularly his campaign appearance last night, election eve) may have hurt Kilgore.

Edited to fix the numbers...

/tk

[terpkristin]

Dola,
Wanted to clarify, my numbers above were off (going to edit them):

<table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="228"> <tbody><tr><td colspan="3">Governor </td></tr><tr><td valign="top">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gifUpdated 9:17 PM ET </td><td colspan="2" align="right" valign="top">Precincts:84% http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif</td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="228"> <tbody><tr id="headerRow" bgcolor="#404066"><td> Candidate</td><td align="right">Votes </td><td align="right">% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#e7e7e7"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/election2003/images/red_check.gif Kaine (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301662/) (D) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">830,055</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif51% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#b9babb"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif Kilgore (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301664/) (R) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">751,647</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif46% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#e7e7e7"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif Potts Jr. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301663/) (I) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">36,628</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif2% </td></tr><tr id="bottomRow1" bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gifFull Results (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/va/#301566)</td><td colspan="2" align="right" valign="top">Source: AP http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif</td></tr></tbody> </table>
<table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="228"> <tbody><tr><td colspan="3"> Lt Governor </td></tr><tr><td valign="top">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gifUpdated 9:17 PM ET </td><td colspan="2" align="right" valign="top">Precincts:77% http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif</td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="228"> <tbody><tr id="headerRow" bgcolor="#404066"><td> Candidate</td><td align="right">Votes </td><td align="right">% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#e7e7e7"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif Bolling (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301668/) (R) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">757,850</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif51% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#b9babb"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif Byrne (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301667/) (D) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">728,128</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif49% </td></tr><tr id="bottomRow1" bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gifFull Results (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/va/#301567)</td><td colspan="2" align="right" valign="top">Source: AP http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif</td></tr></tbody> </table>
<table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="228"> <tbody><tr><td colspan="3"> Attorney General </td></tr><tr><td valign="top">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gifUpdated 9:17 PM ET </td><td colspan="2" align="right" valign="top">Precincts:77% http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif</td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="228"> <tbody><tr id="headerRow" bgcolor="#404066"><td> Candidate</td><td align="right">Votes </td><td align="right">% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#e7e7e7"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif McDonnell (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301666/) (R) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">744,693</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif50% </td></tr><tr id="candidateRow" bgcolor="#b9babb"><td id="nameCell" height="16" valign="bottom"> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif Deeds (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2005/candidates/301665/) (D) </td><td align="right" valign="bottom">737,921</td><td id="pctCell" align="right" height="16" valign="bottom">http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif50% </td></tr></tbody> </table>

[digamma]

I think it's actually 51-46, tk.

[terpkristin]

digamma, read my corrections. I caught it just after I posted, but thanks. :)

/tk

[digamma]

Yeah, your self-correction beat my post by a few seconds.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... but I wonder if President Bush's support (particularly his campaign appearance last night, election eve) may have hurt Kilgore.

Not likely 15% worth. I'm too burned out to tackle a territory I'm not familiar with, but the key(s) can likely be found in looking at:

a) turnout % in traditional D precincts/counties vs traditional R areas -- if one swung high while the other swung low, the results can get ugly pretty quick

or

b) If turnouts were equal/normal, then Kilgore likely managed to bungle at least a couple of key constituencies that he (thought he) had locked up. He either lost "soccer moms" or "NASCAR dads" or some other trendy labeled group.

OR ... he was really behind by 15% all along & the polls were skewed some way that gave a bad read on what to expect.

[Buccaneer]

There are still polls???

[oliegirl]

Yeah, I love the doom-and-gloom headline on CNN.com ("Election may reflect GOP struggles"). And then they suggest in the blurb that the mayoral elections in such conservative bastions as Detroit, San Diego, Atlanta, Boston and NY are going to determine whether the country has become anti-Bush. OK.

Although the metro Atlanta area is conservative, the city of Atlanta - where you have to live in order to vote for mayor, is overwhelmingly Democratic. And as far as I know (admittedly never been to either city), Detroit and NY are also both heavily democratic cities...not sure where these "bastions of conservatism" are...

[Bee]

Obviously what we can deduce from this is whomever Bee votes for will lose. President, governor, doesn't matter. Maybe I'll rent myself out...

[Crapshoot]

Although the metro Atlanta area is conservative, the city of Atlanta - where you have to live in order to vote for mayor, is overwhelmingly Democratic. And as far as I know (admittedly never been to either city), Detroit and NY are also both heavily democratic cities...not sure where these "bastions of conservatism" are...

Thus the sarcasm in Ksyrup's statement....

[oliegirl]

Thus the sarcasm in Ksyrup's statement....


I didn't detect any sarcasm, but if it's there, my bad :)

[Bee]

I didn't detect any sarcasm, but if it's there, my bad :)

don't worry, I assumed he was an idiot too. ;)

[Buccaneer]

San Diego, along with southern Orange County, is one of the largest conservative blocs in the country.

[Ksyrup]

San Diego, along with southern Orange County, is one of the largest conservative blocs in the country.They're all still freaking looney tunes out there.

[Ksyrup]

don't worry, I assumed he was an idiot too. ;)
Usually, it's a coin flip. But alas, this time, I was going for sarcasm.

[CamEdwards]

With 84% of the precints reporting in Virginia, the latest numbers I saw were 51% for the Democrat (Kaine) to 46% for the Republican (Kilgore). I believe the AP has already called the win for Kaine.

They were going into the race virtually neck-and-neck. Of course, there are factors to include such as voter turnout, but I wonder if President Bush's support (particularly his campaign appearance last night, election eve) may have hurt Kilgore.

Edited to fix the numbers...

/tk

Nope. I know you fixed the numbers, but I don't think this had anything to do with President Bush. It looks like we've got a Republican Lt. Gov. and a Republican Attorney General, both of whom got more raw votes than Kilgore.

This wasn't a referendum on the President. This was a referendum on Jerry Kilgore.

[ISiddiqui]

Looks like Corzine beat the crap out of Forrester. Should have been a closer race, but NJ has become very solidly Democrat (after voting for Reagan in 80 & 84 and Bush I in 92... from then to know, it's status as a bellweather state has eroded).

[Buccaneer]

Most voters said President Bush was not a factor in their choices Tuesday, according to the survey conducted Tuesday by the AP and its polling partner, Ipsos.
"There's no way to spin this than anything other than a major defeat for Republicans and for President Bush," said University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato.

It appears Mr. Sabato do not believe in polls either.

[Bee]

It appears Mr. Sabato do not believe in polls either.
Well, the poll from NJ you quoted did indicate that 20% of those polled were casting their local vote as a vote against Bush. While most said Bush wasn't a factor, I'm guessing that 20% is probably higher than the normal influence a president would have in an off year election. Of course, I'm not a political analyst...perhaps that's normal.

[Samdari]

This wasn't a referendum on the President. This was a referendum on Jerry Kilgore.

I agree with that.

Apparently his death penalty ads caused quite a backlash, and may have caused him to lose the election. I am glad to see that, as I want that kind of political advertising to go away. I am really glad this election is over, just so my phone won't ring with a recorded message from Jerry or George Bush 3 or 4 times every evening.

[wade moore]

Nope. I know you fixed the numbers, but I don't think this had anything to do with President Bush. It looks like we've got a Republican Lt. Gov. and a Republican Attorney General, both of whom got more raw votes than Kilgore.

This wasn't a referendum on the President. This was a referendum on Jerry Kilgore.
You beat me to it.

Not only on Kilgore, but I personally believe (see the old thread I bumped that Cam started) it is specifically a referendum on Kilgore's strategy.

The other fact to me is a perception (I think) that current Gov. Warner (D) has done a good job "cleaning up the mess" that Gilmore (R) created.

I know these were the two key factors for me.

In addition - I find it odd that this could be a referendum on Bush in VA when we elected a Democrat to Gov when Bush's approval rating was very high. So, to continue in that trend when Bush's approval rating is low seems to show Bush is not the reason.

[flere-imsaho]

As fun as it is for me to see Democrats win yesterday, these elections aren't a referendum on Bush. That will be the 2006 mid-term elections.

Anyways, we already have a referendum on Bush. It's called his approval ratings. The media just wants a story but doesn't want to have to work hard enough to actually thoughtfully analyze the stories of these individual elections (I'm talking about the national media here, of course).

[Subby]

I think the outcome of the Virginia gubernatorial race was decided by three things:

1) The popularity and relative success of the Warner administration.
2) The negative campaigning style of Jerry Kilgore.
3) The attempt by the White House to put this race in the national spotlight.

I would weigh each factor in descending order, with #1 being the most important. I don't think you can discount the effect of #3, however. I think the President's involvement in the race served as a catalyst for voters who may not have otherwise come out to the polls. I am suprised that Kilgore enlisted the help of the President - no way it could have done anything but hurt him.

Larry Sabato (a legend in this area for his long-time astute political analysis) is probably at least half-right, I would think. To completely discount this as a referendum on the Presidency, particularly when the President was as involved as he was, would be a mistake.

[wade moore]

I think the outcome of the Virginia gubernatorial race was decided by three things:

1) The popularity and relative success of the Warner administration.
2) The negative campaigning style of Jerry Kilgore.
3) The attempt by the White House to put this race in the national spotlight.

I would weigh each factor in descending order, with #1 being the most important. I don't think you can discount the effect of #3, however. I think the President's involvement in the race served as a catalyst for voters who may not have otherwise come out to the polls. I am suprised that Kilgore enlisted the help of the President - no way it could have done anything but hurt him.

Larry Sabato (a legend in this area for his long-time astute political analysis) is probably at least half-right, I would think. To completely discount this as a referendum on the Presidency, particularly when the President was as involved as he was, would be a mistake.I don't disagree with you. However, I think Kilgore loses even without the President's involvement.

I definately think the national media discounted #1 in a huge way.

[Crapshoot]

I'm curious - who actually thought running a ad about "Hitler" in a Virgina election was a good idea ?

[Subby]

I don't disagree with you. However, I think Kilgore loses even without the President's involvement. I think I agree with you - the margin is much wider than I think anyone expected and I have a hard time believing that Kilgore stiff-arming the president would have made up that difference.

The most effective campaign ad, in my opinion, was the one where Kaine said (paraphrasing) "Governor Mark Warner and I worked hard to move this state forward over the past four years. And Jerry Kilgore fought us every step of the way."

It did a nice job of trading on the goodwill built up for Warner while insinuating that Kilgore would undo all the good things that the administration has done. A nice contrast to the over-the-top sledgehammer approach from Kilgore.

[wade moore]

I think I agree with you - the margin is much wider than I think anyone expected and I have a hard time believing that Kilgore stiff-arming the president would have made up that difference.

The most effective campaign ad, in my opinion, was the one where Kaine said (paraphrasing) "Governor Mark Warner and I worked hard to move this state forward over the past four years. And Jerry Kilgore fought us every step of the way."

It did a nice job of trading on the goodwill built up for Warner while insinuating that Kilgore would undo all the good things that the administration has done. A nice contrast to the over-the-top sledgehammer approach from Kilgore.
Yup.

[wade moore]

I'm curious - who actually thought running a ad about "Hitler" in a Virgina election was a good idea ?
Not only did they think it was a good idea, they defended the strategy in interviews until the bitter end.

[flere-imsaho]

Does this make Warner a viable Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008?

[CamEdwards]

Does this make Warner a viable Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008?

No, but only because he's already been a viable candidate. If he can get through the primaries (which won't be easy), he'd be the best candidate the Democrats could field (IMO).

[digamma]

I agree with the general thought that this wasn't a referendum on Bush nationally, however, here in California, it is hard to spin yesterday's results as anything but a referendum on the Governator. He went 0-4 on the ballot measures he backed, with only the labor union/political contribution measure being close.

[JPhillips]

Its only a referendum on the President to the extent that Repubs believe it is. Kilgore made it a point to stay away from the President until the very end when he needed a hail mary to win. Now other Repubs are stating publicly that they don't want to use the President in their campaigns (Hayworth in Arizona said this on Imus this morning).

Its impossible to narrow any of these elctions to Bush, but it is clear that Republicans are nervous. As the 2006 races get near I wouldn't be surprised to see Bush mostly on the sidelines ala Clinton in the 2000 election.

[Flasch186]

this one is horse crap. Im a lefty and I dont agree with this. There is a huge difference between assault weopans and handguns. This should lose in court I hope.



San Francisco Voters Approve Handgun Ban

By LOUISE CHU, Associated Press Writer Wed Nov 9, 6:27 AM ET

SAN FRANCISCO - Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters.

The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.

With all precincts reporting early Wednesday, 58 percent of voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.

Although law enforcement, security guards and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.

A coalition led by the National Rifle Association has said it plans to challenge the initiative in court, arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.

The military recruitment initiative won with 60 percent in favor and 40 percent against.

The measure, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.

It encourages city officials and university administrators to exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.

"We now have the moral weight of the city behind us, and it's definitely a valuable asset to have in our corner," said Bob Matthews, an activist for the proposition.

[CamEdwards]

just out of curiousity flasch, what would you say the difference is? for that matter, could you give me the definition of an assault weapon?

[albionmoonlight]

A good chance for a quick civics lesson. First, I agree with you that the law is a bad idea. I think that guns are used responsibly by a lot of people, and that banning guns covers up the symptoms of violent crime without addressing the causes. Reasonable minds can differ in this area, but I am against it.

It turns out that the NRA, who also disagrees with the law is opposing it in court. You disagree with the law and note thatThis should lose in court I hope.But, look at what is actually being challenged in court:arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.This is not a re-litigation of the merits of the law (is the handgun ban a good idea as a policy matter?), nor is these even a litigation of the Constitutional Right to Bear Arms (which does not apply to state and city level bans for reasons we need not get into here).

Instead, what is going to be litigated is the somewhat dry and academic issue of the delegation of rulemaking authority between the state and city governments under California law. The merits of the case will have NOTHING TO DO WITH GUNS. The merits of the case will have NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER THE LAW PASSED IS GOOD OR BAD. It will only ask whether San Francisco has the right to pass the law in the first place.

The media, however, will portray the case as "Court rules in favor of NRA" or "Court bans handguns in California."

Because we live in a world where everyone who feels opressed runs off to court, people have an impression of courts as super-legislatures that tend to decided each case based on whether the law in front of them is a good idea or not. That's rarely the issue. Normally, courts just make sure that the law was passed validly, does not conflict with a higher law, and is being executed as it was written.

Pretty dry stuff most of the time.

[Flasch186]

just out of curiousity flasch, what would you say the difference is? for that matter, could you give me the definition of an assault weapon?

I think that this is something that people who arent intrinsically involved int he issue, like yourself (no offense) could use the smell test on. I think its that simple.

Assault Weapon = big, fires fast, fires powerful ammo, etc. etc. etc.

hand gun = smallish, used in one hand, fires .45 caliber ammo at best, maybe only semi-auto. etc. etc. etc.

to me its simple probably harder when written out into a law, but in my head, I can see what each one is, and its easy.

[Subby]

The military recruitment measure makes me physically sick.

[wade moore]

The military recruitment measure makes me physically sick.
We're agreeing too much today ;)..

[Flasch186]

The military recruitment measure makes me physically sick.

what is this? i hadnt heard of this?

[flere-imsaho]

Just for clarification, the article said that the measure that passed encourages schools & colleges not to allow military recruiters on their campuses.

[wade moore]

No, but only because he's already been a viable candidate. If he can get through the primaries (which won't be easy), he'd be the best candidate the Democrats could field (IMO).
I would imagine the potential of snagging Virginia would be very appealing to the Dems... Mark Warner seems to me to have experienced a lot more positive feelings in Virginia than any other state politician I've seen in the 8 years I've been voting.