At 11/3/2009 7:14:03 PM, JBlake wrote:
Again, I think you and the media are taking too much of these elections to attack Obama. Consider this:
Not to attack Obama, per se, but to show that the Dem message is not viable.
VA: southern state. It is not uncommon for Republicans to win. Since 1970 5 out of 10 governors were republican.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
It is not uncommon for Democrats to win. Since 1970 5 out of 10 governors were Democrat. VA is not
really a southern state, it is connected with DC, Maryland, and New Jersey - which are definitely northern states.
NY: Dems will probably win governorship. The election for mayor is close because this is Bloomberg's third term. He promised he would not run for a third. In fact, the law was changed to allow him to run for a third. Unhappiness with this better explanation than a backlash for Obama.
Race for Gov is in 2010. Bloomberg already won. These are not the races everyone is talking about though. The 23rd congressional district - Conservative Party vs. Democrat is what everyone is paying attention to.
NJ: Anything but a Dem. stronghold on the Governorship. The republicans held it from 1994 to 2002. The Democrats have held it since then. If the election ends up going to the Republicans, we can probably chalk it up to unhappiness with the high NJ tax rate (highest in the nation) more than a backlash against Obama.
Yeah, that's it. The Dems have held the governorship since 2002 and also have more congressional districts and are in control of the state legislature - but you try to rationalize that the cause of the GOP swing is the high-tax rate. I struggle to see it that way.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
~Stephen F. Roberts
