by Mark Silva
Barack Obama is not on the ballot today.
Yet, when the day's voting is done, many will insist that he was.
In Virginia, where the polls opened before dawn, there wasn't much trouble getting in and out of our polling place - none of the crowds that attended the 2008 election at the same Alexandria community center, when a state that hadn't voted Democratic since 1964 helped elect Obama president in a contest filled with fervor.
Bob McDonnell, the Republican candidate for governor who approached this day with a comfortable advantage in opinion polls, explained that a lot of the independent voters who turned out for Obama last year are happy to turn his way this year. Creigh Deeds, the Democratic candidate, accuses the Republican of trying to "nationalize'' the race because he cannot face the state's issues.
Both parties will attempt to "nationalize'' the outcome of the governor's race in New Jersey, where the incumbent Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine approached this day in a virtual tie with his Republican rival, Chris Christie. With a third-party candidate playing a possible spoiler's role there today, the winner of the election will be hoisted as proof that either Obama still has the juice - he campaigned several times for Corzine, as late as Sunday - or that the tide is turning toward Republicans heading into mid-term contests.
Near the anniversary of his own historic election as president, Obama's own job approval - 54 percent in a CNN/Opinion Research poll released today - has slipped considerably since his inauguration in January. The CNN survey had it at 76 percent in early February, and 54 percent in the latest Oct. 30-Nov. 1 survey - the president's ratings hovering in the 50s since late July by CNN's count.
It's 53 percent in the latest Gallup Poll daily tracking, which measured Obama's approval at 69 percent in late January. The president has bounced against a floor of 50 percent several times in the Gallup track but hasn't slipped beneath it.
The winner of that closely watched congressional race in upstate New York, a sprawling rural district bigger than a lot of states, could be none of the above: A Conservative candidate, Doug Hoffman, benefiting from a flood of support from Republicans who clearly attempted to "nationalize'' the race.
In painting the Republican candidate as untrue to the party's principals - Dede Scozzafava supports abortion rights and gay marriage - GOP leaders such as Sarah Palin pushed the conservative, and pushed the Republican right out of the race in the final days. In turn, the Republican has called on voters in her district to choose the Democrat, Bill Owens, in a region that hasn't put a Democrat in Congress since the Civil War.
There's enough spin potential in the 23rd Congressional District of New York for the outcome to be painted in any number of ways tonight. There was a head-wind of spin heading into this: With Democrats painting it as proof that the Republican Party is purging its moderates, and Republicans in search of party clarity insisting that, clearly, a Democrat cannot win in a place that was willing to accept Obama just last year.
But be assured of this, New York 23 will be nationalized, Virginia will be nationalized and New Jersey will be nationalized, as Obama heads to Madison, Wis., on Wednesday to celebrate another day, Nov. 4, 2008, that was not only national by definition but also fixed in history by precedent as a certain turning point in one nation's epic story.
Comments
The campaigning president is at his best out there stumping for himself and his party in total control of government.
While the leader in him (if he actually has that tendency) cower's in the dark.
He is a great campaigner though!
Posted by: springfieldd | November 3, 2009 11:08 AM
Although the Republicans, Democrats, the National News Media, and Left and Right Wing Political Commentators on Cable Television and Radio, will try to play up the national effects these three elections will play, they are all local. The late and former Democratic Speaker of the U.S. House Tip O'Neill always said that all politics are local. Although many will be talking about the results of the two governor races and the U.S. House race in Upstate New York tomorrow morning, I do not think any of those races will have major effects on the 2010 Elections. In New Jersey Corzine is unpopular and may have worn his welcome out with the voters. But he has outspent his Republican opponent by 2 to 1 and has major Union backing. There also is a third party candidate in the race that could have some effect on the outcome. In Virginia the Republican has a comfortable lead and the state, which Obama carried (1st time a Democrat has carried Virginia since 1964 in a Presidential Race) may be swinging back to the Republicans. The race for the House Race in Upstate New York (which had 3 candidates) is even more unusual. The Republican candidate, who was unpopular with Conservatives, dropped out of the race last weekend and endorsed the Democrat. The Republic National Committee after this occurred endorsed the Conservative Party candidate. And the NRA has endorsed the Democrat. All of those races are local and I do not think you can see any national trends out of them. Although Obama carried all three areas last election one must remember that he is not running in this election. All three of those elections are local and should not be held as a referendum on Obama. It will be interesting to see the results tomorrow morning.
Posted by: Depot- Jim | November 3, 2009 11:25 AM
We can easily imagine that White House has already issued to its media allies the following talking points on these elections:
1. If Democrats win in VA and NJ, write up the election as an endorsement of President Obama, who campaigned so hard for them. Write LOTS of articles on these elections.
2. If Democrats don't win,
a. Find some obscure dogcatcher race somewhere that a Democrat DID win, then trumpet how the election results were "mixed", or
b. Claim that Obama had nothing to do with the VA and NJ results, or
c. Claim that the victory of the Republicans was in reality a Republican defeat, or
d. Simply ignore the bad results, and write some more articles on the First Lady's taste in french fries.
Posted by: Change in 2009 | November 3, 2009 12:16 PM
If the Democrats lose will Obama balme it on Bush.
Posted by: Inky | November 3, 2009 12:25 PM
"Change in 2009", your post would be funny if it weren't true. That's exactly what the WH will do. BO's image has become the sacred cow of liberal politics. No criticism, express or implied, can be tolerated. I guess it is a good strategy by the WH. Nobody really likes liberals. There is something really annoying about people that are both whiney and smug. But people do seem to like BO on a personal level. The DNC milks this. They know that their message doesn't really resonate with average Americans, but they know BO does. Thus, the DNC will do everything it can to keep the image of BO untarnished (e.g., if Deeds loses, it is because he didn't "embrace" BO; if Christie wins in NJ, it is a local issue with nothing to do with BO; if BO reverses himself on a campaign promise, he is being pragmatic; if BO ignores a campaign promise, the poor dear just has too much on his plate; if someone in the news is critical of BO, attack the messenger; if all else fails, change the subject and start babbling about GWB). This strategy is so predictable and transparent, I can't believe that some people still don't see through it. Spin every story. Protect the sacred cow at all costs. BO can do no wrong. Pass the Kool Aid.
Posted by: Herbie H. | November 3, 2009 2:15 PM
It is good to see there are still a few straws for the desperate to grasp at. Oh and change.....talk about desperate......Sean Vannity has Mister Rogers on for the "congressional" race in an obscure "republican" district that hasn't voted democrat since 1890, with national figures such as Palin, Thompson and others supporting him? How do you spell desperation? Hoffman, baby, Hoffman!
Posted by: bill r. | November 3, 2009 2:23 PM
face it; the only achievement this president can speak for is the first Black President; he lacks the wisdom, foresight, knowledge, leadership, aligeance to our constitution and values to be the President of the USA.
Posted by: sobell52 | November 3, 2009 2:47 PM
Please little bill, does any of this rant of yours have anything to do with the subject?
You spew these little rants about this and that but have nothing to add to the conversation. Your fingers are busy pointing in all directions, it's called the game of children who cannot fathom responsibility.
Pick a subject, any subject and try to support the Obama administration on their policies instead of hacking relentlesly at others to deflect the insanity coming from the WH. You have no shame in your game there little bill, therefore, you are useless, unimportant, meaningless and mindless.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Posted by: springfieldd | November 3, 2009 3:02 PM
Please little bill, does any of this rant of yours have anything to do with the subject?
It's spot on the subject. Hence the childish rage.
Posted by: bill r. | November 3, 2009 4:04 PM
As an educated historian I can say to those on the extreme Left and Right that are rating individual American Presidents that it is impossible to do until at least 20 years after they have served. The reason why is that we let our individual biases get in the way and we do not know how their policies and events that occurred during their administrations will play out in the long run. In the case of President Obama he has been in office since only last January and trying to rate him is like trying to rate a baseball game after only two innings have been played.
Posted by: Depot- Jim | November 3, 2009 4:08 PM
ny23 has been repub since jesus walked the earth. virginia has been repub since gw was alive. this is no news, the repubs should win. and if hoffman wins by less then 10 points, thats pathetic. considering the $ and media they have thrown at him and he wasn't even the R's original canidate. HAVE any of you been to NY23? Not much there. 30k people tops. the repubs are falling apart and grasping at straws. i can't wait for 2010 elections. either the moderate R's jump to the D's or they start there own party. which would be good for america.
Posted by: scott from buffalo | November 3, 2009 4:53 PM
Mark, since you admit to voting this morning in VA, mind telling us readers who you voted for for governor?
Disclosure...transparency... How about it?
Not, of course, that any of us have any doubt who you voted for....
ANSWER: My business, no one else's. -- Silva
Posted by: Bruce | November 3, 2009 5:05 PM
When one side or another resorts to name-calling, in any arguement, the side that starts the name calling loses. Arguements must be on facts and beliefs, not hateful rhetoric. Dems and Libs take note, you violate this axiom more than most, but Consrvatives and Republicans, you should know better. Keep arguements relevant, on point. The best way to derail a Liberal is with facts. Real ones, not ones from Moveon.org, etc.
Posted by: JoeVoter | November 3, 2009 5:48 PM
To ignore what is happening in America is a mistake. Katy told Specter the fact. the sleeping giant has been awakened. This giant is the conservative movement of "We The People". These three elections are just the beginning of what may be a sweeping change for America. I do not believe either DNC or RNC current elected members will be immune to the on coming revolt.
Posted by: bcorp | November 3, 2009 8:57 PM
Thank goodness. These elections are clearly showing we only have 1 year left of Socialism in America. One thing good with a high unemployment rate.. People have time to pay more attention to what our elected leaders are doing or lack thereof.
Posted by: Greg | November 3, 2009 10:49 PM
Isn't this what everyone anticipated?
Posted by: nancy @ princetoncryo | November 4, 2009 9:08 AM