2009: A Year in Review

Summary: 2009 was a transition year in politics. Now we wait to see how it will affect 2010.

2009 was truly an interesting year to observe as the nation transitioned out of the Bush Era and into the Obama years.


The year was marked by three issues: the economy, healthcare reform, and the war in Afghanistan. Occasionally we came across other issues including the torture debate, gay marriage, and climate change.

And as the year dragged on with little improvement on any of the big issues Americans are concerned about, President Obama and the Democratic majority in Congress slipped considerably in the polls.

But for campaign people, there were other big developments that largely went unnoticed to the typical American. The ever-growing presence of New Media kept strategists and operatives glued to their computers as they watched for how these advancements could help their work. One New Media tool in particular was Twitter and its importance (or at least perceived importance) in politics.

And then there were the elections…

Campaigns in 2009

While there were only a handful of races in 2009, they were followed vigorously by political-junkies for the importance they might have in the midterm elections next year and the American political landscape for the Obama Era.

First up were the elections in New York City, where last year’s decision to extend term limits significantly shook up a lot of political dreams. Incumbents held on to 38 of 51 City Council seats and Mayor Michael Bloomberg managed to squeak by an unexpectedly tough re-election to earn a third term.

Then there were the Democratic defeats in New Jersey and Virginia. The electorates in these states were not happy with the budgets passed in the wake of the recession, and voted in some of the first GOP governors in those states in a long time.

That same day, voters approved a referendum in Maine that re-banned gay marriage after the State Legislature and governor approved the unconventional arrangement earlier this year. This upset indicated that the electorate appeared to be on the side of the LGBT community, but still privately opposed same-sex marriage.

There was some light at the end of the tunnel for liberals. A bizarre upset in upstate New York - as well as a somewhat expected victory in California - delivered additional Democrats to the House of Representatives. This indicated that while Democrats were facing a lot of pressure at the state level, Americans were still a little more confident in the Democratic Party than the far-right Republicans on the federal level.

Of course, politics is still a bad spectator sport, and it’s impossible to make any definite predictions based on what we saw this year going into 2010.

Looking Ahead to 2010

The other political trend this year was that of pundits, political-junkies, and political professionals trying to get a sense of what to expect for 2010. The implications of several national debates - particularly on healthcare - are sure to have an impact on the midterm elections, but what that impact will be is still unknown.

We did see the rising Tea Party phenomenon, which taught us that Reaganism has not died out and conservative activists are as fired up as ever. It also showed us how important astroturfing will be in coming years.

But while the conservative base is ready for a fight, the liberal base of the Democratic Party is not happy. Democrats now control the White House and both houses of Congress with large margins, but still can’t seem to get important work done. Nowhere has this been clearer than with the healthcare debate. This may be the biggest trouble facing Democrats in 2010 - a liberal base that stays home on Election Day.

Ultimately, however, the healthcare debate was the issue of 2009 and it may not be next year. A healthcare bill of some sort is likely to pass by February, and when it happens it may get more public support than it has now. The economy and job growth in particular will be a huge issue going into next year’s elections. If the economy improves by September, Democrats may be able to hold on to enough seats in Congress and the State Legislatures to maintain political dominance over the next decade. If the stimulus and jobs bills fail, however, it could mean a Republican resurge.

All of the trends mentioned today will have some impact on 2010, and political professionals would do well to take all these implications into account as they map out their plans and strategies for the upcoming year.

Final Thoughts on Yesterday’s Elections

Summary: Dave at WAYLA reviews the November 2009 elections and their implications.


First I want to start by looking back on my predictions from Monday. In Virginia I said McDonnell would win handedly against Deeds, and he did. In fact, he won with 59% of the vote - 2% more than I expected.

In New Jersey, I wrongly suggested Corzine could squeak in a victory, and no matter who won it would be close (as in, by a point or so) - as it turned out, Christie defeated the incumbent governor by more than 4%.

In Maine, I suggested it would come down to whether the youth and progressive votes would turn out in proportionally higher numbers than the older voters and conservatives. Unfortunately, I don’t have the exit poll information to check that, but I’ll get back to this race later in the post.

In New York City I turned out to be dead-on in my prediction: incumbent Mayor Michael Bloomberg won, but with a much smaller margin than pundits were predicting. I was hearing he might win by as much as 10%-15% yesterday - he won by just 5% over City Comptroller Bill Thompson.

In New York’s 23rd Congressional District I was wrong yet again, assuming that Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman would defeat Democrat Bill Owens by a substantial margin. Owens won with a 3-point lead over Hoffman. In fairness, I was second-guessing that prediction yesterday hours before polls closed in New York, and I’ll explain why shortly.

Second of all, let me stress that I don’t believe this was a referendum on President Obama or the Democratic Party. In fact, Tom Schaller had a very interesting post the other day, suggesting it could be more of a referendum on the GOP.

However, most of this comes down to the local circumstances of each race. As we mentioned last week, the Deeds defeat - and the extent to which he lost - had more to do with poor campaigning on the part of him and his party than on anything to do with the “spending in Washington” we’ve heard so much about. Chuck Todd said it best when he pointed out “[the Virginia race is] a good reminder that campaigns matter.”

In New Jersey, Corzine was plagued by the difficulties of governing in a recession - something we’ve discussed time and time again. In order to balance the state budget he had to increase property taxes and reduce services - actions that would be unpopular no matter what. The property tax increase was particularly damaging to him - according to the exit polls, a whopping 26% of voters said it was their main issue in the race, and that meant a significant drop in support (by perhaps as many as 100,000 voters) in the suburbs of Philadelphia and New York City.


Now let me get back to the elections in Maine and NY-23.

Yesterday something crossed my mind while looking at the polls on Question 1 in Maine - what if we were looking at a Bradley Effect?

To explain, let’s look at the three most recent polls on the issue. Two found that the referendum would fail - a Daily Kos / Research 2000 poll said it would by 1% and a Pan Atlantic poll said it would by 11%. A third poll, conducted by Public Policy Polling, found the referendum would pass by 4% - which is roughly what happened.

It’s important to note that unlike the other two polls, the PPP survey was an automated response poll - allowing respondents to explain their position by punching in numbers on their keypads and not talking to a live person. This allowed them to be honest about their opposition to gay marriage without being embarrassed for what could be perceived as homophobia.

I was led on to that theory by a recent article in Politico on the gay marriage referendum. Just read some of the responses from those interviewed:

"[‘No on 1’] did a very good job of humanizing the issue," said state Sen. Peter Mills, a Republican who voted for the marriage equality law and opposes Question One. "They had gay couples inviting themselves into the Rotary Club and talking about what it's like to live in a world where it's possible to discriminate against somebody just because they're a same-sex couple."…

…"Even in the conservative areas, they don't like the government telling them what to do and making choices for them," said former Defense Secretary William Cohen, who served as a Republican senator from Maine and has not taken a position on Question 1. "Maine people in particular are very open to change, even though it's a moderate-to-conservative state overall."

Republican politicians not only kept mum about the issue, but some even went so far as to oppose Question 1, seemingly to save themselves from what they figured was a socially libertarian electorate. In fact, it seems quite possible that many anti-gay marriage Mainers were hiding their true opinions from their neighbors.

Moving a few hours south of the Pine Tree State we come to New York’s 23rd. Many - including myself - initially figured that Hoffman would solidify support from Scozzafava’s base despite her endorsement of Owens. After all, the polls said he would.

But yesterday two things occurred to me. First, Scozzafava would remain on the ballot, and a sizeable portion of her supporters would vote for her regardless of her decision to drop out - it turned out to be 6% of the electorate.

Second, many of Scozzafava’s supporters probably quickly decided that they would support Hoffman - Owens was a Democrat, after all - and then later changed their minds. The second part of that trend, however, wouldn’t have been reflected in the polls following Scozzafava’s decision - it took place just four days before the election. My guess is a number of these voters took a step back and said “well, I am a center-right conservative, but this Hoffman guy is really out there - he just called Glenn Beck his mentor.”

With a shake-up as dramatic as Scozzafava’s decision, it’s quite possible that her supporters were scrambling like that to make a decision before Tuesday.

Finally, everyone is going to want to point out broader implications about what these elections mean for 2010. Republicans are saying that voters - even blue state voters like those in New Jersey - are rejecting Obama/Democratic policies and that we’ll see this trend continue in 2010. Democrats are arguing that the shake-up in NY-23 indicates that conservative activists are moving the GOP so far to the right that they won’t be electable next year.

The implication I see, however, is along the lines of an idea we’ve discussed before. Next year might be a tough year for Democrats on the state level, but probably not too bad of a year on the federal level.

We saw such trends yesterday. Democrats won in special Congressional elections in New York and California, while losing statewide races in New Jersey and Virginia, not to mention State Legislative seats in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.

Whether those trends will carry on in 2010 will now depend on just how the parties and campaigns position themselves going into next year.

Happy Election Day 2009

Summary: Happy Election Day - will political predictions come true?

It’s the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November - and although it’s not an even-numbered year this year, today is still Election Day.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

With polls closing in Maine, New York, New Jersey, and Virginia in less than 12 hours we thought we’d bring you some Election Day analysis from pundits across the news media and blogosphere.

From NBC Political Director Chuck Todd:

“We know that whether Jon Corzine wins or loses, he won't get 50 percent, meaning more than half of the state voted to oust him in a very blue state.

We know that the Republican Party has to deal with two rifts, one that is ideological, the other a battle between the establishment and grassroots. The two rifts are not interchangeable.

We know that not being associated with either political party is a net plus with many voters — from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s expected victory, to Chris Daggett's influence in New Jersey, to Doug Hoffman's rise in New York's 23rd Congressional District.

And we know that the president's coattails have gotten shorter…

…Let's start with what should be the biggest lesson: The return of the angry independent.

The one thing Daggett and Hoffman have in common is that they both have anti-establishment, anti-political party credentials. And both used those attributes to gain credibility.

While lots of folks want to paint 2010 as either a midterm election like 1994 (Democratic over-reach backlash), or 1982 (economic angst), let me suggest that things are looking more like 1992, when a billionaire gadfly galvanized the radical middle…

…there are a few other things about [the Virginia] race that shouldn't be overlooked.

First, McDonnell avoided a divisive primary and didn't have to "run right" before running to the middle in the general. In fact, McDonnell got to run to the middle the entire year — his ads project a pragmatic problem solver who can work with both parties. It should be a model for Republican gubernatorial candidates in 2010, and perhaps for any Republican pondering a presidential run in 2012…

…Second, McDonnell was of course helped by the inept campaign run by Democrat Creigh Deeds. But the irony is this: Deeds is the most centrist/moderate Democrat the party has nominated this century. He is to the right of Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, and Jim Webb, but he was painted as someone more liberal than any of those three. These mistakes are on Deeds and his campaign. It's a good reminder that campaigns matter.”

From Newsweek’s Howard Fineman:

“President Barack Obama believes in the saving grace of the federal government.

But do the American people?

In a time of economic uncertainty and fear, that is the core question implicit — and sometimes explicit — on Election Day 2009…

…It's always dangerous to extrapolate national trends from scattered local elections such as these.

And of course, as I write, we don't know the results — only which way the polls were heading in the final days. But I think in this case the message is already clear: Voters, who launched the Obama Era with so much hope a year ago, are still hopeful but they're also skeptical.

And they are once again impatient with Washington, and with big shots of any stripe — on Wall Street or the nation's capital — who seem more interested in increasing their own power than truly solving problems.”

From MSNBC host and former Rep. Joe Scarborough:

“A big Republican win in Virginia will not be an earth mover, but instead confirm that the home of Thomas Jefferson and Robert E. Lee is a toss up state that still swings Republican. A Bob McDonnell victory will be seen by most in the media as reflecting a rising discomfort with the explosive growth of Washington, but also, perhaps more importantly, the weakness of the Democratic candidate…

…Every Democratic consultant I've talked to over the past few days has let loose involuntary groans every time they talked about [the New Jersey] race. Many Democrats began quietly predicting the collapse of the independent candidate at the end of last week and assumed that factor would help Christie.

Last minute polls suggest they may be right.

Still, I believe the Democrats' turnout operation should keep this race tight all night. If the race is instead a blowout, that can only be bad news for the Democrats.

And for those second guessing the president's active involvement in Corzine's race, the fact is that Barack Obama had no choice but to jump head first into the Jersey fight. All the president's men know that a Republican sweep in New Jersey and Virginia will strike fear in the hearts of those swing state Democrats who now hold the future of health care in their sweaty moderate hands…

…Hoffman's ascendancy in NY-23 is less about Barack Obama than it is about a decade of bloated and corrupt Republican leadership in Washington, D.C. This race gave the same conservatives who helped drive Ronald Reagan's victory and the 1994 Republican Revolution something to cheer about for the first time in a long time. It also gave them an opportunity to stick it to an incompetent GOP Establishment…

Here are my predictions a little more than 24 hours before the polls close:

Virginia-- Bob McDonnell by 10+
New Jersey-- Chris Christie by 1
New York 23-- Doug Hoffman by 7

…(Despite my prediction, I still have a hard time seeing Jon Corzine losing this race.)”

Also, be sure to check out Politico’s “5 Things to Watch for” in Virginia, New Jersey, and NY-23, as well as a good article on the gay-marriage referendum in Maine.

Predictions for Tomorrow’s Elections

Tomorrow is Election Day for residents in New Jersey, Virginia, Maine, New York City, and New York’s 23rd Congressional District. Last week we analyzed the gubernatorial race in Virginia and found Republican Bob McDonnell to be the likely winner.

Today we take a look at the big races in the other four elections.


New Jersey

Big Race: Governor

Candidates: Jon Corzine (D), Chris Christie (R), Chris Daggett (I)

Analysis: While Corzine has not been a popular incumbent throughout the race, he has been gaining in the polls over the past month or two. Nate Silver suggests the race is largely up in the air at this point, with Christie being a 4:3 favorite. The race has been very negative, and no matter who the undecided voters choose, they’re going to have to select a politician that they’ve heard a lot of bad things about. Largely, this race could come down to which campaign has the best organization for tomorrow - and in New Jersey, it’s typically the Democrat.

Predictions: I would put my money on Corzine, but it is certainly possible that Christie will pull an upset victory. Either way, expect Daggett to do fairly well - perhaps even better than the polls up to this point suggest he will do.


Maine

Big Race: Question 1

Options: A “Yes” vote is to overturn the legalization of gay marriage in Maine, a “No” vote supports gay marriage.

Analysis: This question was thrown on the voters at the last minute, and for a referendum concerning an issue as progressive as gay marriage, it should theoretically be a bad sign for “No on 1” supporters. That being said, “No on 1” has raised significantly more money - including from in-state contributors - and past analysis suggests the electorate will vote this question down. Silver predicts there is an 80% chance that the “No” vote will win. However, a recent Public Policy Polling survey found that Maine voters supported Question 1 at a 51% - 47% margin.

Predictions: If any state can vote this down, it’s a New England state - however, the polls don’t look good. I think it will come down to the youth vote. Young voters were far more opposed to the referendum than older voters, and older voters typically make it to the polls more often. Yet gay marriage is one issue that young voters are extremely passionate about, and they might rally a “No” vote better than conservatives can rally a “Yes” vote tomorrow. We’ll have to wait and see.


New York City

Big Race: Mayor

Candidates: Michael Bloomberg (R,I), Bill Thompson (D)

Analysis: Unfortunately, this race has been a lot less exciting than we hoped. While NYC is an incredibly Democratic city, voters tend to approve of Bloomberg’s pragmatic style of governance. Silver sees Thompson as a 35:1 underdog, with only the Bronx as a winnable borough for him. However, voters in NYC are still upset over Bloomberg’s moves last year to extend term limits and still others are frustrated with his lack of attention towards low income residents. Additionally, Bloomberg’s campaign has been using robo-calls so frequently it’s getting on everyone’s nerves. Nonetheless, voters will probably look past these issues, and Bloomberg’s wealth has made him a very difficult candidate to beat in logistical terms.

Predictions: While I suspect Bloomberg will win, I have some feeling it will be closer than most pundits are saying it will.


NY-23

Big Race: Representative to Congress

Candidates: Bill Owens (D), Doug Hoffman (C)

Analysis: Until this weekend, I would have expected the conservative vote to split about evenly between Republican Dierdre Scozzafava and Hoffman - running on the Conservative Party ticket - allowing Owens to squeak by with a slim victory. On Saturday, however, Scozzafava dropped out - leaving a mass of conservatives to support Hoffman. Of course, she did endorse Owens upon exiting the race, and the district as a whole is far more moderate than Hoffman. Nonetheless, the conservative base is fired up and likely to bring in way more support for Hoffman on Election Day than Scozzafava can do for Owens. In fact, DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen appears to be conceding on that point already.

Predictions: Hoffman will win, and probably by a substantial margin.

Will Young Voters Continue to Help Democrats?

Summary: The progressive Millennial generation appears to be less engaged since 2008 - is there any way for the Democrats to turn that around?

Politico today has a potentially troubling article for Democrats looking forward to next year’s midterm elections.

From the article:

In New Jersey, about 377,000 of the 560,000 young voters who showed up at the polls supported Obama. In Virginia, about 373,000 out of 621,000 young voters backed Obama.

But some young Democrats say that energy surge has begun to dissipate and student political involvement for the 2009 races has returned to normal — before the Obama phenomenon seemed to transfix young voters.

At the University of Virginia last October, political signs plastered dorm room walls, and campaign volunteers saturated the campus.

Now, volunteers canvassing first-year dorms report that many students have no idea who [Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh] Deeds is.

The article points out, however, that this is not exactly a phenomenon.

Historically, gubernatorial races suffer from low voter turnout across all age groups. Experts already expect less than half of last year’s electorate will cast a vote in either state. And young voters are often one of the first age groups politicians lose in an off-year election, making it vital for Democrats to round up a solid showing, according to Peter Levine, director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement…

…New voters haven’t entirely dropped from the political process. A number of college Democrats say their membership numbers are steadily climbing and that more students are likely to become interested in the races during the final weeks. Those who are tuned in to the campaigns say they’ve been impressed by the extensive outreach both campaigns are making on social media forums including Facebook and Twitter, and by the campaigns’ grass-roots efforts on campuses…

…The [Deeds] campaign is also relying for additional outreach on a television ad aimed at college students.

In the ad Priority, Deeds tries to relate to the financial struggles of college students.
“Growing up, we didn’t have much. But education was always a priority,” Deeds says in the ad. “My mom sent me off to college with just four twenty-dollar bills, so I know good schools are the best investment we can make in our children’s future.”

In New Jersey, Corzine recently tailgated with hundreds of Rutgers University alumni and students before the school’s homecoming game. Despite last-minute advertising, only 30 of the campus Democrats’ nearly 300 members showed up, according to Rutgers University Democrats President Alex Holodak.

“To be honest, it’s been a rough year. Even though the race is getting more interesting minute by minute, it’s more difficult to get people engaged this year,” said Holodak. “I feel like the overall morale of people is like, ‘We already elected the president,’ and that’s it.”

We’ve mentioned before how young voters are dramatically shifting overall public opinion, but without a strong effort to turnout the youth vote, they probably won’t help shift public policy.

One reason that young voters are less likely to be engaged during midterm elections - which the article only briefly mentions - is that college students often do not attend a school in their home state. As a result, they feel less invested in the outcome of a statewide election than they do in a national one.

In a presidential race, most everyone on campus knows the outcome of the election could likely affect them personally. Even foreign exchange students understand it is important who the president of the United State is. That cannot really be said of a gubernatorial race.

The Deeds and Corzine campaigns are right to invest in targeting young voters through new media and grassroots outreach. As Lauren Gilbert - President of the James Madison University Young Democrats - said, “there’s still a lot of potential here.”

Depending on the outcomes of those efforts, they could serve as an important lesson for Democrats in 2010.