Yes, everyone's favorite and most exciting slate of races every 4 years, or not. I don't see any discussion here about these, and I'd like to talk about them with some of teh locals. So what we have here:

NJ-Gov: Here we have the uber-unpopular incumbent Corzine (D) actually taking the lead in the polls. Chris Christie ® has been in a free-fall since his high in mid-summer after the primary, mostly because of one scandal after another (Attorney scandals, not reporting a loan, 'throwing his weight around' with a speeding ticket, etc.), and he's actually managed to be disliked as much as Corzine if that were possible. While Corzine has managed to consolidate a little bit of (D) support, most of it has gone to independent Chris Daggett, who is currently in the upper-teens, lower-tweens. This'll be a nailbiter til the end.

VA-Gov: Basically, Deeds (D) has lost against AG Bob McDonald ®. There was some hope and speculation that, as Deeds has done in the past, he could close the gap and finish really strong, but that doesn't appear to be happening. It seems that the electorate of likely voters for this state (and NJ too, I might add) is very GOP, and some SUSA polls and others have suggested that if this race (and NJ too) had the same turnout as '08, the Ds would be winning both handily. But that doesn't seem to be happening.

NY-23: DeDe Scozzafava ® vs. Bill Owens (D) vs. Doug Hoffman ©. Despite the fact that this seat hasn't gone dem in a century and a half, thanks to activist refusal to nominate a moderate GOPer in the mold of its former representative John McHugh, they've instead decided to sabotage the campaign and nominate Doug Hoffman under the Conservative party. A Sienna poll a little more than a week ago had Owens up by 4, an R2000/DKos poll last week had Owens up by 5, and Scozzafava's campaign has run out of money. Thank you Club for (Democratic) Growth!

ME Banning gay marriage, NYC Mayor: There's a ballot initiative to ban gay marriage in Maine, which seems even in the polls and is highly based on the likely turnout (registered voters favors pro-Gay Marriage, Likely voters does not), with some variation. Bloomberg also is facing a stiffer challenge from Compotroller Bill Thompson, but seems to have a fairly sizable lead over him.

My predictions: Corzine eeks out a win, McDonnell pickup by ~10, Bill Owens wins with around ~42% of the vote in a 3-way contetst, the Marriage Ballot initiative is defeated, and Bloomberg wins handily.

But I thought Dems were supposed to be losing so badly in the polls! Or so you would think after listening to any TV 'news outlet' (so much for the librul media).

Discussion?

And oh yes, I eagerly await when Loki wakes up the next morning to find Corzine on top after saying Christie would win by double digits. I imagine his reaction will be something like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tim5nU3DwIE

I think a lot of these races still have room for photo finishes.

Deeds has, in my opinion, lost. Corzine could steal it unless the Republicans pull something special out. My eyes are mainly on the Maine decision, and I hope gay marriage stays legal. Hopefully the get out the vote mechanism is strong, and people will actually head to the polls, but this being an off-off year there is no guarantee of that.

Either way, any attempt to turn this into either a continuing mandate (if dems do well) or a stinging rebuke (if dems do badly) is much ado about nothing.

Indeed, I had been holding out hope for a Deeds photo finish as he did during the Primary, and during the '05 AG race. McDonnell is just too disciplined for him.

And yes, the scenario I outlined with the Dems losing VA-Gov but picking up the NY-23 house seat certainly flubs the narrative we're supposed to believe from the news outlets (omg Dems could lose the house... but then they gain seats?).

I seem to remember reading that in NY-23, the Democratic candidate is conservative, the Republican candidate is moderate, and the Conservative candidate is teabagger-insane with an endorsement by Sarah Palin.

indeed, Michelle Malkin has described the Republican candidate as a "radical leftist". Try as I might I can't see the leftist part of the candidate's issues here:

http://www.dedeforcongress.com/issues/default.aspx

And the funny thing is, that Scozzafava is a conservative Republican... for New York standards: http://bshor.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/scoz...an-in-new-york/ . These though, it only takes being slightly less conservative than Attila the Hun to be considered a big librul. Then again, she is pretty liberal on some social issues like Gay Marriage and abortion, but on virtually everything else she's a lockstep Republican. Owens, aside from Gay Marriage, is more liberal than Scozzafava in almost every way.

I figured Christie didn't have a chance. He doesn't differentiate himself from Corzine much, which opened him up to Daggett. If I bother to go home and vote (unlikely!) I'll pull the lever for Daggett simply because he's doomed. I really don't think the scandals thing hurt Christie much - Corzine had someone in his cabinet caught in the big corruption dragnet. If we got an actual alternative to Corzine (like Lonegan, who lost in the primary) maybe I could get excited about this. But the Republican party here is terrible in general.

The only way that Christie pulls this off is if Daggett loses votes because people can't find him on local ballots (he's independent and thus shuffled away in the other tiny third parties) and voters choose the not-Corzine option.

But either way, NJ will continue to be run into the ground.

What's kinda gross in my view is the short-sighted national cover of the race here. I've only really read National Review's piece about the race, but no one seems to get that both parties have burned this state into the ground for decades. It's not like Corzine showed up and everything went to hell. And Christie's not going to do anything radical so it'll be the same old story.

It kind of sucks to be a Virginian with a likely McDonnell win. I'll still vote for Deeds, and best of luck to Maine defeating that homophobic ballot inititative (show Cali how it's done).

Wait, I thought the elections are next year?

Don't forget our "This job sucks, I think I'll go for a promotion" gov here in FL. Our senator got 'homesick' and quit and our gov appointed a place holder while he bails Tallahassee for a go at DC.

So now we have an open Senate seat and governorship in a state that has been sold out, piece by piece, to corporate interests largely against the will of the people and largely to out-of-state/country corporations. The latest example being rights to mine water that was projected to run out in '18 before the deal.

Suffice it to say, our gov't sucks and our state is being raped. Thankfully we have a chance to clean house but that doesn't look like it's going to happen.

Might want to take another look. Paper has been filled with gubernatorial candidates for about a month now here in FL.

Really? All I know is Texas gubernatorial elections are next year.

There's an interesting post about the money in the Maine initiative http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/des...p-in-maine.html

The "Yes" campaign has far fewer donations, though they average more in $, and are largely from out of state. The "No" campaign also has a good number of out-of-state donations, but they are spread out over many people.

I think that a combination of both Christie's personal scandals and Corzine's barrage of attack ads have virtually warped Christie as equally scum as Corzine, thereby coalescing some stray Dems and bleeding Christie of support to Daggett. Unfortunately for Daggett, he may have gained the momentum too late to be a Jesse Ventura, and for that reason I'd still go for Corzine. He did inherit a mess, and half his term has already been plagued by the recession, so I do wonder how the second term would turn out in light of a recovery.

You're thinking of Congressional midterms. Technically, I think midterm refers to any election that doesn't include the presidential election, though it is more commonly used for Congressional midterm elections (2006,2010, etc). Two gubernatorial elections (VA and Jersey), a Maine marriage equality ballot initiative, some special elections, and some other stuff are up on November third.

The VA gov race is particularly interesting. The dems did a nice job of reshaping that state and getting thier base out. I thought that it would be one of the new "swing" states but the republicans look poised to take it back.

the ME vote will be interesting but even if they vote to ban gay marriage that train has already left the station. More states will do it and eventually Maine will come back around. I dont see the wisdom in exclusion, it simply hasnt worked in our history, women now vote and civil rights to a large degree worked out well.

It wasnt to long ago during the dark days of Mr Bush we were talking about constitutional amendments for gay marraige, like I said that train has left the station.......

Those are the mid-terms, where the full congress is up for a vote, around like ~35, most state legislatures, statewide offices, senators, some ballot initiatives, etc. But, the year after every presidential election, the VA/NJ governorship and part of the legislature (only the House in VA's case), and statewide offices (Lt. Gov and AG for VA), some mayoral elections (like my hometown of Houston is replacing Bill White, or NYC), ballot initiatives (Gay marriage, California/Ohio referendums), and in this exceptional case, a race to replace a vacant house seat (NY-23).

Texas will be further weird, as KB Hutchinson will resign her seat around the new year to run against Perry in the primary, so a special election will be held for that seat sometime in May. It'll be the uber-popular, well-connected, well-funded Bill White against some currently unknown Republican (Dewhurst maybe? Abbott?), so dems WILL have a chance in this. And boy, would that be hilarious if he won... I can't even begin to imagine the look on some of the GOPers' faces...

no one but the ignorant masses on both sides were talking about a constitutional ammendment. I think you should check to see what years that was brought up in everytime it was brought up. A little hint, it was always right before an election.

Politicians do this all the time over divisive issues, they have no real intent on passing it, they just want to get everyone to vote on it so they can use it in their campaigns as ammo.

Source:
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/phil..._gaym_chron.htm

what elections specifically Bush had already been elected, if your telling me that the gay rights discussion and constitutional amendment was exclusive to the election cycle I respectfully disagree.

Here are some other amendment dates, admittadly state admendments but it all went down around the same time when it was pretty clear a U.S. constitutional amendment was on the table for discussion by our elected officials. are they "ignorant masses"? yea probably but your far to dismissive IMHO.








My point? It isnt an election issue sox, your simple summation might be true in some cases but in the larger context of the discussion gay marriage has always revolved around the personal ethics and morality of individuals.

I had assumed we were discussing the federal constitutional amendment which the original post made it seem, that issue was raised in 04 and 06.

I don't know why you say "bush had already been elected" since he was facing re-election 9 months later and i never said anything about Bush, as he doesn't vote on it period, the senators mainly used the issue to drive out the vote for themselves, or against their opponents.

We were talking federal and state, thats what I meant anyway, and you are correct about Bush he was facing reelection in 9 months that was my error. I posted various quotes to illustrate the context of the conversation at the time was vast and in my view was not being held exclusively by the ignorant masses as you proclaimed. I dont believe the various state issues were exclusive events outside of the broader national discussion at the time, perhaps you do.

However you may have me on the issue of it being around an election, we certainly were gearing up for the 04's at the time so I will happily concede that point. My original post was (which you replied to)



Amendments meaning more then one, yes I could of been specific and stated I meant a broader context which I didnt do, thats also on me. My point was and is gay marriage is an issue that has run its course the arguments of exclusion and inclusion have all been made and its up to the states now to decide where they want to fall. This maine vote is, in my view a postponment of an envitable override. However (last concession from me) I thought that about CA too.

Wait, you live in my city? What part of Houston do you live in?

Talking about the Virginia Governor race, what a pure waste. Either the candidates spent the large majority of their time mudslinging instead of talking about what they wanted to do, or they just had poor ideas/past histories. I STILL have no clue as to what either of their plans are regarding most of the main issues.

McDonnell wants to sell off liquor stores "for funding".. It's bad enough that we have Alcohol and Beverage Control, but what or who is he planning to sell the ABC stores to?

New Jersey and Ohio governorships will go to republicans, i guarantee ya. And if im wrong, sig me

I guarantee you'll be at least half wrong, as Ted Strickland's term doesn't end until next year.

I want talking exclusively about the mid terms, but yes, the Ohio election is next may.

no it isn't. It's next november.

Is there anything you've ever been right about?

Ok, you have 1 and a half minutes to name the candidates in the race


I can.


whoops times up. John Kassich and Ted Strickland. Btw, i dont live in Ohio, so im sure i wouldn't know the date.

Declared candidates are Ted Strickland running as a democrat, John Kasich running as a Republican, and Todd Kritzwiser running as a republican. Kevin Coughlin and Mike DeWine both considered runs and then declined. In all probability there will be a libertarian candidate running again, possibly Bill Peirce.

I have no idea how this has anything to do with the fact that you didn't know what month the election would be in.

Very nice

McDonnell has a lot of support around here, and I anticipate his election. I've been volunteering with the campaign so I'm obviously very biased, but he is the more pragmatic candidate over Deeds.

In Virginia, most Governor's elections are based on quality of life issues...most voters here are moderates with libertarian tendencies (Was is the Post that said that?). Even under a series of Democratic governors, I've seen very few changes that would suggest such.

In NJ, I would love to see Daggett pull a victory, however, it doesn't look like it will happen.

Actually, i've already sought asylum in the northern tundra for college, so I really only go down to H-town for friends & family; I went to Jersey Village High School, in the northwest area.


I can't wait. NJ looks great for Corzine right now, and there's no way that Kasich will win anything.

Funny no one mentioned this. The Democratic candidates have been decisively more negative this term. There's even a Corzine ad running around making fun of Christie because he's fat.

Hope and Change, everybody. Both parties run negative campaigns, the Republicans are just better at it.

I'm just itching at the prospect of Specter losing next year. Either in the primary or in the general election.

EDIT: Interesting situation with NY 23. From what I've read about her, Scozzafava is not such a great candidate. Gets very itchy with uncomfortable questions. Better let the Dems enjoy the seat for a year. Also, the Post just endorsed Hoffman.

"...she supports Big Labor's favorite organizing bill -- card-check -- as well as the federal stimulus, opposed by every House Republican." This is from the NY Post, so handle with care. If true, that would be enough for a conservative not to vote for her.

Oh ok, so you actually live on the other side of H-Town... I'm down in the southeast area by the coast.

In any event, what do you think about Bill White? Seems like he's pretty popular even among some Republicans down here.

Lol! It never ceases to amaze me how much conservatives absolutely LOVE playing the victim card (see: Fox News), and here's another example. That ad was clearly about Christie using his special status to get himself out of a ticket. But the fact that Christie tried to warp it in the midst of falling poll numbers makes the ad even funnier (it was embarrassing enough to begin with).


Well he won re-election in '05 with 91% of the vote, being a more successful politician than psuedo-soviet election politicians. He's basically our best bet in picking up that Senate seat in May, and he's already raised horseloads. He's very friendly with business interests, could play very well in the bigger cities (especially Dallas-Fort Worth), could attract more moderate anglos, and has a huge base in Houston. Huzzah!

Oh and, he's been the best mayor of Houston in my lifetime (Lee Brown? lulz), and probably well before that.

for those who haven't seen it, a Corzine spot accused Christie of "throwing his weight around" to get out of a traffic violation. This is a fairly common phrase for someone using political influence to get privilege. Possibly an unwise choice of words, but not something that wouldn't have been used about a thin opponent in similar circumstances.

Perhaps, but we don't know that they didn't think of the play on words when they decided to use them either, do we?

It's hard to feel bad for Christie after the treatment he gave Lonegan in the primary.

The choice of words was deliberate. I don't mind if he did and I don't mind negative campaigning. I mind when liberals think the campaigns they run are any better than the ones Karl Rove ran. The Deeds campaign is textbook negative campaigning, trying to pin McDonnell on something he wrote 20 years ago. It is relevant because those are his political positions, as outdated as they are. Then again, Willie Horton was also relevant as an issue and there were rivers of tears after Dukakis lost.

By the way, it is also stupid, because it's god damned Virginia and not Rhode Island.

I would have much preferred Lonegan on the ticket instead of Christie, but I'm confident at least half of Daggett's polling numbers will swing to Christie in the actual election. Nobody likes tossing a vote into a third party if it means the guy they really hate wins because of it.

If Daggett dropped out of the race today, my prediction on Christie winning by double-digits would easily hold true. Honestly, I didn't think Daggett was going to have any meaning in this race. I still don't think his continued presence will affect the outcome.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/10...t_of_NY_23.html

Scozzofava dropped out.

Sweet

My inner partisan agrees, since a more conservative GOP is a less inclusive GOP, ensuring Democratic victory. Taking the long view, however, it's too bad that they'll further marginalize people.

Hey, this is a third party beating the machine, you should be happy! Scozzafava was not a good candidate. She was flimsy on the issues and an awful campaigner. In the worst case the Dems will hold the seat for a year and I still believe Hoffmann is going to win.

Thats great news. We need moderates to get out of the GOP, we need more conservatives.





You can keep believing that, its never going to happen. A more conservative GOP is a more United and stronger GOP.

Well that's not very good news. Scozzafava was supposed to siphon off enough Republicans to ensure Owens winning. But, it's only a couple days until the election so she is still likely to get ~15% of the vote. Owens will need around 45% to win this. GOTV will be massively important.

Though I do wonder where the Scozzafava-McHugh-Obama voters will go to.

Those voters are the ones driving Obama's disapproval rating up.

Obama's disapproval rating is still much lower than McCain's share of the vote. That's why in some of these polls, it's strange to see Obama's approval ratings so low, and whether this is due to the likely voter screen or a real shift away from Obama (i'd say, as with NJ and VA, it's due to the former). It's also possible that these are the types of voters who are more likely to get screened out of the LV model. I also wonder what the moderate republicans who often vote democratic will do. Afterall, the GOP has a HUGE registration advantage in this district despite having voted for Obama.

I absolutely agree. Shrink that party as much as you can.

I really hope this candidate's supporters remember the disgusting things the hoffmann campaign were saying about her.