WSJ's only premise: What if Dems lose on Tuesday?
November 02, 2009 12:03 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
This press trend has now become something of a stampede. Looking ahead to tomorrow's three off-year elections, the political press is interested in one storyline, and one storyline only: what if Democrats lose?
As we noted last week, that laser-like focus is a bit odd since according to available polling, Democrats stand a reasonable chances of winning two of the three races; the scrambled special Congressional election in NY-23, as well as retaining the NJ governorship. (The VA. gov. race looks like a lock for the GOP.) Yet rather than pondering the implications for Republicans if they lose (again) on Election Day, the media direction is focused in one direction only; towards the Dems.
The latest entry in this bad-news-for-Democrats movement came from The Wall Street Journal:
Virginia Race Tests Obama's Staying Power
That seems monumentally dumb. The Journal's news team actually suggests that a state-wide election in VA. will indicate whether Obama wins a second term three years from now?
But the meat of the article is worse than the headline, as the piece completely ignores indications that Democrats might do well this week [emphasis added]:
In Virginia, as in New Jersey, Republicans have pushed aggressively to tie the Democratic candidate to Mr. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, whose efforts on health care and the economy are unpopular with some voters. The Republican Governor's Association spent about $13 million on TV ads in the two states.
That's the Journal's only mention of the NJ race in the entire article about off-year elections and the possible implications for the Democratic White House. The Journal makes no reference to the fact that the GOP candidate in NJ blown his double-digit lead since this summer. Pondering the ramifications of Tuesday's election, the Journal chooses to ignore N.J.
UPDATED: On ABC's Good Morning America today, more GOP-friendly spin:
"You can tell how much the White House may be anticipating to have a bad day tomorrow by how much they're already saying the results won't say anything" about the president's political standing."
I have no idea who is going to win on Tuesday. But neither do reporters and pundits, who seem only interested in one storyline.
UPDATED: Am I the only one who thinks it's odd that the press often lumps in the N.Y.-23 special election into articles about what the Tuesday votes will say about Obama's political standing, when N.Y.-23 hasn't sent a Democrat to Congress since the 1800's?
Sure but if Obama was really Hopey McChange he would get one in there! Obviously he is doomed...
Well, that he doesn't pick the candidates, and so so when a crappy Dem candidate from Virginia runs, he might lose in a state that often elects Republicans.
What else do they show about Obama?
That despite a huge lead by the Republican in the summer, when discontent with all things Democratic was at a peak, now there's a good chance the Democratic candidate will win. This after support from Obama. So what does that race show? Obama hasn't hurt the guy at all. Republican lack of bipartisanship? That hurt the governor, because it made the Dems look bad that they couldn't force the Republicans to be bipartisan. Hopefully we can knock down that meme in the near future.
And lastly, what about the race in NY State - what does that show about Obama? Well, it shows that his bipartisanship has led the Republican candidate to throw her support behind the reasonable Democrat rather than the ill-informed, rabidly conservative candidate one would have expected she would support!
All this stuff about how this will reflect badly upon Obama is rightwing spin that the MSM is buying into! And that's why the Obama Administration is fighting against FoxNews, et al. Because it poisons our national debate! We don't get to see reality because of the smokescreens they put up.
What it shows is NOTHING. The talking points are simply that . . . nothing.
It is not the bill I was looking for.
The only positive thing is that it will require that all insurers take anyone regardless of prior medical history.
It will not control insurance rates.
The public option could not have been made weaker, and it will be more expensive than private insurers.
I will never give a dime to a Democrat, or vote for one again. And I start tomorrow.
Bye-bye. We'll miss you.
And next time, stick to the topic, Bozo.
If the republicans ever get real power again, the country you live in will cease to exist.
Latest results from Public Policy Polling:
Virginia-Governor -
Bob McDonnell leads democrat Creigh Deeds, 56-42.
"The streak of good elections for Democrats in Virginia ends tomorrow. Republicans are going to sweep the statewide races and the only real suspense is by how much". - PPP
NY-23 -
Doug Hoffman leads democrat Bill Owens, 51-34.
NY-23 is shaping up as a huge victory for the grassroots conservative wing of the republican party...and it looks like he (Hoffman) will win a resounding victory.
NJ-Governor -
Chris Christie leads democrat Corzine, 47-41.
Christie's six oint lead is an increase from four points a week ago and a single point three weeks ago. For most of the last three months the election had moved more and more in Corzine's direction but it appears that his momentum stopped about three weeks ago.
The elections in Virginia have gone to members of the opposing party to the party in power in off year elections since 1977, why should this year be any different?
No Democrat has won NY-23 in 137 years, why should this year be any different?
Corzine will probably lose because of his handling of the economy and his association with Goldman-Sachs.
There's no story in these elections . . . well, at least not the story that RNC would like to paint. No referendum.
Good point...and it should be addressed to Boehlert...after all he's the one who claimed, "Democrats stand a reasonable chances of winning...the scrambled special Congressional election in NY-23".
You look it up yourself on reliable sources.
Secondly, it was a robo-call poll.
The lastest Quinnipiac poll shows them in a statistical dead heat. Monmouth College shows Corzine with a 43 to 41% lead.
But what do you show us? Results from a pollster that none of us have ever heard of before? Is this the new Rasmussen Reports, since RR has lost a lot of their credibility recently?
And the NY poll? Ignores the move by the Republican candidate to endorse the Democrat, and the Democrat should lose by a landslide in this election, btw. This is a district that's never going to elect a Democrat unless the Republican is a real loser, and in off-cycle elections, only diehard politicos vote, and so if the Dem even comes close, it will be a miracle.
And a "good chance of winning" isn't a comment worthy of complaint. It's the truth. Had you not selectively quoted polls and ignored reality, you might know this.
Randy