The AP's only premise: What if Dems lose on Tuesday?
November 03, 2009 3:50 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
I know I sound like a broken record, but that's what happens when the Beltway press corps embraces crushing uniformity; everybody just keeps repeating themselves.
-Fact: There are three key off-years elections today, with contests in N.Y., N.J., and VA. According to the polls, Dems could win one or two of those races.
-Fact: There are three key off-years elections today in N.Y., N.J., and VA. According to the polls, Republicans could win one, two, or three of those races.
So why do media elites only ponder the implications of Dems losing?
From the AP [emphasis added]:
In a very early test of President Barack Obama's political influence, two states are choosing whether to continue Democratic rule while voters elsewhere elect a handful of congressmen and big-city mayors.
Elected just a year ago, the president has spent a considerable amount of time and energy trying to ensure that Democrats win governor's races in Virginia and New Jersey and pick up a GOP-held congressional seat in upstate New York.
In doing so, Obama raised the stakes of a low-enthusiasm off-year election season -- and risked political embarrassment if any lost.
All three could.
Do you follow? If three Dems "could" lose, than that's news. If two Republicans "could" lose, that's irrelevant.
As a bonus, the AP Liz Sidoti's election analysis is just plain dumb:
Of the two races, a Republican victory in Virginia would be the most telling about potential trouble ahead for Democrats as they compete in swing states next fall.
Long reliably Republican in national races, Virginia is a new swing state. It's home to a slew of northern bellwether counties filled with swing-voting independents who carried Obama to victory last fall, the first Democrat to win the state in a White House race since 1964. Rapidly growing counties like Loudoun and Prince William swung toward Democrats in the 2005 governor's race, previewing an Obama win three years later.
Conversely, New Jersey is a traditional Democratic-leaning state with an incumbent Democratic governor. As such, it's the trickier of the two for Republicans to win -- and yet the GOP just might.
The GOP just might! Nice touch, Liz.
And by claiming that a GOP victory in traditionally GOP-leaning VA "would be the most telling about potential trouble ahead for Democrats," Sidoti gets is pretty much exactly wrong. Republicans are expected to win the purple state. The real trouble for Dems would be if the GOP won the governor's race in blue-trending NJ.
Honestly, can't anybody here play this game?
UPDATED: What's also astonishing, and this is absolutely ignored by the press, is that the NJ race is only close today becuase the GOP candidate has lost a double-digit lead in recent months. It's only close because the GOP candidate's campaign has imploded since the summertime. But the press doesn't care about that, or what that might say about the GOP. The press only cares if Dems lose.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Randy
What happens now that the Dems HAVE lost?
The most logical thing to do now is to listen attentively to the mainstream media as they regurgitate Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin's take on this, just as they have done with every political news story for the past year – or in Limbaugh’s case, since Reagan was president. Since the media would sooner go off the air than EVER lambaste the Republican Party or it's members when the American people reject them, they've had to rely on the alternate reality rantings of the wingnut-o-verse to tell them what to say.
In other words, since the media couldn't eviscerate the GOP for their massive failings, they can now spend the next year harshly dissecting this election and feel very comfortable. What else can they do? “The American people have spoken!" … in some areas against some Democrats, which us good enough for the national media.
It really is hard to understand why US newspapers are becoming extinct and the TV audiences are tuning out. Must be because they’re “liberal”!
And the incumbent lost in New Jersey. It didn't matter what party he was.
And in upstate NY?
That was a loss by the Republicans and a win by the Dems. The Republicans tried to get too tricky by half, and the voters in the district didn't like being played for fools by a guy who didn't know local issues, didn't live in the district, didn't live near the biggest cities in the district, didn't have a connection to the huge military base, and who ousted a fairly-chosen Republican candidate.
The Republicans lost the race in NY. The meddling by the national Republicans in a local race like this really turned them off, as it should have!
Heads the Republicans win. Tails the Democrats lose.
If the Democrats win 2 of the contests, the Beltway Boys will tell us that these 3 races are really not indicative of anything much, the races were close anyway, and it could be trouble ahead for Democrats.
If Republicans win 2 contests the Beltway corporate poobahs will be screaming that Democrats are collapsing and Obama's agenda is all but finished. If they happen to win all 3, they'll be calling for Obama to hand in his resignation, immediately.
MMFA loves to report, and the posters here love to say over and over the the Republican party is dead, that they were beaten so bad they will never recover. WRONG
The Republican party is alive and well. "Change we can believe in" has turned out to be nothing but a campaign slogan. Obama does not have the reach and the clout the Dems were hoping for.
If the Dems were to win all three of these races, the Main Stream Media would be full of stories about Obama's power, and charting his re-election. Looks like the headlines will now question how the Dems won the WH, won the Congress, and STILL failed to get anything done. The honeymoon is over.
The Democrats have already gotten some things done.
1) Passed a stimulus bill that has created hundreds of thousands of jobs, after conservatives all but destroyed our economy.
2) Passed credit card legislation that makes a good start at reigning in the worst abuses of banks.
3) Slashed salaries for the top 25 execs at bailed out companies 90%. The conservatives are whining like schoolgirls, the American people are cheering, and want Obama to kick even more conservative ass.
4) Democrats are now on the verge of passing historic health-care legislation that may well signal the end of conservatism in America. Let's hope so!
I must say, it's interesting getting talked down to by a noted simpleton like pointless.
MMFA loves to report, and the posters here love to say over and over the the [sic] Republican party is dead, that they were beaten so bad [sic] they will never recover. WRONG
I have seen comments--in fact, I've made some myself--saying that if the Republicans continue to be led by the extreme right (Limbaugh, Beck, ad nauseum), then they will be so marginalized. In other words, it's conditional, and based on current trends rather than recent elections. Furthermore, I'm not aware of this claim showing up in actual MMFA reports. Feel free to provide proof.
The Republican party is alive and well. "Change we can believe in" has turned out to be nothing but a campaign slogan. Obama does not have the reach and the clout the Dems were hoping for.
Limit Corp. Ownership shot this statement to pieces above, and there's no need for me to repeat it.
If the Dems were to win all three of these races, the Main Stream [sic] Media would be full of stories about Obama's power, and charting his re-election.
Nonsense. They'll claim voting fraud and shout from the rooftops about ACORN. In fact, some of them are already doing so, pre-emptively (don't you read the other articles?).
Looks like the headlines will now question how the Dems won the WH, won the Congress, and STILL failed to get anything done. The honeymoon is over.
People like you were claiming the honeymoon was over on January 21, so I see no reason to buy it now. The fact is, the American populace is not gravitating en masse over to the Republicans. There just isn't sufficient reason to attract people that direction.
Barry lost Ed last night. You keep drinking the kool aid.
In fact if the dems stay on this tact with unemployment heading upwards of 11%, the losses will be even greater come Nov 2010.
You stick to those mmfa talking points though!
Your strawman argument was easily dispatched.
And the Republican Party is not "alive and well." It's corrupt and dishonest.
For starters, it makes no sense whatsoever to consider the congressional race in NY while ignoring the race in CA. Both are highly partisan districts that are unlikely to change party.
The story in NJ is just how bad both of the candidates are.
The VA story is interesting, and would represent a real gain for the GOP, but it has little in common with the other races. Bad job by the AP here.
The spin meisters can try and work their magic on this but believe one thing. This was a stinging rebuke of the "Obama" magic on the stump. Couple this with the international rebuke of Merkel and the Afghan election mess and Nov is turning out as bad as Oct was for Barry.
Good to know. For a minute there, I thought maybe the voters in those states might have had some concern for their local issues and the merits of the actual candidates. What was I thinking?