Ohio Special Election Open Thread (Final results Schmidt: 52%; Hackett: 48% Demos lose again)

[watsonfellow]

Has anyone seen any polls?

[ken5050]

Ann did much better than expected in 2004..And BTW..I look for Bunning to retire next year, and for Ann to be appointed fto his seat..then run for it in 2006..stay tuned

[ken5050]

You need to change your tagline ..something like "proudly called a scumbag by Malloy LIVE on Air America"

[Coop]

Tip: When you hit rock bottom, stop digging.

[Coop]

Negative, Chris. Try again.

[Coop]

I want to thank you for being here tonight to try and put this in the proper prospective. I'm beginning to think I shouldn't watch election returns on FR. I always thought it was the DUmmies that didn't have a backbone but it appears we have our share right here. I have never seen so much nail biting and gnashing of the teeth. Some people need to get a clue.

You're welcome. But that's just how it's always been around here. During the times between main election cycles this place is crawling with doom 'n gloomers. But as you can see their handwringing is rarely supported by numbers, and quite a few of them have a deliberate agenda. Such is life on a free forum, and we can counter their pessimism just as quickly as they post it.

[Coop]

but it's more due to the fact that northern VA is becoming more like DC and MD than anything else..

People have been saying this since Virginia was one of the 13 colonies.

[Coop]

Oh, did he fight in Iraq? I heard he was a desk jockey.

He was in Fallujah. Good enough for me.

[ChadGore]

I put this thread down when I went to bed last night around 10 central, and it was looking pretty close. What an absolute joy it is to wake up in the morning and find that we have yet another VICTORY in OHIO !

In a way, wasn't the losers campaign a "kerry re-run" ?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the central message of both candidates : "I served (in an effort to placate the right), but I'm an isolationist appeazer (in an effort to placate the left)"?

It puts a smile on my face to know that honest Americans, at the ballot box, again and again, recognize MISSION FIRST.

[xzins]

He seems OK to me. He's a traditional Catholic, conservative if I remember correctly. He's also a real local. I don't think he has much chance of going beyond congressman.

[ChadGore]

[jwalsh07]

No problem. :-} 52-48 is just fine btw. In two months the question will be, Who's Hackett?

[SoFloFreeper]

I hope this is available...the way you guys are talking about this no name (I never heard of him) makes it sound hilarious. Isn't Err Amerika available for podcast?

[SoFloFreeper]

The closeness of the race suggests Republicans need to learn from the race, too.

Many people seem to think the Democrats have found a "formula" to get close or win. This thinking assumes a static Republican strategy. That won't happen. Rove & Mehlman will work to counter many of these so-called patriotic Democrat liberals.

[AmericanInTokyo]

wow. even better than my 'best' scenario predicted of 51 vs 49 percent.

hmmmmm.... Wonder if the losers, steeped in denial and looking backward not forward in life, will ride around foolishly for a year or more there in Ohio with "Paul Hackett" bumper stickers on THEIR cars, too??!!

[expatpat]

Yeah, in the morning, the temperature is at its lowest and the rel. humidity is at its highest (and you've probably had a shower and added further to the humidity).

[AuH2ORepublican]

"The Conn Pubbies had narrow margins in a rather good GOP year in 2004, with Shays suffering a percipitous decline in his margin. 2006 will be less friendly. I suspect both will go, as it stands now, but Shays has higher odds of biting the dust."

---

2006 wasn't really such a good year for the GOP in CT. Bush did improve from his 2000 percentage, but of course his 2000 percentage was quite deflated given Lieberman's presence on the ballot. Getting 43.95% in CT is *not* a good GOP year---I'd say a good GOP year in the state would be when the presidential candidate gets 46% or more. And BTW, the largest improvement for Bush came in the New Haven-based 3rd CD, with many Italian NYC commuters who switched to Bush on the WOT issue, but of course New Haven-area voters wouldn't have any effect on the Shays and Simmons CDs.

Shays' CD gave Bush 46.3% in 2004. In 2006, Governor Jody Rell, who is very popular among RINOs, will be atop the ballot. You don't think a RINO such as Shays can get an extra 4% from among the 53.7% of people in his district that didn't vote for Bush? Surely more than 7.5% of Kerry voters in the district (many of whom are RINOs) would prefer a socially liberal Republican incumbent over a Democrat challenger.

As for Simmons, his district is less Republican than Shays' (Bush got 44.2% in 2004), but he has survived some terrible electoral environments against tough opponents in the past few cycles, and his socially liberal voting record will make him hard to dislodge. I do think that Simmons may be vulnerable in 2006, but it will depend on whether the Defense Department ends up closing the base at Groton and whether Simmons gets blamed for it.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"Those seats are totally safe for the incumbents, just as they were in 2004, and for Boucher, since rocks cooled."

---

The same was said about Barron Hill's 9th CD in Indiana, and he lost in 2004. And it was also said about a plethora of districts in the South and Midwest that switched to the GOP from 1992 to 2002. Sure, incumbents are much more difficult to defeat, but all it takes is one good GOP candidate who can convince voters that the Dem incumbent's votes are hurting Bush's agenda and we've got ourselves a race.

Bush didn't get 60% of the vote in the VA-09 because its voters prefer pro-abortion socialists who are in the closet, and I think it's short-sighted to say that just because Boucher has won fairly easily in the past means that he will win easily in 2006, especially with Kilgore boosting conservative turnout in SW VA.

As for Holden, he only won 51%-49% against George Gekas in 2002, who was out of touch with the district (especially with voters in the city of Harrisburg), never really introduced himself in Schuylkill (sp?) County, and seemed to be old and tired (being caught asleep in his car at the Capitol parking garage in the middle of the day didn't help him any). In 2004, Holden faced Joe Paterno's fat son, who won a split primary and never really got his campaign off the ground. Now, Holden is a conservative Democrat, and the district is not as Republican as Boucher's (it gave Bush 56% in 2004), but Lebanon and Dauphin Counties are rock-ribbed Republican (save for black-majority Harrisburg) and a top-tier GOP candidate would have an excellent chance in 2006, especially if Rendell's ratings keep dropping.

You are being way too pessimistic here. I know that's what you do best, and I appreciate having a "Devil's advocate" on the FR election threads to keep us honest, but if your views were correct we would have never retaken the Senate in 2002 or added 4 net Republican Senators in 2006.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"or added 4 net Republican Senators in 2006" = "or added 4 net Republican Senators in 2004"

But I hope we can gain 2-3 net GOP Senators in 2006.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"So people think he's conservative because he only talks about the 10% or so of the votes where he comes down on the conservative side."

---

That was also the case for dozens of Southern Democrats who were defeated between 1992-2004. The GOP nominee needs to hit Boucher hard on his very liberal voting record. The one issue in which Boucher votes conservative most of the time is guns, but otherwise he's pretty much indistinguishable from a NYC Democrat.

[SoFloFreeper]

I'm posting this info from the buzz blog on NRO on many of the Ohio Special election threads. Good stuff...the Democrats may be celebrating a "close election" for naught.

The point many on the left seem to be dwelling on this morning is the “great” turnout Hackett received.

However, Buzz reader Melissa writes in with some interesting data from the last two congressional cycles:



2002-184,100. R-136,523 D-47,618
2004-310,000 R-227,102 D-89,598
2005-111,000 R-57,974 D-54,401,


Comparing 2002 to 2005, the Republicans stayed home, the Democrats, if reports are true, invested millions to get 6,783 more votes. Relative to 2004, they lost 35,197 or 40% of the voters they had only 9 months ago. The backslapping that is occurring is far from reality.