Skip to comments.Michael Barone's Analysis on The 2005 Election Results
Posted on 11/09/2005 10:44:17 AM PST by new yorker 77
click here to read article
Not a word about Ohio...
I am actually more alarmed by the California results. There you have not just a rejection of conservatism (to be expected) but a rejection of sanity. I mean, what kind of people would NOT want to be notified if their kids were having an abortion???
Whats up with his total lack of detailing the very important OH results. That was a swing states overwhelming kick in the left's crotchital regions.
The sheeple beg for more chains!
San Francisco passes a handgun ban.
Washington votes for more gas taxes.
Washington votes for a smoking ban, even in bars.
Ohio's issues are a more important indicator than poor Republican candidates.
California has 1.2 million more registered Democrats than Republicans. It's not that surprising.
THAT surprises - and scares the hell out of me.
Really? These people are behind the times! Move to NY, where our gas taxes are higher and we haven't had smoking in bars since 2003! Oh, and no cell phones while you're driving!
Ping - Interesting fact from Barone's article is Kaine taking exurban Loudoun and Prince William.
I did not expect that at all.
Actually, it's less than status quo.
In 2001, NJ and VA were won with a wider margin in an election year where W Bush was at his most popular...2 months after 9/11.
This year, as Bush's popularity is supposedly at its lowest, those 2 governorships were won with a lesser margin.
Its bad but not too bad so says the wisest man alive...BARONE
I agree. OHIO ballot measures were the most important elections of the night folks. This guarantees that the House will stay REP in 2006. NANCY PELOSI HAD A VERY BAD NIGHT!!!!
Prince William is a hotbed of activist conservatism, with a more "mainstream" conservative republican as the chair of our board of supervisors, a guy named Sean Connaughton.
He ran for Attorney General in the primary, and was opposed by a majority of the republicans in the county committee. Needless to say, this has led to some bad feelings in the county republican caucuses. The "hard" conservatives also ran a solid conservative against a revered long-time delegate who frankly is pretty conservative himself, but voted for the tax increase in 2004. That left a lot of bad blood between the mainstream and conservative republicans.
I talked to conservatives who weren't voting for Kilgore because he didn't sign the tax pledge, and moderates who wouldn't vote for Kilgore because he was seen as the pick of the hard conservatives.
I'm wishing, but not hopeful, that our prince william republican party will take this election to heart and come back together. However, in FR-land, our problems would be seen almost as typical "true" conservatives against RINOs -- and we all know how THAT argument is playing out.
One more insight: The republicans had two long-time incumbent delegates covering Prince william and Loudoun, both were strong social conservatives. The democrats heavily targeted these two. One of them (Loudoun) lost. I'm sure that is both a reflection of the changing nature of Loudoun, and an explanation for why Kilgore lost. 2 years ago I think neither had an opponent.
BTW, people are ignoring that, in a comparison between 2001 and 2005, we had an election in 2003 as well. In 2003 we drove up the number of republican delegates to 60 from a much smaller number, and in 2005 we only lost 1. So we have more republican delegates now than we did after the 2001 election. Some had real opponents and won by a lot less votes, but they all still won.
We lost a couple of RINO republicans we bumped out in the primary. We picked up a couple seats, and lost one more than we picked up. I have to check if the number of "conservative" republicans has increased, but I'm afraid it has not.
Thanks for the explaination. I'm only somewhat familiar with those two counties politically, and haven't been past Farifax county in my travels.
That said, I know all about exurbs (which is why I was surprised) having lived in one back when it was "country".
Picking up Lt. Gov. and losing 1 House of Delegate member = a very slight net pick-up in Virginia.
Kaine was mayor of Richmond (and a very talented and successful one, and I think that helped him in this race statewide), so that may explain the suburban county vote there (Henrico and Chesterfield), but the Northern Virginia and Norfolk area result I think is in part because Kilgore came across as a hick, and those areas don't do hicks. The swing in Prince William by the way was only around the statewide swing based on the Bush 2004 numbers, so Kilgore was not particularly weak in the North Virginia exurbs. The swing was much bigger in suburban Richmond, the Hampton Roads region, and Fairfax County. I think another factor is that those areas are anti Bush, and part of this is an anti Bush vote - in NJ, Virginia and California. It may not make any sense, but there you have it anyway.
I would feel that way except one of the delegates we lost was a really good, strongly conservative guy.
I'm waiting to figure out how the "conservative makeup" of the senate has changed.
The 4 delegates I tried to help personally all won, but the one guy barely eaked out a win.
It wasn't a fun election. But frankly, if I had a choice between my delegate and Kilgore, I'm glad my delegate won and Kilgore lost.
I am actually more alarmed by the California results.
Perhaps Arnold should be alarmed:
"California has 1.2 million more registered Democrats than Republicans. It's not that surprising."
And about 3 public employees per taxpayer....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.