A Note on the Election Outcomes

Here is a radical thought for all here on townhall and in the conservative media who are ripping the GOP and Hoffman as a candidate…

The D Owens WAS A PRETTY SOLID canidate!

He appears to talk a moderate game and is a military retiree in a district who largest employer is FT Drum NY (think many DOD employees and Military retirees):

http://www.observer.com/4850/meet-bill-owens-dccc-approved- non-democrat-house

I think this guy was a smart pick by D to play to the military element in the district or at least blunt that vote.

The other side gets to think too and Owens was a solid choice

NOTE: this does not constitute any form of endorsement of Owens goofy statist views; its simply a comment on the politics of the situation lol

I agree, Owens was a good choice, essentially a Blue Dog, at least part of his public persona. On top of that, clearly it is a liberal Republican district, as they nominated Dede. So they do not have a solid conservative base. That the conservative candidate drove the liberal Republican from the race shows improving conservative numbers, but still a liberal district, and one with a rift in the right-leaning parties.

In short, yes I agree with you.

Actually Best of the Web has an interesting take on this that differs a bit form mine, but which also explains this in an interesting way:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487040130045745 15612402280696.html

on Repubs who endorsed Ms. Democrat in Republican clothing. The GOP just doesn't seem to get the hang of standing firm for what you believe in. Neither do they get it that this failure has everything to do with losing elections. There's a lot of empty space between the ears of both parties in DC.

From what I saw of Owens' credentials, he was a formidable foe. Poor Hoffman was as exciting as drying paint. He was a solid conservative but to beat stiff competition like Owens, he would have been well served by a charisma transplant. I know that he was a "last minute" entry and all in all, he damn near won anyway. I do take some optimism away from last night's results. It is heartening to me.

From what I understand, Dede (not spelling that last name over and over) was picked by the party bosses, so it may be more informative about the nature of the party leadership than the NY rank and file, though the disconnect between party and leadership is troubling too... That is why I was taking some time. The more I read the more I discover about the specifics of this, and it seems a strange situation, from NY's multiparty system, to the selection of the candidates, it is definitely a unique situation which makes a bad example on which to evaluate the relative strengths of D and R. But, as I said, I would like to gather a bit more info before making any statements I later have to retract.

I must confess to knowing little about the specifics of the race, or the personalities involved, so I can't say much about that. But if your description is accurate, it would be yet another example of the press taking a bad Republican candidate and characterizing his failure as a vote against conservatism. Would hardly be the first time they have done that.

Why, for that matter, they took McCain's defeat as a defeat of conservatism, which is absurd as many conservatives sat out precisely because of McCain's nomination. I argued at the time it was a bad decision to do so, but that is irrelevant. What matters is that McCain was hardly right wing, and his defeat said nothing about the viability of the right (as we saw yesterday).