GOP nonsense hard at work

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I noticed the GOP all excited about yesterday’s election. They claim that because 2 governorships went
from Democratic to GOP, it proclaims some sort of repudiation of Obama. Well, as usual they are wrong.
Since 1970, Virgina has has 10 governors, 5 demo’s and 5 GOPER’S, mixed across different presidential
terms. so having a GOP governor during a demo president is not that uncommon.
The same goes with New jersey. Since 1970, new jersey has had 12 different governors,
6 DEMO’S and 6 GOPER’S. And again, across different presidential terms. So I wouldn’t get too excited
about this so called repudiation of Obama. Now here in California, a local race, CA-10 went from a moderate
Demo to a very liberal democrat. I would say this is a more likely turn of events given the area of the congressional
district. Also NY-23 which went democrat after an GOP incumbent is more indicative of national trends too. this
is a case of the narrow minded GOP who was favored by Rush and others of his ilk got crushed by 17 points. The moderate
GOP person dropped out just before the election and endorsed the democrat. You have to take into account history
and the area in question before you make judgements such as Obama’s been repudiated.

Kropotkin

2

I think the point is that both of these states went heavily to Obama in the general presidential election, only 1 year ago. It isnt the fact that there is a GOP governor elected per se, it is the fact that there was a radical political swing in just a single year, from left to right. This could be seen as indicative of a shift in public sentiment; really, it is hard to see it as anything but.

Of course, polling results showed a HUGE decline in young and minority voters in these governor races, when compared to voter turnout for the presidential voting. This likely accounts for much of the discrepancy. During the presidential vote, there were TONS of new first-time voters, people who didnt know or care about the political issues or facts involved, and merely wanted to be “part of history” or “vote for change” because they felt a hatred for Bush. . . regardless of their motives, this vast voting block turned out for Obama. This vast voting block was absent, however, in yesterday’s governor elections.

To the extent that many of these young/minority/first time voters will again turn out in 2012 for the next presidential race (I think that many of them will, if not all, maybe around 80% if I had to wager a guess), these governor races are not really anything for the DFL to worry about; of course, they might worry about losing control of Congress next year, especially because these same voting blocks are usually far less interested in midterm elections.

Another key point is the independent vote, and this does give some reason for the DFL to worry: last year independents turned out in droves for Obama, yet in these governor races independents voted mostly along conservative party lines. To the extent that independent voters represent a substantial or crutial voting block this might cause alarm in the DFL, if they realise that independents who voted for Obama and his “change” (change, into what…? surprisingly, no one ever seemed to ask that question…) might be switching their political affiliations from left to right. But then again, I am sure that much of this discrepancy is accounted for by midterm voter apathy.

All in all, the GOP is overstating the results from yesterday, and the DFL is understating the results. Typically, and as is to be expected, both “opposing” parties miss the point and instead prefer to remain at the superficial level of analysis only.

3

There’s likely no connection between the governor’s races and the national political scene. I used to live in the bluest state of them all - Massachusetts. We would elect republican governors with some regularity. It did not ever mean a shift to the right, nor did it ever have anything to do with national politics. One of those governors, William Weld, was extremely popular, but when he ran for Senate, he was roundly rejected by the voters.

4

Why do you think this is? Are DFL voters indifferent to their state elections and only get riled up about the big national ones? It seems like the sub-section of voters who vote only in national elections and not usually in their local state elections would be expected to be relatively the same percentage across all party affiliations, statistically speaking.

5

I am not familiar enough with Virginia or New Jersey state politics to comment directly on those elections.

But Massachusetts, I know pretty well.

But i think there’s something to the generalisation that voters use the gubernatorial elections not to send a message to Washington, but to send one to their own state legislatures. If they’re sending a message at all.

6

Sure, it seems pretty unlikely that voters would go to the polls in a state election with the intent of “sending a message” to washington, I agree; I would say its more a result of far less media hype and a smaller press propaganda machine, which goes into overdrive on national elections and tries to whip everyone into a freny. Not so much for state elections, which get marginal coverage by comparison, even if they are “crutial” such as a swing seat in the senate.

That being said, I would assume those particular segments of the voting population which are more able to be riled up and manipulated into voting based on emotional propaganda and media disinformation, those people who vote not on solid issues or a genuine concern for the political process so much as whimsical or contrived emotional responses of the moment, or the pressure of local voter recruiters, would show markedly wider swings between the state vs national level elections, in terms of their overall turnout as a group. And im sure we all have our opinions as to which “side” is more emotional, malleable, unthinking and reactive.

7

Well, the press hype is less, but not necessarily less within that state. In Maine, where I now live, we just had a referendum about gay marriage. There was a media blitz - every other television commercial here was about that question. You couldn’t escape it.

The statewide media were surely filled with ads and discussions about the governor’s races.

But I think I get your point, which may boil down to this - college students don’t vote in off-year elections.