Well, I’m a Hoffman, Baby, Hoffman away from a perfect score. My predictions were made here a week ago. Here in Virginia, there have not been such crushing Republican victories since Ulysses S. Grant left the state. One party swept the Governorship, Lt. Governorship and the Attorney General’s office for the first time since 1997. Northern Virginia, suburban and under the malign influence of the Washington Post, still went 51% for the Republicans. I guess it just shows what a Pat Robertson educated lawyer can do (for those not from here, the prime talking point of the Post was that McDonnell went to Liberty University Law School and wrote a thesis on traditional values). In New Jersey, not since the Jim Florio inspired tax revolt of 1992 has there been such an earthquake. The most densely populated and suburban state in the nation went decisively Republican. Not only did Chris Christie win but the liberal Republican took 5% of the vote.
Overall it was a crushing blow to the “Republicans Are Dead” meme. The Hoffman loss for the Conservative Party in a district won by Obama is instructive as well. First, a conservative decisively crushed a Republican. The one brand is much stronger than the other. As others here have pointed out Hoffman ran on national issues and eschewed local concerns. He was a political neophyte, unknown six months ago, and running far behind three months ago. He finished second with 45% of the vote. This is powerful evidence that conservatism alone is a potent weapon in a candidate’s arsenal. It will not win by itself however. Had Hoffman highlighted how he would serve local interest, particularly Fort Drum, he might have pulled it out. It is also instructive that his Democratic opponent did not run on social issues.
Which brings me to the most powerful social issue of the night in one of the least hospitable states in the nation. In Maine, a state where the religious right has almost no purchase, same sex marriage passed by the legislature went down in smoking ruins. Maine is an unchurched state. It has virtually no ethnic minorities loyal to the Democratic Party, but hostile to same sex marriage, as in California. It is represented by two moderate Republican Senators. It still rejected same sex marriage which required overturning the status quo in order to do so. In Maine the forces of change had to overcome the status quo of same sex marriage. Even with that burden, marriage won. Maine and California are Democratic states. They have gone for the Democrat on the presidential level for two decades. They still want marriage to be defended.
Conservatism can be a powerful ally for a Republican, but if the candidate fails to focus on governance issues such as roads, bases, taxes and services, he will lose. But if he fails to defend marriage, oppose the growth of government and profligacy he will be crushed.




















3 responses so far
1 joemarier // Nov 5, 2009 at 12:04 pm
But the Religious right does have purchase in Maine. The Catholic Church took up special collections for a half million in ad buys there. That’s “purchase” by definition.
2 mlindroo // Nov 5, 2009 at 3:23 pm
> It is also instructive that his Democratic opponent did not run on social issues.
Well, did McDonnell or Christie…? As far as I can tell, both (wisely) ran as centrists rather than as orthodox full-spectrum Republicans — particularly McDonnell.
—
Anyway, for the first time ever I actually agree with Vecchione about something! The “Conservative” label probably has lower negatives that the Republican moniker. The latter term is not very popular anywhere following the Bush debacle. McDonnell’s and Christie’s websites reportedly avoid mentioning the “Republican” word, although their opponents of course used it frequently as a derogatory term. So my advice for Michael Steele would be this: why not simply RENAME the Republican party to sort out all the identity problems and ideological confusion?! After all, the political right wing party in the UK and Canada is known as the Conservative Party isn’t it…is there any better way to encourage long suffering American conservatives while showing squishy RINOs and moderates what the game really is about?
MARCU$
3 ottovbvs // Nov 5, 2009 at 6:33 pm
……..there are more contradiction in this little homily than I’ve read for a long time……but keep up the good work
You must log in to post a comment.