RSS Feed MenuToday’s the big day in upstate New York. Jim Tedisco vs. Scott Murphy. I’m naturally nervous but not at all in despair over Jim’s chances. As Matt Dill, Jim’s political director in the State Assembly, told me on Sunday night, “I think we’re gonna win it.”
Keep in mind this is the same campaign that as recent as last Thursday told me, “It looks like we’re gonna lose this thing… it’s gonna be a dead heat” (expletives and angst not included). Of course, over the weekend two things happened:
1. The fact that Scott Murphy opposes the death penalty for the 9/11 terrorists in Al Qaeda actually (and unexpectedly, I confess) caught major fire. People are talking about it, and I hear the grassroots are pretty disturbed by it. Very good news.
2. Jim basically won the endorsement of the upstate press. This includes the flagships like The Saratogian (liberal) and The Post Star (more moderate but also based in Murphy’s “hometown”) and others like The Adirondack Daily Enterprise and Ballston Journal, plus many that sided with Jim before the weekend such as the very liberal Poughkeepsie Journal, Glens Falls Chronicle, the New York Post, etc. (The Albany Times Union, a major paper to be sure, predictably endorsed Murphy but their argument that Tedisco is a Republican just like Rush Limbaugh is disgusting and pathetic.)
The Tedisco campaign is exhausted but at the same time relatively hopeful. “We’re hearing a lot of new and different things,” a Tedisco staffer told me over the weekend. From the Democratic side, government professor Bob Turner from Skidmore College in Saratoga (the heart of the district) sent me his thoughts as well. An avid Murphy supporter, he replied, “I really have no clue” when I asked him to predict who’ll be taking this one. To sum up his other thoughts:
- It is going to be the 2nd most expensive special election in American history, 2nd only to the special to replace former GOP speaker Dennis Hastert’s seat where spending was about $10 million.
- Turnout in special elections is about slightly less than ½ of what it was in the general election. In the 8 closely contested special elections since 2007, they’ve seen approximately 90,000 voters. Lower turnout favors Tedisco, since higher turnout means more independents (who’ve been breaking for Murphy) are voting.
- Since 2000, there have been 33 special elections, only 7 times has control of the seat switched parties.
- The last time the GOP won a special election for a seat that was held by a Democrat was in 2001. (VA 4th District, Forbes.)
- Democrats have been on a winning streak since 2006, winning 9 of 12 seats.
- There are three more special elections coming up for Rahm Emanuel, Hilda Solis, and Ellen Tauscher, all of whom have accepted positions in the Obama Administration. All three are very reliable Democratic districts. Republicans need this to be their victory!
- The Saratoga County Board of Elections has reportedly given out an extremely large number of absentee ballots, so if the race is close, it might not be decided by tonight. (Saratoga County = 1/3 of the 10-county district.)
There’s nothing quite like Election Day in March! Tonight will be very interesting, to say the least.
ireign // Mar 31, 2009 at 9:02 pm
The national gop did a terrible job in this race. Add this to Tedisco’s odd refusal to take a position on the bailout to late in this race, and the race went from a solid GOP pick-up to a nailbiter. If Tedisco loses, some NY and National GOP leaders should lose their positions.
mlindroo // Mar 31, 2009 at 10:11 pm
> If Tedisco loses, some NY and National GOP> leaders should lose their positions.Well, seems like a scoreless tie to me so far … which side will “win politically” (i.e. the spin wars) then? Should Murphy (and Obama by extension) or Tedisco (Michael Steele) have done better than this? This is a heavily GOP leaning district but Democrats have been more successful in NY-20 in the past few elections…MARCU$
krove // Apr 1, 2009 at 6:34 am
For a party with a 70,000 built in voting advantage in registrations to be looking to loose this against a mainstream Dem as against the Conservative Dem Gillibrand is a disaster for the GOP. They should have swept this by thousands of votes. What does it say about a party and it’s ideals when they cant retain a stronghold?
ireign // Apr 1, 2009 at 7:40 am
Mlindroo-Democrats got a lucky break in 2006 when people in the Pataki administration that were close to Gillibrand leaked a police report against the incumbent in the closing week of the campaign. Gillibrand, went from losing quite handily to winning a narrow victory. Then, like most incumbents she won re-election in 2008. So this is a district Republicans can and should win. The longtime Congressman from this district was Gerald Solomon, a pretty staunch conservative who used to win handily. A tie for Republicans is a loss.
ireign // Apr 1, 2009 at 7:42 am
Republicans also missed a chance to attack Gillibrand’s record of flip-flopping (she has already switched many social positions since being named Senator) as part of their attack on Scott Murphy. Any decrease in Gillibrand’s popularity would have benefited Jim Tedisco and hurt Murphy and would have hurt Gillibrand in her bid for re-election.
mlindroo // Apr 1, 2009 at 12:03 pm
> this is a district Republicans can and should win. The > longtime Congressman from this district was Gerald > Solomon, a pretty staunch conservative who used to win > handily. A tie for Republicans is a loss.Well, the spin that I hear is that a) Gillibrand won reelection 62%-38%, b) meanwhile Obama also beat McCain in the district 51%-48% last autumn, ergo a 50-50 tie now actually equals “a stunning rebuke to Obama’s actions!” So there you have it:-)MARCU$