Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 8:39 AM

Owens Wins NY-23. Did Independents Make the Difference There, Too?

Holly Bailey

GOP sweep? Not exactly. In one of the few bright spots Tuesday night for Democrats, Bill Owens narrowly defeated Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman in New York’s closely watched 23rd Congressional District. With more than 90 percent of the precincts reporting, Owens led Hoffman, 49 percent to 45 percent. Dede Scozzafava, a Republican who dropped out of the race last weekend amid criticism from the party’s right flank over her moderate positions on social issues and support for Barack Obama’s stimulus bill, still finished with 6 percent of the vote. Although more than 5,000 absentee ballots were due to be counted, Hoffman conceded the race early Wednesday morning. But you’d better be prepared for déjà vu: Hoffman told reporters Tuesday that if he lost the race, he’d just mount another challenge in 2010—though this time he’ll likely be the actual GOP candidate, instead of mounting a third-party bid.

What does it all mean? Democrats will no doubt point to the GOP’s infighting in the race and Hoffman’s subsequent loss as a sign that voters declined to endorse the party’s more conservative views. But Republicans played down their loss by blaming the controversy over the party’s nomination process, in which Scozzafava was chosen behind closed doors. “There is no doubt in my mind that the candidate selection process lacks openness and transparency and should be changed to a primary system so voters can have a say in who their respective parties nominate,” Rep. Pete Sessions, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in a statement this morning.

Your Gaggler hasn’t seen any exit polls for the race, but, we suspect, not unlike other races last night, that independents played a big role in Owens’s victory. Heading into Election Day, Republicans were encouraged by that polls showed swing voters were moving heavily toward Hoffman. According to a Public Policy Polling survey released Sunday, Hoffman led Owens, 52 percent to 30 percent, among independents. But a Siena Research Institute poll released Monday found that Hoffman’s lead among indies had vanished. According to the poll, Owens led Hoffman among unaffiliated voters, 43 percent to 37 percent. Did a last-minute swing among independents on Tuesday make the difference for Owens?

Advertisement
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: exnazipope (November 5, 2009 at 7:51 AM)

Despite heavy heavy support from the loony Palin, Rush, Hannity, Beck Teabagger.....A LIBERAL DEMOCRAT WON IN A SOLID REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVE DISTRICT!!!

Spin uselessly away.


Posted By: exnazipope (November 5, 2009 at 7:48 AM)

A DEMOCRAT WON IN A SOLID REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVE DISTRICT!!!!  That in itself speaks volumes.

davole, what part of that don't you understand???


Posted By: Davole (November 4, 2009 at 9:09 PM)

Apolitical -

No, I'm not dense, but you sure appear to be half way between dense and blindly biased.

There are three reasons why the Conservative candidate lost, and note, by a only slim margin.

The first reason is that the NY Republican Party botched the selection process by appointing a RINO candidate, who was more liberal than Republican. She was arbitrarily selected by a committee, as opposed to having to face a primary process whereby the membership would decide.

The second reason is that the federal Republican Party wrongly chose to financially support that RINO candidate, instead of supporting the Conservative candidate who is also a Republican.

The third reason is that although the so-called Republican candidate had withdrawn from the race, her name still remained on the ballot, and she received 6% of the total vote. If her name had not been on the ballot, most of those votes, the deciding margin, would probably have gone to the Conservative.

So, the Conservative candidate fared way much better than the Republican one, and came quite close to actually winning that election.

Now the Republican Party administration will have to decide whether to enlist and support true Conservative candidates, or whether to enlist and support RINO and so-called moderate candidates who, according to history, would probably soon leave the party.

I believe that a Republican Party which defines itself according to conservative principles would attract more independents and true moderates to substantially compensate for the smaller number of RINOs and liberal moderates who regularly are prone to abandoning the party.

You refer to Palin, Rush, and Beck as "nuts" - on what factual basis?

Lastly, why would an obamabo(ugh)t like you actually care about honestly advising the Republican Party regarding how to select candidates, and why should the Republican Party even bother to accept your advice?

Your ulterior motives in that regard are quite conspicuous!