Quote

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Looks Pretty Red To Me

At least for a time we shouldn't have to endure the talk from all those wishful thinkers out there about how the commonwealth of Virginia is turning blue.  Or purple.  Or something.

It looks mighty red this evening:

I'll give Creigh Deeds credit for achieving what Obama promised but failed to accomplish.  He united the electorate.  We're all Republicans now.

Thanks, dude.

Quote of the Day

From a commenter over at the Roanoke Times blog:

"Looks like we get 'TalibanBob' McDonnell for 4 years. How sad for all of us."

And they call Republicans radical.

Message Sent

2010 looms large:
6 Republicans beat Dem incumbents in Va. House
By Larry O'Dell, Associated Press Writer

Richmond, Va. (AP) -- Republicans gained at least four seats Tuesday to strengthen their grip on the House of Delegates, but lost an influential delegate who has been embroiled in a scandal.

Aided by a Republican sweep of the top three statewide offices, the GOP knocked off at least six Democratic House incumbents. The defeat of Del. Phil Hamilton, R-Newport News, and a Democratic win in an open seat formerly held by a Republican put the GOP's net gain at four with a couple of close races still to be decided.

Three Democratic incumbents in Fairfax County lost. James M. LeMunyon beat Chuck Caputo, Richard Anderson ousted Paul F. Nichols and Barbara Comstock defeated Margaret Vanderhye. In Loudoun County, Republican Thomas Greason beat Democratic incumbent David E. Poisson.

Also, Republican James Moorefield beat Del. Daniel C. Bowling in southwestern Virginia, and the GOP's Christopher Stolle ousted Del. Joseph F. Bouchard in Virginia Beach. Stolle is the brother of five-term Republican state Sen. Kenneth W. Stolle. [link]
 A good day it was.

What To Make of the Elections?

Mickey Kaus offers this:
Winner: Robopolls. Rasmussen's final poll, showing a 46-43-8 Christie win, was pretty damn accurate.

Loser: Health care reform

Loser: Obama, who tried to work his magic for Corzine and discovered it wasn't there. (I don't buy the "he invested his prestige" line. A President is still allowed to try to help in a tight race. But he was clearly not a transformative presence in this one. It was more an Olympics bid situation.)

Winner: The Incumbent Rule--which holds that late-breaking voters do not go to the incumbent.  Tarnished in 2004, it's having a Nixon-like rehabilitation in New Jersey.

Losers: E.J.Dionne, Walter Shapiro and others caught in the MSM negative-ads worked narrative (which just happened to favor the Democrat). ...

Winners: ACORN, SEIU, voter fraud. A close election would have put the spotlight on them, no? I guess that could still happen in NY-23. ... Corollary Loser: John Fund. A close election would have given him six months of well-paying work. ...

Losers: Dems who were planning to argue that a Corzine victory, when contrasted with Deeds' loss, shows the need to stick with "core Democratic values" (i.e. unions) ...

Loser: Card check. Virginia Republican McDonnell didn't fudge on labor's "card check" bill. He bashed it. He won. Virginia is hardly a union state, but neither are the states with Senators who are swing votes on "card check". ...

Losers: Beck, Limbaugh, New Media conservatives who thought the rebellious Reaganite vote was bigger than it turned out to be in NY-23. ... Also Dem-leaning MSM who were planning to use a rebellious Reaganite victory as demonstrating a tea-party takeover of GOP (as opposed to a botched candidate-selection process). ...

Winner: GOP, because now that the rebellious Reaganites have had some serotonin leakage, they might be a bit easier to handle. ...

Winner: Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC. Breath of sanity next to K. Olbermann ...
Seems reasonable.

What Happened?

I'm still trying to figure out what happened over in the 3rd District.  Was it a Dan Bowling loss or a Will Morefield win?

Defining The Republican Party

It works every time it's tried effectively.

Conservatism:
The GOP elite’s $1 million object lesson — and the message of NY-23
By Michelle Malkin

Conservatives owe NY-23 candidate Doug Hoffman immeasurable gratitude. He overcame impossible odds (single digits just a month ago) to come within two points of defeating Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman had zero name recognition. National Republican Party officials dumped nearly $1 million into the race on behalf of radical leftist GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava, who then turned around, endorsed Owens and siphoned off 5 percent of the vote with her name still on the ballot after she dropped out.

Conservatives’ money went to pay for specious attack ads against Hoffman run by the NRCC like this.
Conservatives’ money went to support a GOP candidate who shares the same socialist alliances with fellow SEIU/ACORN/New Party/Working Families Party activist Patrick Gaspard, the Obama White House political director who intervened in the race to secure Scozzafava’s endorsement of Owens.

Hoffman’s candidacy illuminated the stark difference between GOP political opportunists willing to pimp out their endorsements to any old ACORN-embracing, Working Families Party-consorting, Big Labor crony who puts an “R” by her name — and movement conservatives who refuse to “mooooderate” for the politically expedient sake of mooooderation as dictated by out-of-touch Beltway party leaders. The NRCC/RNC’s $1 million debacle will cost much more than that. [link]
Give the voters a reason to vote Republican and chances are good they will.  Offer up a "Democrat" and voters will vote for the Democrat.

Maybe They Should Have Listened At Those Town Hall Meetings

Discontent ain't the word for it:
'09 Exit Polls: Vast Economic Discontent Spells Trouble for Dems in 2010
By Gary Langer, ABC News

Vast economic discontent marked the mood of Tuesday's off-year voters, portending potential trouble for incumbents generally and Democrats in particular in 2010.

Perhaps most striking – though simply confirmatory of national polls – were views on the economy. A vast 90 percent in New Jersey and 85 percent in Virginia said they're worried about the direction of the nation's economy in the next year; majorities, 55 percent and 53 percent, respectively, said they're "very" worried about it.

In Virginia, voters who expressed the highest levels of economic concern supported McDonnell by a very wide margin, 73-26 percent. Moreover, 46 percent called the economy the single top issue in their vote, far and away No.1, and those economy voters favored McDonnell over Deeds by a 10-point margin in preliminary results. (An additional 14 percent called taxes their top issue – and those voters went for McDonnell by a far broader margin.) [link]
Earth to Democrats: We worry for our children's future.  You're hell-bent on nationalizing health care and passing climate taxes.  What about this election don't you understand?

So Much For That Narrative

You've read it in the Roanoke Times.  You've seen it on the pages of USA Today.  And in the Chicago Sun-TimesNewsweek.  The really hip and really well-educated are going to be flocking to the hippest of American cities to begin and extend their lucrative careers.  New York.  San Francisco.  Portland.  Seattle.

Well, kiss that theory goodbye:
Blue State Exodus
By Joel Kotkin, Forbes

For the past decade a large coterie of pundits, prognosticators and their media camp followers have insisted that growth in America would be concentrated in places hip and cool, largely the bluish regions of the country.

Since the onset of the recession, which has hit many once-thriving Sun Belt hot spots, this chorus has grown bolder. The Wall Street Journal, for example, recently identified the "Next Youth-Magnet Cities" as drawn from the old "hip and cool" collection of yore: Seattle, Portland, Washington, New York and Austin, Texas.

It's not just the young who will flock to the blue meccas, but money and business as well, according to the narrative. The future, the Atlantic assured its readers, did not belong to the rubes in the suburbs or Sun Belt, but to high-density, high-end places like New York, San Francisco and Boston.

This narrative, which has not changed much over the past decade, is misleading and largely misstated. Net migration, both before and after the Great Recession, according to analysis by the Praxis Strategy Group, has continued to be strongest to the predominately red states of the South and Intermountain West.

This seems true even for those seeking high-end jobs. Between 2006 and 2008, the metropolitan areas that enjoyed the fastest percentage shift toward educated and professional workers and industries included nominally "unhip" places like Indianapolis, Charlotte, N.C., Memphis, Tenn., Salt Lake City, Jacksonville, Fla., Tampa, Fla., and Kansas City, Mo.

The overall migration numbers are even more revealing. As was the case for much of the past decade, the biggest gainers continue to include cities such as San Antonio, Dallas and Houston. Rather than being oases for migrants, some oft-cited magnets such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and Chicago have all suffered considerable loss of population to other regions over the past year. [link]
Much is made by planners in those "hip" cities of their having amenities that are sure to draw the right emigres to their environs.  Parks.  Symphony orchestras.  Greenways.  Civic centers.  Hiking trails and walking paths.  On and on.

All San Antonio, Dallas and Houston have to offer is a less expensive, less intrusive way of life (and good schools, quality public services, etc.).  Yet they thrive while the others whither.

How can that be????