Blogs and Stories
The GOP Surge Isn't Obama's Fault
Mario Tama / Getty Images
The president suffered a bruising at the polls Tuesday. Bush strategist Mark McKinnon on how he lost his magic—and why he's not really to blame.
The post-presidential election correction has officially kicked in. Barack Obama cannot translate his popularity to other Democrats when he’s not on the ballot.
The only absolute we can count on after Tuesday's elections is that the press will overinterpret the results. No matter that there are important nuances, local issues, unique circumstances, and dramatically varying quality of candidates, the media will default to the simplistic explanation.
It is fair to conclude the bloom is off Obama’s rose. But, that’s largely political entropy setting in. It’s inevitable for all newly elected presidents.
During President Bush's eight years as president, no matter where the election was, or what the circumstances were, and no matter how we tried to spin it, the results were always in some form or fashion a referendum on the president.
And so it will be with President Obama. It ain’t fair. But it's life in the big chair. And Team Obama knows it. That's why they tried to distance themselves from Creigh Deeds' campaign for governor in Virginia weeks before the election. It’s pretty ugly when your campaign gets thrown under the bus by the sitting president of your party before voters have cast any votes. But Team Obama saw the writing on the wall in Virginia, and rather than stick it out until the end, they waved the white flag early in an effort to distance themselves from responsibility for the outcome. And while Team Obama will make the case that the reason Deeds fared so poorly was because he ran away from Obama, the margin of McDonnell's victory makes it clear Obama could have been Deeds’ running mate and the result probably would not have been much different.
Two storylines we are likely to see are that the results are a repudiation of President Obama—and that the right wing of the Republican Party has taken over and has driven moderates out of the party.
Now, it is fair to conclude the bloom is off Obama's rose. But, that's largely political entropy setting in. It's inevitable for all newly elected presidents. Campaigns raise expectations and hopes to levels that simply can never be realistically delivered. And the physics of modern politics simply translates into voters having very little patience. After George W. Bush was elected in 2000, many projected Republican hegemony and dominance for decades to come. Similar echoes were heard in the weeks following Obama’s election.
• Peter Beinart: Behind the Democratic Wipeout
• Linda Hirshman: Get Gay Marriage Off the Ballot
• Max Blumenthal: How the Right's Point Man Went Down in Ny-23
• More Daily Beast writers on the election results Republicans won a clean sweep in Virginia of the top three statewide offices. And Bob McDonnell won the governor's race by a huge margin. What does it mean? Well, first and foremost it means McDonnell was a terrific candidate and ran a great campaign. Contrary to the meta-narrative the press will write, McDonnell actually ran a very pragmatic, non-ideological campaign focused on local jobs and roads issues and shunned offers of help from socially conservative outsiders like Sarah Palin.
The big man, Chris Christie, beats the thin man, Jon Corzine. Hard to spin this one. Obama won New Jersey over McCain by 57-42 percent. New Jersey is a traditionally blue state. Corzine outspent Christie three-to-one, most of it his own money, and, unlike Creigh Deeds in Virginia, had the full-throated endorsement of Obama. Team Obama was all in and can’t blame the candidate on this one. Voters were concerned, in order, about property taxes (26 percent), the economy (21 percent), corruption (20 percent) and health care (18 percent). Corzine had a lot of problems and high unfavorables. It may be impossible to correlate, but I think Corzine’s ad basically calling Christie fat (slow-motion footage of Christie’s mid-section with a voice over blaming Chris Christie for “throwing his weight around”) was a huge strategic mistake. The spot crossed the line into a truly personal, cheap attack. And the problem is a vast majority of Americans, and I suspect probably two-thirds of New Jersey, more closely identify with Christie’s body type.
So, what we can say about Tuesday’s elections is simply that reality has set in. Obama’s personal popularity does not magically translate to electoral success for Democrats. Voters are concerned about the economy, spending, and big government and increasingly are ascribing responsibility to Obama and the Democratic Party.
What we can also say is that this election will largely be viewed as a repudiation of Obama policies and will therefore have very real consequences—the most immediate of which is likely to be diminished support among Blue Dog Democrats for Obama’s health-care initiative.
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono.
For more of The Daily Beast, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
What's Joe's Problem?
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
How Palin Helps Bloomberg
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
Huckabee's Power Surge
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
10 Worst Political Scandals
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
In New Jersey and Virginia, African-American voters who who turned out in historic numbers for Obama, did not make the same effort to vote for governor. This is not good news for President Obama when he looks ahead to a second term.
Why do you say that? African Americans did not turn out for Corzine and Deeds. They are not Obama and African Americans can tell the difference.
Do you realize how shallow that comment is???? Your either saying all african americans are racists...or that it's ok to just vote when you want a special person voted in......a lot and I mean a lot of blood was shed for the right to vote....it's a right....and a duty....it makes me sick to hear of such low turnouts....then hear all the people complain about whose in office when they never took the time to to learn of candidates....it does matter... your vote does matter it's a real shame that people allow these idiots in congress to pick our pockets just as the British did before our revolution. These people work for us......we the people have the power to keep them in office and continue to increase our taxes.like lemmings.. or...to vote them out. Like I said it as an honor and duty to vote and to make such a lame statement...I mean how lazy can you be to not vote???? Thats why we now have a Marxist and Maoist and other extremeists running this great nation...Its not a beauty contest....or rock star show....its our government and deserves the effort of knowlege and effort to get off butt and vote....This nations biggest enemy truley is ignorance..as my mentor R.L. has said and I so hardily agree..at least think about it...
At least they got that going for them.
No it was not Obama's fault. Really? Did Rahm call Mark to write this? It was those Independent voters finally realizing what Obama is. Candidate Obama was such a nice guy to vote for. He won on ABB - Anybody but Bush. Obama wanted to be Uniter - country is divided as before. Obama did not campaign to have Government will control all aspects of you life, work, business etc.
A good move for Obama would be to ban the SEIU thugs from the White House.
Good article. Some good points. But I think there is some accuracy to the theory that moderates are rebelling against the Democrats and to President Obama.
A lot of folks, like myself, helped get Mr. Obama elected so that he would live up to his promise of improving the political system, and weed-out corruption in a substantive way. We haven't seen much of that yet. And campaigning for dubious characters like Mr. Corzine here doesn't instill much faith.
I'm patient. I'm not taking to the streets. I'm not calling for Obama administration resignations. I'm not screeching and moaning like some folks in the 'liberal' camp are. I'm not regretting that Hillary Clinton didn't win the primary and I'm damn sure not thinking John McCain might have been the better choice. I'm not vowing to withhold my vote if I don't get my way in the next 6 months. But I won't make excuses endlessly. There is a mountain of things that need improvement, but we put him in office to get results.
Like many people who supported Barack Obama, I don't expect instant gratification. Not at all. But I do expect some real results from the Obama administration before the 2012 election.
Very well said DragonScorpion, I thought logic had died in this country.
Oh you are so strong, first you said you would only wait 6 more months for results and then you close your post by saying before the 2012 election. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you right here a true Democrat, "DragonScorpion" is the purest example of a true Democrat, they are bureaucratic, inefficient and impotent!!!
If you are going to make snarky comments like this, at least take the time to read what a person has actually written. I stated above, "I'm not vowing to withhold my vote if I don't get my way in the next 6 months." Key word here, "NOT" vowing to withhold my vote...
Now, after you apologize for misstating what I wrote, perhaps you could explain just what it is about my comments above that suggests I'm a) a Democrat, b) bureaucratic, c) inefficient, d) impotent.
Don't worry DragonScorpion, osea65 stupidity is a pre-existing condition that has no cure.
Dragon all I have to do is apologize for missing the keyword "NOT", with that the rest of my comment is null and void of course. I'm sorry about that, however I still think you should give them less time to comply with their promises!!!
By the way kord81, I'm gonna let that one slide this time , since you suffered such a bad setback on tuesday, and I you probably need some kind of satisfaction!!!!
osea65 I hate to break it to you there is no such thing as setback. The only election that matters is the one coming up in 2012.
I appreciate that, Osea65. We'll just call that an honest mistake then.
always reasonable opinion. thanks
Two off year elections: So what? The opposition party always does better in non-presidential years, unless something very unusual happens. The Democrats will lose some ground in 2010. The question is: How much? That will depend on the history of the future.
Exactly! I was just explaining hyperbole to my 9-year-old and calling two governors a "surge" is a great example of hyperbole.
If you think "surge" is bad, check "wipeout" in the headline to Beinart's story. Unfortunately, the level of headline writing is no better than the writing on this site.
It's easy to kick Obama around. He brought too much baggage with him. But the real vampire in all this is PELOSI. I don't care where you come down in your politics that lady needs the power taken away from her. Many times she won't let a vote come to the floor if she doesn't agree with the ligislation. When that happens your representative, that you elected, can't represent you.That's BS. We elect our reps and some old broken down madame from California should not have the power to tell them when they can vote!!!
You're absolutely right on this one!!!!!
I believe this sends President Obama a message: a mid-course correction is needed. Now, we'll see how capable he really is and if he can make it.
The Republican Party is about to make an epic comeback due largely to the President Obama's staff keeping him in campaign mode. The rubber has hit the road so to speak and it is time for him to govern, lead and be the President of the United States.
I am extremely disappointed in our President -- Bill Clinton knew when it was time to stop campaigning and get to work. We have not seen the results or the transparency promised to us and now the voters are say "enough."
You can't have it both ways. If the Democratic candidates for governor in NJ and VA won, would President Obama have gotten credit for helping them win? Probably. He should surely take some of the blame for their loss. Many independents across the country are having buyer's remorse re the president. I would imagine that many in Congress are hoping that Health care will die on the vine. Who wants to walk the plank on that one if you are up for re-election?
Maybe Corzine's loss would have been even greater without Obama's campaigning.
Ah the nerve of these people!!!! It's so sad to see all this misguided devotion.
NJ and Va with Republican govenors. Good luck with that. They have one year.........2010 looms.
Two additional Democratic congressional seats who have an actual vote on legislation. No down side there.
The virulent Palin strain eradicated in NY-23. Voters hear her name and 70% hit the eject button.
I don't agree with your reasoning. Palin emphasized how the Republican in the race initially was out of step with Republican issues. She eventually stepped out of the race. I think that's the difference with the Dems and the Republicans; Dems will take anyone (William Jefferson - $100K found in is refrigerator by the FBI, Roland Burris - appointed by impeached Gov. Blagoivich, Ted Kennedy - left girl to drown in his car as he swam to safety, Bob Torricielli - In 1995, then-Rep. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., made secrets public at the behest of left-wing activist Bianca Jagger, his girlfriend at the time, Pat "Leaky" Leahy Leahy leaked secret information about a 1986 covert operation by the CIA, Charles Rangel - evaded taxes for years on his rental property, used House letterhead to shill for CCNY to name building after him, etc.) despite their ethical lapses. Republicans usually resign when these matters arise.
Sarah Palin: "I want to personally thank Republican Dede Scozzafava for acting so selflessly today in the NY District 23 race. Now it's time to cross the finish line with Doug Hoffman so that he can get to work for District 23 and the rest of America."
-FAIL
"The virulent Palin strain eradicated in NY-23. Voters hear her name and 70% hit the eject button."
LOL!!! Funny true.
Where are the headlines like "Conservative eat their own" or "Republicans blow Upstate New York out of their asses"?
PURGE BABY PURGE!!!!!
(chuckles)
someone pinch me...an extremely well thought out and written piece by my least favorite political commentator. dead on about the "fat" ad.
Great explanation as to how he wasn't to blame, but Obama didn't suffer a bruising at the polls. He suffered a bruising given to him by the mainstream media.
obama will suffer somewhat from the inevitable negative spin about the events of tuesday. but more important is how the blue-dogs will read the results. they are likely to be pretty damn nervous.
The truest words spoken by McKinnon is that the media meta-narrative will be simplistic and wrong. Fact is, off year elections historically have low turnout, and if you look at the exit polls, Obama had the same level of support (52 in Virginia, 57 in Jersey) as he did in the election a year ago. The simple fact is that McDonnell and Christie ran NON-IDEOLOGICAL campaigns against awful candidates and won. The vast majority of voters said Obama was not a factor, and of those who did, it was a wash. Add that to the fact that youth and Af-Ams did not come out for an off year election featuring 4 unappealing old white guys, and this is basically a dog bites man story. But rest assured, Fox, Limbaugh and their chorus of hater will interpret it as a stunning repudiation of Obama.
Far more interesting is that Hoffman lost to Owens in a district that has gone Republican for more than a century. If I am a GOP strategist, the lesson I will draw is that non-ideological and centrist candidates are what the GOP needs, as Steele and Cornyn and Gingrich have been saying. If I am a Dem strategist, I am hoping and praying that the Club for no growth and the Palinista/Limbaugh wingnuts do take over the party and run an ideological purge in California, Florida, etc, etc...in the blue dog districts, if the GOP runs center-right candidates, the voters will choose the moderate GOP over the conservative Dem, but if the club for growthers force more Hoffmans and Rubios on those districts, the blue dogs will win. The House is actually better set up for health care now than 24 hours ago, as Garamendi, a far more liberal Dem than was Tauscher, is the new rep for CA 10, and NY 23 now has a blue dog dem vote, which is better than nothing.
The obvious conclusion re the Gay marriage measure is that, as Nate Silver observed, there may now be a Bradley effect on Gay marriage issues. Folks who are homophobic (a really applicable description of the fearful folks fighting gay marriage) know it is somewhat socially unacceptable to voice this in a lot of the country now, so they say something different in the polls than in the polling booth. The Bradley effect seemed to have no bearing on Obama, but it is alive and well for the anti-gay marriage types. Truth is, if Loving vs State of Virginia had not been decided in 1967 by the supremes, hardly any states would have approved it 40 years ago, and I guarantee you that if interracial marriage were up for a vote in Texas, SC or Georgia, in an off-year election, there is a good chance it would be defeated. That is the reason we have a supreme court, in large measures, so that constitutional rights are not decided on a whim of a majority vote.
It does seem like the supremes will have to settle this one, and to bet on how Kennedy votes on that is anyone's guess, but it will be 5-4 either way.
Ultimately, gays will have the right to loveless marriages and ugly divorces and custody battles just like the rest of us...
now why aren't YOU a commentator here....brilliant post. one of the best I have ever read on this site.
You do realize Pres.Obama is against gay marriage.He must be homophobic. Since he's against gay marriage he must also be against interracial marriage according to your logic.Gay marriage is not the same as interracial marriage and the american people agree.It's been put up for vote in 34 states and voted down in 34 states,from liberal CA. to ME..And despite your "guarantee" that interracial marriage would be voted down in the states you mention ,I disagree.What do you base that on?
As far as NY 23 being used as the barometer of things to come; I would just say that the margin of victory in the New Jersey Gov. race alone is greater than all the votes cast in the NY 23 election,surely it shows a greater cross section of america than NY 23 does.The story there is that despite the "repub." endorsing the Dem.,Hoffman was still able to do relatively well.As far as the incumbent Gov.s being awful,I agree.They're tax and spend liberals similar to our tax (or) print and spend President.Informed and thoughtful voters rejected their irresponsible liberal "Obamalike" ideals.Christie ran against high taxes and won,a bad sign for Dems. in the mid-terms and for Obama in 2012.
The Army today announced that 75%
of Americans youth ARE NOT fit for the military.
The Pentagan says too many Fat, Dumb and young people with Police Records.....
Let us hope we do not get into any more wars, before we get these slobs into shape we will all be dead.
That's funny, true and sad.
I wonder who made all those kids fat, dumb, criminals anyway?
Personally, I think the Right is congratulating itself a little too enthusiastically today. Of the three most-followed races, it was NY-23 that I was watching. This was a Federal-level seat with a campaign that played out like a political soap opera so dramatic you literally couldn't make it up.
At the heart of it was internecine warfare between the moderate and "tea party" wings of the party. The tea partiers won the battle but the GOP lost the war. It was nowhere to be found on Fox's home page today.
The Dems went 1-for-3 on the high profile races, but they did have pockets of success. One that received virtually no MSM recognition was Charlotte, NC, which elected its first Dem mayor in 22 years. The winner, Anthony Foxx, is a dynamic young (38) African-American who's coming into office just as the city is struggling to redefine itself in the wake of heavy banking losses. (Charlotte is the 2nd largest banking city in the nation, behind New York.) City council also went 7-2 for the Dems.
NC was the most narrowly blue state in 2008. For its largest city to award overwhelming wins to Dems last night says something. Everyone's so busy looking at VA and NJ, they're missing some interesting outcomes at the local level contests.
How ironic, Cielle (pretty name), that Andrew Foxx hails from only a few hours south of Virginia Foxx, congressional wingnut second-in-command to Michelle Bachman!
And that's why you are indeed very right to say that this was a huge result that got overlooked. Winston-Salem vs. Charlotte, V. Foxx vs. A. Foxx: the contrast couldn't be more stark--nor the future more clear, thank God.
Just face the music for once will you? It's not like you Dems aren't quite used to losing, or did you forget already? You can spin it till you develop some humility (not likely), but the fact remains you lost on tuesday and that's just the beginning, your guy is simply not delivering on the hype and everybody except the you guys has realized that he is not only a true politician, but that he might have a surprise hidden socialist agenda that, of course, he forgot to mention during his campaign.
The Obama administration is heading for a policy and leadership trainwreck of colossal proportions. Full speed ahead, Mr. Rahm and Mr. Axelrod.
Nice article, actually. But one minor correction: George W. Bush was not elected in 2000.
It's kind of funny reading the comments here about "This wasn't a 'surge'!"
Six months ago the triumphal Dems here were crowing about the imminent demise of the GOP. Now they're reduced to saying, "Well, 2010 year won't be as bad as 1994".
What a quick climb down. :)
Outside the FOX- and Republican infected South, Obama is probably polling over 60%. Not bad for difficult, trying times. Why is this referred to as a "bruising"?
Now there's an intellectual statement. Leave out the ones you don't like and "probably" big ears is doing alright?? Is that what I read.
Exactly right, but the Repubs have done that themselves. They are primarily located in the South and a few western states where nobody lives. The rest of the country will go on without them.
And that's where all the electoral votes are.
PELOSI said," we won the election. Now we don't have to cooperate with anyone." I think she's pretty much lived up to that. But somehow she forgot that WE'RE still out here.
Losing two senate seats is a surge?
ROFL
Yes, because that was only the beginning of the Tsunami, Mr. ROLF!!!!!
Two senate seats? Two governorships, which have little to do with national politics.
The election that affects national politics? Oh, yeah. NY 23. The wacko Right sent in their big guns and they fizzled.
We are watching the fall of Rome. Mark M., you're one of my favorites because you tell it like it is without it sounding too harsh. But I'd actually prefer you just said it bluntly: We Are One Dumb Bunch.
We have become a country of ignoramuses, completely lacking the sophistication it takes to survive in this complex world. We are even too ignorant to realize how the rest of the world has progressed--and our "incremental changes only" system of legislation is antiquated to the point of being completely disfunctional.
I am amazed, saddened and frightened by the ignorance of what I read in comments. It illustrates our utter inability to produce the informed electorate this political system was based upon--and heaven knows where we'll go from here because of that. Obama may be the last nuanced president our media system manages to let us elect. Hereafter, we'll probably have figureheads and continue our downslide. We'll get what we deserve.
Nothings husseins fault its all you morons that voted for him PERIOD
Nice run-on sentence. And BTW, it supports the thesis of the post above yours.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.