Another Good Primary Election Night for Democrats

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The conventional wisdom (CW) of the media villagers and Beltway bloviators is that "Republicans are resurgent" and their base voters more ethusiastic than Democrats. The "CW" is that Democrats are at risk of losing the House and a number of Senate seats in November because voters are angry about the economy and always blame the party in charge (rather than the Republicans who created the economic catastrophe).

Just one problem. In a series of early contests this year, the "CW" has failed to bear any fruit. It is the Republican establishment that is in trouble from its Tea Party insurgents, and the GOP remains shut out of special election congressional races this cycle, including several in prime competitive districts. Hardly a harbinger of a "resurgent" GOP. Note to media: this election will not be "1994" redux. It never was.

Moreover, primary voter turnout in GOP primaries was lethargic compared to robust Democratic voter turnout on Tuesday. So much for all those angry voters flocking to Republicans and the "enthusiasm gap" for Democrats.

Yet if you watched any of the primary election coverage and the post-mortem analysis (sic) from the media villagers and Beltway bloviators, they are still repeating their pre-conceived 2010 election narrative despite the election results. "That's our story and we're sticking to it."

"If we repeat our 'big lie' propaganda often enough the people will begin to believe it's true and it will become self-fulfilling reality. We are the media, dammit! We decide elections, not the voters."

In the special election in Pennsylvania Dist. 12 to fill the House seat of the late Rep. Jack Murtha, a race that Republicans believed they would win and poured more than a million dollars into the district to win, Democrat Mark Critz held the seat for Democrats easily defeating Republican Tim Burns by more than 10,000 votes, 53% to 45%. This was a huge symbolic loss for the GOP.

In the Pennsylvania Senate primary, the netroots progressive candidate, Rep. Joe Sestak, defeated Republican-turned-Democrat Snarlin' Arlen Specter, an institutional fixture in Pennsylvania, 54% to 46%. Democratic primary voter turnout was higher than the record turnout in the Ed Rendell and Bob Casey gubernatorial primary election, the previous high-water mark in Pennsylvania. Specter had the support of the Democratic establishment in the state because they had made a deal for his switching parties, but grassroots Democratic voters decided they preferred a real Democrat to represent them.

Sestak polls better against conservative wingnut Pat Toomey (in the mold of "man-on-dog" Rick Santorum). If the Pennsylvania Democratic establishment will put this primary fight behind them to support Sestak, Democrats will retain this senate seat in November. (CW says it is Toomey's seat to lose — and he will).

Mitch_mcconnell_frown-cropped-proto-custom_2

In Kentucky, the national Republican Party backed the wrong candidate in not one but two primaries.This was a repudiation of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on his home state turf. Mitch doesn't look too happy, does he? He sees the writing on the wall and he knows that the insurgents in the GOP are coming for his senate seat in two years.

From TalkingPointsMemo.com:

No one suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune more than
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. His hand-picked candidate was
by tea partier Rand Paul in the Kentucky Senate primary. McConnell's
pick, Trey Grayson, only got 35% of the vote despite his party's
backing. Grayson even lost in his home
county
.

In a smaller, but no less telling, Louisville House district primary
last night, NRCC choice Jeff Reetz came
in third
in a primary to challenge Rep. John Yarmuth. Reetz only
got 17% of the vote.

Of course, the media villagers and Beltway bloviators this morning all want to talk about the "Rand Paul Revolution" cult following he has inherited from his father, Rep. Ron Paul (TX), because they all love to talk about the Tea Party so, despite their small numbers.

The real story in Kentucky this morning is netroots progressive candidate Jack Conway winning a narrow victory over Daniel Mongiardo, 44% to 43%. Both Jack Conway and Daniel Mongiardo received more votes than Rand Paul (unofficial results, 99% reporting):

Conway (D) 226,773

Mongiardo (D) 221,269

Paul (R) 206,159

There are far more registered Democrats in Kentucky and they do tend to vote for Republicans, i.e., Sen. Mitch McConnell and the retiring Sen. Jim Bunning, but if this is really an anti-incumbent, anti-establishment year, then it is the Republican establishment in Kentucky that is in serious trouble. Kentucky voters can send a clear message to Mitch "just say no" McConnell that they are tired of his policy of obstruction and kowtowing to his Wall Street bankster masters by voting for Jack Conway in November, and actually have a senator who will serve their interests well (Jim Bunning, whom he would replace, has been out to lunch for years).

This whole Ron Paul/Rand Paul cult phenomenon is all about about them — it is narcissism writ large — public service to their constituents does not factor in. This is a potential pick-up seat in the senate for Democrats. (CW says it is Paul's seat to lose — and hopefully he will).

In Arkansas, netroots progressive candidate Bill Halter narrowly trailed the senator from Wal-Mart and Tyson Chicken, "bluedog" Sen. Blanche Lincoln, by 43% to 45% in a three-way contest forcing a run-off election next month. All the momentum is with Bill Halter going into the run-off election. Depending upon how the Senate votes on Sen. Lincoln's amendment to regulate derivatives in the next few weeks (there are reports that her amendment may be pulled or substantially watered down), this could seal her fate.

Primary voter turnout in Arkansas exceeded the presidential primary voter turnout in 2008. Arkansas is another state with far more registered Democrats who have tended to vote for Republicans in recent years. Both Lincoln and Halter received more votes than all five of the Republicans in their primary combined, which Rep. John Boozman won outright. (unofficial results, 99% reporting):

Lincoln (D) 146,207

Halter (D) 138,660

Boozman (R) 74,009

Again, if this is an anti-incumbent, anti-establishment year, then Bill Halter, who is the Lieutenant Governor of Arkansas, would be in the strongest position to claim that mantle after defeating Blanche Lincoln in the run-off election and facing yet another Washington insider in Rep. Boozman. (CW says Arkansas is a pick-up for the GOP — that remains in doubt).

Last night's big loser was the national Republican Party. It was another good primary election night for Democrats, especially for progressive Democrats.


Discover more from Blog for Arizona

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “Another Good Primary Election Night for Democrats”

  1. You apparently believe that when a Democrat is elected president that the Republicans who spent the last 30 years creating this train wreck of our economy with their faith based supply-side trickle-down economics nonsense are suddenly absolved of their sins and all is forgiven. Blame the other guy. I don’t forget and I don’t forgive. I expect Republicans to wander in the wilderness doing penitence to pay for their sins for at least a generation or more. Anything less would not be righteous justice.

    BTW, Obama’s policies prevented this country from sliding into a Great Depression and the economy is beginning to turn around. As everyone knows, employment is a lagging indicator. If employment continues to grow at the pace it did during the first quarter of this year, the economy will produce more jobs just this year than George Bush did in his entire eight years. I’ll bet on this horse.

  2. With regard to the Specter/Sestak primary, I find the most significant facts to be (1) Specter’s comment when he switched from R to D, that he was switching because he did not believe (have any confidence?) that he could beat Toomey. Between that and the fact that he is 80 years old, has been in the Senate a loooooooong time – and he was “primaried” by an active and deeply committed (real) Democrat – that’s how Specter lost. I suggest Specter go home and enjoy his old age (Since I am 2 years older than Specter, I get to say that!)

    In Kentucky, the most significant variable in this race is total D and R votes cast in the primary for the Senate seat. Total D votes: 520,412 and the total R votes 351,927. The only conclusion that I am willing to draw is that more Ds were interested in getting out to vote than Rs and by a substantial majority. As for the Halter-Lincoln primary – I’ll put my money on Halter in the re-run. Lincoln is trying to play both ends against the middle and the voters aren’t that stupid – especially, I don’t think voters like to think they are being “played”.

    Just my 2 cents!!!!

  3. How many years have to pass before Democrats own the economy? Three? Four? Five? Six? Eight?

Comments are closed.