An Early Round Up of Lessons Learned

Everyone's talking today about the most important outcomes of yesterday's elections. There will be much more comprehensive post-mortems to come, but these are three key lessons that I'm taking away from the wins in New Jersey and Virginia.

Republican Smear Tactics

In Virginia and New Jersey, the Republicans thought they could Swift Boat Kaine and Corzine right out of the water. The television spots claiming Kaine is soft on murderers and that Corzine is a scumbag for being divorced finally touched the "too far" nerve for voters in both states. Rather than calling into question the morals of the Democrats, the ads backfired spectacularly, calling into question the integrity of the Republicans.

The Democratic responses -- even Kaine's, which many thought was too weak -- were solid answers that effectively changed the subject and played up our positives. Kaine personally opposes the death penalty because he's a good Christian who did missionary work in Central America. Corzine ignored the content of the smear entirely with an ad decrying "Bush-Rove smear tactics" and "the politics of personal destruction" that sought "to stop him from protecting our families and our values."

There was no serious debate about the merits of the charges. The focus was shifted entirely to the 'win at all costs' gutter politics the Republicans were counting on to succeed. Steven Hart at The Opinion Mill called the Democratic wins a rejection of "the Republican sleaze weasels." Sounds about right to me.

The Suburbs and Exurbs

Republican pundits like David Brooks like to think that the natural political lifecycle for middle class Americans is that they start as urban liberal Democrats, become suburban moderates, and then eventually settle in as exurban right wing Republicans. Last night's results are a strong challenge to that CW.

The Washington Post covered a similar story in the Virginia race. The extremism Republicans tried to sell finally scared moderate voters who typically vote Republican right into the Democrats' arms. Northern Virginia's outer suburbs, which typically vote Republican, went hard for Kaine.

Kaine, a Richmond native with no ties to the region, collected a higher percentage of Northern Virginia votes -- nearly six in 10 -- than that compiled by Alexandria resident Warner when he won the governorship.

Meanwhile, several area House of Delegates races that were expected to be close or go to Republicans were instead won easily by Democrats.
. . .
Political observers said the vote totals were a reflection of a changing Northern Virginia, where thousands of new residents are tilting the political landscape to the left.

In New Jersey, much of the early talk on local news stations NJN and News12 was that Corzine was outperforming his Democratic predecessors in New Jersey's suburbs and exurbs. Looking over the numbers, I don't think that's quite accurate. Then again, the Republican ran as a faux liberal and outperformed the candidate who ran in 2001 as a conservative. Without exit polling about voter attitudes though, that's difficult to interpret.

However, there are some examples of the Democrats improving their performance in the outer suburbs. For example, in 2001 during the last Governor's race, the Assembly race in the rapidly growing 25th district went 60%-to-40% for the Republican incumbents. This year, the Democratic challengers still lost, but brought the gap down to 54%-to-46%. The most common criticism of the Republican incumbents was that they lean too far to the right.

Democrats and Faith

Guest-posting at Political Animal, Amy Sullivan writes that part of Tim Kaine's win in Virginia was that he was able to neutralize what has been a Republican advantage on the faith, values, and character issues related to religion. Kaine didn't pander to the religious right (he is a Catholic, after all), but he did hold up his faith as a defense when Kilgore attacked him for being personally anti-death penalty.

Kaine always made it clear that his religious views don't have an undue influence on his political decisions, though. This indicates to me that voters, even in a red state like Virginia, like politicians with religion, but don't buy into the idea that religion should dictate politics. By knocking the religion advantage out of the Republican playbook, Kaine "got to compete on actual issues--whether immigration or education or sprawl or health care." As she writes, "that's good news for Democrats."



Display:


GOP dimwits (none / 0)

The trouble with the GOP is that they invested 30 years in building a machine that could win elections, but never gave a thought to actually governing.  It's beginning to show....
by global yokel on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 02:10:45 PM EST

Re: GOP dimwits (none / 0)

GOP 'never gave a thought to governing'?  Sure they did!  Their program is to loot the treasury on behalf of the rich and the big corporations, but to put a variety of happy faces on it so that no one will notice.  And then yell "class war!!" if somebody does.

All in all, they've been remarkably successful.  "It's beginning to show" = "we're finally beginning to notice something's wrong."

by RT on Thu Nov 10, 2005 at 05:36:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Suburbs and Exurbs (3.00 / 1)

Most commentary on "suburbs and exurbs" that Ive seen dont "get it right" because the writer doesnt think about this issue in an historical context(not talking about your comments Scott).  For example, last election you saw a lot of commentary stating that (1) the exurbs are the fastest growing area of the country and (2) that these areas were very Republican.  The inference then drawn is that this is a very worrisome trend for the Dems.

Yet, when one thinks about geographic-demographic trends since WWII and its effect on politics you can see that "there is nothing new here."  Right after WWII the movement towards suburbs started, a trend that greatly increased after the interstate system was built in the 1950s.  These suburban areas where the "fastest growing parts of the country" and were very Republican.  Practically any book on the politics of the late 50s, 60s and early 70s would confirm this. Yet, through the 1980s and 1990s, these suburban areas grew increasingly receptive to the Democratic Party, a trend that is still increasing.

So now, there is developing another "outer ring" around our city's, the exurbs.  Again, the growth is incredible.  Again, like the suburbs of the 1950s and 1960s, these areas are vastly Republican.  Clearly, for reasons that I could only speculate on, the people who first move further away from inner cities are conservatives.  However, this does not mean that there are more Republicans, or that Democrats or independants become Republicans when they move out to the exurbs.  Rather, it is a large group of similarly minded people banding together in a neighborhood community.

Watch.  Over time, more people will move out to the "exurbs."  People more deverse then the original group.  Further, concerns about traffic, education and environmental issues will surface, problems which require some governmental action.  When that happens, the voting pattern of the exurbs will change just as did the suburbs.  Apparently, that is already happening in northern Virginia.    

Andy Katz
by Andy Katz on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 02:33:02 PM EST

Democrats and Faith (none / 0)

I think Kaine may have actually defined how a religious Democrat should sound.  Not preachy, not elitist, not bragging....just well religious

The way he appraoched the death penalty, public service, and his tenure as Richmonds mayor made him sound moral, decent and worth emulating.    

by kmwray on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 03:29:16 PM EST

Re: Democrats and Faith (3.00 / 1)

The key probably is that if a candidate is going to speak about religion at all, s/he better actually be a practicing member of some recognizable faith. Then it works -- when candidates are just common Americans who "believe in a spritual being," or some such, they probably should shut up on the topic. They can't fake it.
Can It Happen Here?
by janinsanfran on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 06:36:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Democrats and Faith (none / 0)

Its not just about the language he used; the DNC had announced last spring it was putting in place an "evangelical outreach" pilot program in VA. I never heard anything further but I wonder what sort of ground organizing this program involved and how much of a factor it proved to be.
by desmoulins on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 07:51:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Democrats and Faith (3.00 / 2)

   What Kaine did right was to frame Democratic values like opposing the death penalty in a faith context. This took away the Republicans' favorite weapon to use against Democrats -- that we're somehow "anti-religion". When that didn't work, Kilgore was lost.

   The trick is to use a faith frame to SUPPORT traditional Democratic values -- equality under the law, caring for the poor and vulnerable among us, respecting life in the form of providing access to decent health care for all, avoiding unnecessary wars and all wars of aggression, honesty and transparency in government, and so forth. All of these can be conveyed against a faith-based backdrop.

  The DLC approach -- throwing gays and single mothers under the bus to appease the narrow wingnut definition of "Christian values" -- is wrong and counterproductive. Bravo to Tim Kaine for not falling for that, and instead invoking his religious faith to promote DEMOCRATIC values.

by Master Jack on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 08:00:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

On Faith , you're absolutely right (none / 0)

And speaking as a christian, if you want to meet god, and you're working for Al Qaeda. I can help.
 
by turnerbroadcasting on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 03:55:26 PM EST

Corzine's reply (none / 0)

IMO, what really turned the tide on Corzine's ex's
comments was his own first response when he was asked about it on camera. Corzine didn't appear angry, wasn't flustered and just stated his ex was entitled to speak her mind. I belive that classy reply was what did it.
by phillydem on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 04:33:41 PM EST

Re: Corzine's reply (none / 0)

I think thats the anti-dukakis mojo worken there
by turnerbroadcasting on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 04:36:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Virginia election is not over (none / 0)

Creigh Deeds vs voting machines
by Alice Marshall on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 05:08:49 PM EST

Small correction (none / 0)

The DC exurbs did not go "hard" for Kaine. But the fact that he won Fairfax (more suburb than exurb) with 60%, won Loudoun and got a plurality in Prince William while competing in Fauquier and Stafford...it's absolutely a good sign, and I agree with your interpretation of why.
by asf6 on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 05:33:23 PM EST

Republicans Losing it in NJ? (none / 0)

My NJ hometown, Maplewood, has been about 75% Democratic for the last 10-15 years - but we're a very diverse community, both racially and economically. We're in the 10th Congressional District with longtime CBC leader Donald Payne in the House.

But right next door, in Millburn, it's quite a different story. A much wealthier, much whiter town, Millburn has been ruled by Republicans for over 30 years. They're right next door, but they are in Mike Ferguson's Congressional district - the NJ 7th. Ferguson is one of the more odious members of the house, with ties to DeLay and some huge ethical lapses to go along with his right-wing politics.

But yesterday Millburn elected two Democrats to their Township Committee - one to an open seat and the other to a set held by an incumbent Republican. It's a townsip election, so in and of itself not such a big deal, but I think it may be an indication of where center-right Republicans in NJ may be going; i.e. as far away from Republican business-as-usual as they can get.

I'm hopeful that this is a sign that Ferguson is, along with other hard-right House members, vulnerable in 2006.

by curmudgeon on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 07:35:27 PM EST

Kaine, Kilgore split the DC exurbs (3.00 / 1)

First, definitions:

  1. Inner suburbs: Alexandria, Arlington, Falls Church, Fairfax County
  2. Outer suburbs: Loudoun, Prince William, Fauquier, Stafford counties; cities of Manassas, Manassas Park, and possibly Fredericksburg

Kaine took the DC inner suburbs by nearly 107,000 votes - pretty close to his statewide margin of 113,000.

He either lost the outer 'burbs by ~300 votes, or won them by ~800 votes, depending on whether Fredericksburg is out or in, respectively.  A wash.

But let's face it, a wash in the exurban belt is really all a Democrat needs.  Because if he's getting 50% of the vote there, he's probably racking up a pretty hefty lead in the inner 'burbs, which Kaine was.

But there's one more thing that's worth noting:

3) Kaine won the cities and towns all across Virginia.

And I'm not just talking about Alexandria and Richmond and Norfolk and Hampton and Newport News and Roanoke; I'm also talking about Lexington (home of VMI), Lynchburg (home of Jerry Falwell), Martinsville (on the NASCAR circuit), Danville (deep in the Southside) and Covington (way back in the mountains).

Practically anywhere where there was a town of any size, Kaine did well.  And the importance of this in Virginia politics cannot be understated: Virginia is only going to get more urbanized over time.  The same is true for most of the country, so it's not just Virginia.

So this is how we do it: we win the cities and the towns and the inner suburbs; we do increasingly well in the exurbs, as they start having the sorts of problems that demand that people work together.

We may never do really great in the small towns and rural areas.  But what we can do is remember that occasionally small-town folks get stomped on by big corporations, and when that starts happening, we can show up and help them take on the corporations.  If we do that more than occasionally, word will get around, and we won't lose those rural areas by all that much.

by RT on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 08:19:40 PM EST

nice summary (none / 0)


I think the basic motif is that the social wedge issue is dying as a political tool.  Voters are moderating, beginning to tune them out as scurrilous stuff previously dealt with rather than finding in them unmet needs or resentments being addressed.

My impression/political explanation of exurbs is that they're generally populated by people who grew up rural/conservative and got city jobs.  It's a shuffling of rural voters, in essence.  Initially they react negatively to city life and go Republican, then slip moderate and/or Democratic over time as they grasp the quality of life problems and different political terms (in interdependence, cooperativity, pathologies) of suburbia.

by killjoy on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 09:13:03 PM EST

Kaine & Faith... (none / 0)

I had the privilege of meeting Kaine more than once during the campaign trail and was so heartened to hear him use the language of religion without quoting this Bible verse or the other.  It just made you glad to be in the same room with him.

It was totally unscripted and quite natural; so one knew his words came not from talking points but from his heart.

by notime4lies on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 09:39:50 PM EST

Dems did well in my part of the sticks (none / 0)

Just thought I'd add that small report.  

Out here in rural western PA, a lot of those seats that were contested for the first time were won.

We have actual parity on the borough council.

Jeez.  It's amazing.  If you run for an office, you might win.

Who knows what could come of this plan?

by jcjcjc on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 10:20:20 PM EST

How They Won (none / 0)

We should also talk about how the Virginia Democratic campaign won, and see how we can apply it to 2006.  I heard some pretty awesome and amazing things about the Democratic GOTV effort statewide and that they assembled an excellent team of staffers, and I think that paid huge dividends. (See: Virginia Beach, one of the biggest Republican cities in the nation, home of Pat Robertson...Kaine wins by 1%)
by JamesSWVA on Fri Nov 11, 2005 at 12:00:06 AM EST

Kaine, a foot in the religious right's door (none / 0)

Kainw used religion skillfully to mitigate both the abortion and death penalty issues, and he may have been the first candidate I've ever publically witnessed to use the "religion is not an excuse" argument.

He used it to explain why religion would not make him liberal, because the death penalty is the law of Virginia, and (unfortunately) he will enforce it. But he has given major traction to the "religion is not an excuse" argument, and I think if you're trying to find ways to expand on this for next year, this is how:

Start saying "religion is not an excuse to..." all over the place. Kaine said it's not an excuse to refuse the death penalty, but we should be saying it's not an excuse to deny a woman the right to choose, not an excuse to deny a child a scientifically consistent education. The GOP has waged a war on science, and they've convinced America that Jesus doesn't like science either.

We will never have a fully secularized democracy until we can fully embrace religion and still be able to say "religion is not an excuse" for some good, frugal, moral, responsible policy towards government. Tim Kaine already won using this sort of strategy; let's keep it going in the right direction.

P.S. Why is the death penalty not a part of our next platform? Does anyone have a good reason? If now is the time to really change minds, the death penalty is one of the issues to do it on. It's religious, it's moral, and god damn it's moral. It pulls at the most human part of my soul and it should pull on yours. Let's make it a big issue as soon as people are ready to hear it, please?

Progress is Personal | Connie Brennan | My opinions are mine alone
by msnook on Fri Nov 11, 2005 at 11:20:23 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.