Another nail in the GOP coffin, but it does seem to require a hell of a lot more nails to keep the beasties down.

I'm glad of a good night for the Democrats, there seems to have been many lately, but I still have nightmares during the day when I see Bush on TV :-(

The Kaine win is truly stunning.  We're talking about a Democrat who is against the death penalty winning in Virginia!

I remember reading about this race a few months ago and all the know it all professional analysts were calling it for Kilgore.  

I think the win is a sign that even conservative voters are fed up with the Republican party, and are willing to give Democrats a chance. 

I'm encouraged, but Bloomberg's win in NYC is a reminder how quickly fortunes can change.  Two Years ago, the man was polling in the 20's, and tonight he won with nearly 60 percent.

We need to keep up the momentum, and hopefully America will continue to notice that Bush's missteps didn't start in the last two months, they've been disasterous from day one.

It will take more than a nail in the coffin.  More like a stake through the heart.  Van Helsing, where are you?

It's time indeed we had some good news.  VA in particular is heartening. GOP talking points right now seem to be "big deal, Dems replaced Dems in both gubenatorial races.  They're not talking about from how far behind Kaine had to come.  I was prepared to be extremely happy with a 5 point victory and he did a touch better than that.

HOWEVER -- not to bring us all down -- the numbers on the Reform Ohio Now initiatives are terrible.  With GOP all but self-immolating and a very present netroots pushed, 2,3,4 and 5 are getting trounced!  Not the kind of follow-up one was hoping for after that thrilling night a few months ago when Hackett almost took OH-02.

We'll see where California comes out.  Looks like at least 2 of Arnold's proposals are going down. 

I think they don't amount to much, but they can be a starting point.

We won in NJ and Virginia.  We should always win in NJ.  Virginia looks good, but he was following a Democratic governor, so it may not be that big of a deal.  Especially considering the low turn out.

In short, in themselves, todays elections aren't much, but it's something to build off of.

You must have good candidates.  In NY,  Bloomberg was re-elected because Dem candidate was not that strong. 

While Paul Hackett's election results were not bad news, but this is good news. More importantly though, the elections that will make an even greater difference are a year away. Rather than bask in the reflected glory of these wins we need to stay focused, we need to keep pushing, we can't let up for a minute. I think it is those here in the blogosphere who are helping to set the agenda of the debate. And as the case with the forged Niger documents demonstrates, it is hard for the powers that be to come up with answers to things like why was Martino never questioned and at the same time call their investigation complete. TPM and others help to keep the focus on those issues. At the same time, new candidates, an awakening press, and a little more skeptical electorate will help assure the outcome of 06 will be much more of a contest than was 04 and the oposition can take nothing for granted.

Thanks for that update, Popnarcotic.

I attempted to watch national coverage of the elections tonight -- hoping for some at least superficial analysis about the various races -- but apparently there was a HUGE break in that Aruba story, so, you know, naturally certain things like major election results had to be back-burnered.

slb -- re Warner's star ascending.  Am I wrong or is George Allen's gibbous on the wane?

As a NJ democrat whose mother worked for the Forrester campaign, I have mixed emotions regarding tonight's outcome.  Actually, not really.  However, it does seem that Corzine will be closely watched by NJ voters of all stripes and that his performance will impact outcomes in this state in '06 and '08. 
'Squeaky clean.'
M.

Credit to Gov. Warner, of course, and to Kaine himself, who consistently confronted his accusers on their own turf...such as interview on hostile NRA radio network, where his rhetorical skills and integrity were apparent, despite his host trashing him before and after the broadcast. Perhaps also some marginal demographic changes which boosted the Dems this year....and Republicans seemed to have stayed home in larger numbers than Dems (Turnout in Eric Cantor's hardcore conservative congressional district in Henrico where I vote was exceptionally low.) Kilgore was a weak candidate, but many thought he was a shoe in. The turn off of the repeat tactics from 2004 was huge for many Republican friends -- perhaps in a politically mature state such attack/smear campaigning is too crude and transparently dishonest to be successful. Whatever, one lesson has got to be that Republican candidates can no longer reliably imitiate the sleazy methods of Dubya's rise to power.

Opportunity knocks!  The tide may turn... but we should seek to help parts of the other side to save face.  This could mean concentrating on getting Cheney dismissed and suggesting ways Bush can redeem himself by selecting better staff and atoning for the mistakes of GWII. 

But first we gotta keep the battle over Alito from getting ugly.  As I've mentioned some prolifers are riproaring for a repeat of Gettysburg.  I don't believe this is inevitable.  I think we can circumvent the cultural wars issues by reframing them along more neutral lines. 

I also think that the right tact to take against the BushAdmin's nomination of Alito is one of basic fairness.  A president barely elected and whose popularity is tanking should not be able to enact a major change in the balance of power in the supreme court.  As such, he ought to nominate a moderate to replace a moderate, preferably one who represents an under-represented part of USAmerican culture.  I think that's a principled stand for fairness that discounts the fact that Alito is a smart, competent judge and sets a reasonable precedent. 

I also agree with Matt Yglesia that there is potential to split to the religious right into a watered down version of European-style Christian Democratic party and a neo-cons with evangel-speak camps with the former likely having more popular traction.  I think this is a development that should be encouraged as it will rupture the unholy alliance between economic and social conservatives in the Pub party.

dlw

<span class="Apple-style-span">It seems like tonight has some positive news, but keep in mind that the upset loss for incumbent Dem Mayor Bob Baines in the mayor's race in Manchester, New Hampshire, while small potatoes, was a local election that Dems attempted yet failed to nationalize. I don't know much about the specifics of the race or what the post-mortems will say, but it does seem that we should be careful to draw to far reaching a conclusion about tonights more high profile victories. </span&gt

In California, Arnold Schwarzenegger is a spent force in California politics.  Think Mike Curb.  If George Bush gets to face three embarrassing years as a lame duck, AS gets to spend one year.  Just as Bush's popularity dipping below 50% is something he can't recover from, this $50M special election will get hung around AS's neck.

On the national scale, I think this isn't so much a big win for Democrats as it is a big loss for Republicans.  Colorado, California, Virginia, New Jersey.  Ok, they got Ohio.  And Texas.

It would just force unions to try new approaches, which would probably be an improvement. 
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2005/11/california_ball.htm

Let us enjoy victory on some fronts tonight, but reflect on the loss of a good progressive like Donna Frye who unfortunately lost the mayors race in San Diego.
As for Ahhhhnold, it is wise not to get smug for he is of great cunning and charm.  Tonight was merely battle 1 of the Great Progressive War to Retake Our Country.  Republicans have balls, and we're getting them too (slowly but surely).
Let us forego litmus tests for liberals and Democrats and never forget the bigger picture: failure is NOT an option!

I think all the CA initiatives are going down, and while most of these may be clear wins for progressives, It looks like the re-regulation of CA electricity is going to go down by the largest margin of any of the propositions.  I'm wondering why this in particular is so unpopular, given the Enron rip-off that CA went through.  Was this ballot initiative that badly written, or is there some other reason Californians aren't interested in prop 80?  Not living in CA I haven't paid as much attention to the details of 80 as I might have otherwise, but I'd be interested in people's comments on the following:

If 80 and 79 (the two progressive-leaning props on the CA ballot as I understand it) go down by larger margins than the rest (especially 74,75, 76, and 78 - I leave out 73 because its a hot-button for the religious right and has different dynamics, I think, then the others; and I leave out 77 because its been argued both ways by both sides much more than the others), is this really a win for progressives or is it more like a loss for AS and conservatives?

Or are 79 and 80 really not that great from a progressive perspective?  What interpretations do others have, especially anyone from CA?

-Liano 

I think there is little future for actual, substantive policy to be passed through the iniative process.  The things that can hope to pass are ones that have simple and attack some particular interest or promote some simplified idea (like stem cell).

 Progressive need and want policy and often regulation. Things that are complicated, will be attacked by corporations and will be difficult for voters to understand.

 IMHO, there is no progressive future for any initiatives in California outside of raising the minimum wage.

Yeah, our fearless leader pays us a visit.

Well in California only 50% of the results are in, but it is starting to look to me that Schwarzenegger's (he's a republican in case you didn't know) special election of ballot measures he has put together since he isn't getting his way in Sacramento, that his initiatives are losing across the board.  It's too early to tell from some of them.

Word has it that this special election of "his" has probably cost him his re-election in the future election, as "vote no" TV ads have portrayed Schwarzenegger negatively and have used the air time to not only oppose the ballot measures but also schwarzenegger himself.

I am wondering if email campaings are starting to show some strength as well, although i have no proof to back this theory or not.  I got an email from the Calif Dem Party and it told me how to vote, and i just rubber stamped what they recommended without reading the detail of any of the ballot measures, trusting their judgement that the Gov is just trying to get his way.

I think part of it too is a general realization that this was a "special election" and therefore costly and unnecessary and i think a sizable number of voters just punched "No" for no's sake, to vote against such special elections.  I've heard that the many ads have had the affect to disgruntle voters regarding the pain in the neck the election is and that the ads are and perhaps there is something to that as well.

I'm not so sure if Calif's election suggests anything regarding swing voters swinging our direction or not, although I would guess that is what will happen in one and three years from now.

"Or are 79 and 80 really not that great from a progressive perspective?"

I am getting the feeling voters just clicked "No" to all the measures out of disgruntlement there was an election to begin with.

I havn't even read the details on the initiatives, i just followed what my Calif Dem Party email recommended, which was to vote yes on 79 and 80 and no on all the others, so i imagine it's unfortunate the last 2 didn't pass, yet i think the most important thing was to terminate arnold's measures and it appears they might all have been terminated, which is a good bet the terminator will himself get terminated in his reelection bid.

CA is looking pretty good.  73 (parental notification) and 75 (union dues) are narrowly losing, which is good. Nothing else is close, which is also good.

The bad news is OH. WTF! I am *deeply* suspicious about these results. What will it take for OH to smell the coffee? Maybe they already have...

--Dan 

As others have said, a lot of Californian's who voted -- and the turnout was unusually high for an off-year election -- did so just to send a message to Arnold, probably even to Bush too in some cases. Besides, everybody here in CA is at least a bit overwhelmed if not downright sick of endless initiatives. How can we possibly be well informed about all these topics, especially in the face of the propaganda onslaught? And besides, isn't that what we pay our elected representatvies to do?

And, fwiw, I watched Arnold's speech tonite, and he was very contrite, even seemingly genuinely humbled (though he conceded no defeats formally at this 'good-night' speech), promising several times to work with Democrats, etc. We'll see. Even if Schwarzenegger's newfound humility is a just an act, it would still qualify as a sure sign of a serious blow being absorbed by the Accidental Governor.

With a majority of the votes now counted, all eight propositions have rightly failed in California, and Der Gropinating Governator has been terminated.

Myself, I am particularly glad to see that Proposition 73, the abortion notification law, went down to defeat, even if it was a very narrow margin.  It was narrowly winning in the latest pre-election polls.  The poison pill it contained, defining abortion as the termination of a human being before birth and enshrining that in the constitution, would have been the foot in the door for the right to have gone after choice big-time in the future.  This is a serious defeat for the Talibangelical right and the Catholic Church in California. This was a victory for women, who opposed this proposition, while men - still seeking to regain their "headship" - supported it.

Seeing the shameless scam that was Big Pharma's campaign for Proposition 78 go down was also good news.  Now the legislature can re-pass the prescription drug reform they passed before, and Big Boy will have gotten the message about signing it.

Watching Der Governator tell his supporters tonight how he's ready to negotiate and work in a bipartisan manner with the legislature reminded me of the schoolyard bully who wants his victim to apologize for having had the guts to give him a bloody nose.  With any luck, Arnold's going to be pursued every one of the next 365 days until he's run out office and takes the Republicans down to defeat with him.

Campaign 2006 begins now.  As my great-granduncle who worked for Hary Truman told me, "the only good Republicans are pushing up daisies." 

As the line in the old Beatles song "Piggies" goes, "What they need's a damn good whacking!"

1) The real showpiece initiatives for Ah-nold were props 76 (spending/funding proposition giving lots of power to der Gropenfuhrer) and 77 (redistricting).  Those lost in all but five counties.  Of large population counties, only good old Orange went for all four of Ah-nold's propositions.  That is a pretty significant rejection I think!

2) The lone ``culture'' initiative on parental notification shows how there is a blue-red divide in CA.  Coastal counties (with Ventura, ORange, and San Diego excluded) and a smattering of inland counties (Yolo, with Davis, Sacramento, and a couple of small Sierra counties with lots of relocatees) voted strongly against the proposition, while the vast majority of the inland empire and central valley counties voted for it. I permanently reside in the Bay Area, but spent a year in SD last year.  Go to a coffee shop to work in the Bay Area and you will see urban hipsters pounding on laptops as in NYC, DC, etc.  Go to SD and you are as likely to see someone poring over their bible, even in areas close to the university.  Just a reminder that CA is not a monolithically `blue' state.

It means the Democrats are occasionally, in some regions, a fairly good local party. 
It means nothing regarding whether the Democrats may, sometime in the future, become a nationally viable second party.
That will take more a lot more than a few local victories -there were defeats also. And the occasional yelp from Dean and a bark from Reid, as entertaining as both are, means squat unless concerted opposition to Bushism is consistent, relentless, loud, and implacable, which it most certainly is not.

<table width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="1" border="0"> <tr><td colspan="2"><pre> Propositions Yes Votes Pct. No Votes Pct.</pre&gt</td&gt</tr&gt <tr><td colspan="2"> <pre> 73 N Minor's Pregnancy 2,632,074 48.5 2,785,015 51.5 Map

Just a couple (off topic) suggestions:

Use the preview button when posting. You would have seen that your table had turned into this mass of unreadable HTML and not posted it.

Right below the comment box is a list of "Allowed HTML" -- which means exactly what it says. Any HTML not in that list will not be rendered in the browser.

Not to pick on you, I see a lot of these bad HTML posts here and I just wanted to get the message out. It's too bad, really, that the software can't validate the HTML and return a warning when you try inserting tables or spans or whatever. But, it doesn't, so you have to check your post before hitting "Post" or you risk submitting garbage.

Thanks.

mp

I think the defeat of ballot initiatives in OH and CA are of a piece: a sense among voters that things are already gummed up pretty bad so let’s not pass anything new to make things worse until we sort out the existing mess.

Dover ID school board replaced. Now that's news. Dems win elections while GOP fights in court. Click Here.

Two points.

Kilgore running negative was not well received.  I think it reminded everyone of Bush.  Do you really want people to lump you with Bush right now?  Kaine learned from Kerry's mis-steps and responded quickly, and competently to the slurs out of the Kilegore campaign.  That really drove a stake through the heart of Kilgore.

I think Warner is great, but Kaine won this election by being himself, and responding to the attacks.

People need to realize that Warner is a former venture capitalist, and he did quite a job selling business on why the tax increase was necessary for Virginia.  Basically indicating - would you underfund a business you were investing in?  Is underfunding a business in the best interests of your investment in that business?

I wonder what kind of job Warner would do convincing businesses to support something like Universal Healthcare to make US businesses more competetive globally.

I would not be resting on one's laurels with this, nor would I say that the country is ready to run liberal now. The wins were my moderates. We need to claim the middle ground. Learn the lessons from the Republicans. First define the issues the Democrats stand for. I have not seen enough of this. Then we can use their other tactic, define what the Republicans stand for, just by pointing at what they have done.  What are the Democrats doing to reduce the deficit? I have seen no leadership on what is going to be a critical issue.. You can win some elections by the virtue of not being a Republican, but would hope we are in for it on the longhaul.

I don't think these results mean anything nationally. Mark Warner was a successful governor in Virginia and Tim Kaine attached himself to Warner's hip throughout the campaign. Kilgore ran a sloppy, viscious campaign with no plans other than tax cuts and idiotic immigration pledges.

The failure of all of Schwarzenegger's initiatives rather surprised me but it's pretty obvious that Arnold's election was more of a vote against Gray Davis and the California Democratic party at the time than a mandate for what Arnold supported.

I'm disappointed with the redistricting reform initiative loss. I thought that was a good idea. Certainly better than letting the state legislatures redistrict every time a party reclaims the majority.

Corzine's victory wasn't too suprising. Now that he's been a senator and soon to be a governor, I wonder what other political office he can buy with his personal fortune.

I think the Democrats should simply say, "Hey, yesterday was great but we're focused on 2006."

It's sad when a writer for a TV show (The West Wing) can come up with a more eloquent and stirring call to arms for the Democrats than anyone in the party can. Matt Santos' (Jimmy Smits) moving rebuttal of the charge of being a "Liberal" was something I've been dying to hear from ANY significant Democrat since 1999.

It's nice that the Republicans don't have every election in the bag but let's not get too excited about some race for dogcatcher. The mid-terms in '06 should be everyone's focus.

MARKO:

 Very well said.  Democrats continue to define their platform by pointing out the failings of the president.  A big reason why the Democrats have failed so miserably the last few elections is because the American people do not like to be lectured.  When Bush makes a mistake, people can decipher that for themselves; they do not need bleeding heart "liberal" politicians to point it out for them at every turn.  As a Bush Republican myself, I admit he hasn't been a perfect president.  Granted, he has been much better than most give him credit for--but history and time will prove that.  The bottom line is simple: If the Democrats want to start winning important elections, they need to STOP bashing the administration and START proposing viable alternatives.  It is truly amazing to me that despite Democratic acknowledgment that their party has lost its focus over the last 5 years, and vow to renew their pledge to Americans, they continue to do very little other than criticize the Bush Administration.  Even party stalwart Ted Kennedy can scarcely get a sentence in these days without taking a stab at G.W.  If the Democrats want to win, they MUST stop this nonsense.  The American public may not be particularly smart, but they don't need somebody pointing out everything that is wrong in our society.  Try, for a change, to show them how it can be made better.  Republicans do a better job at this and will probably regain the White House in 2008 as a result.

That was a stunner, and Black's district is at the outer edge of the county near West Va. The victor, David Poussin, explained last night that his version of "family values" -- good education for our kids and good transportation to bring parents back to their families at the end of the day -- is what resonated in  Loudoun Co. Simple, good lesson for other Dem hopefuls to take away.

Calif is not monolithically Blue.  But this could change when the boomers retire and the old timers expire.  Houses are cheaper in the desert, which is part of the Red area.  And boomers will probably move to the desert when they retire, cashing in on the difference in cost of homes to help fund their retirement income.

I live in the mountains of so cal and it's in that Red "inland empire" category which is also a category including cheaper housing.

Of critical importance of course is the hispanic sector, and I guess they are Red and Blue depending.  When I looked at a web site to see what my children's schools' test scores are compared to Calif as a whole and other schools, I was surprised (but not shocked) to find out as far as schools go, my caucasian children are minorities.  31 percent white students statewide, 47 i think hispanic state wide.

I would have to take exception, to some of what you say , gettysberg. I am not against bashing the president or Republicans since they are the most directly responsible for most the problems facing this country at this time. I just believe that Democrats better have more up their sleeves then that. Case in point. , you said, "big government is not the best way to go about solving problems". Government has done nothing but grow under Republicans. The swilling at the pork barrel has helped balloon the deficit with NO end in sight. You also say, "Civil liberties, multilateral military operations, and job growth are all on the rise" . What planet are you on? There has been some small job growth,, but what kind of growth, service jobs , low wage stuff. Multilaterlism? The U.S.'s standing in the world is certainly not better off then before Bush.

    I see the economy as being in a vary precarious situation. It is not sustainable running up these debts and at some point, they are gonna quit buying our debt. But where are the Democrats on this? Time to bring back that phrase "It's the economy, stupid!" AND take action. Roll back those tax cuts. I love tax breaks , but damn, you cant afford it. Cut the pork barrel spending and roll back those tax incentives given to Oil companies. How much was that in the Energy Bill they passed, some 12 Billion., You have to be kidding me, with what they have done. There are moderate Republicans out there that are very appalled at the spending going on. Form a coalition, do something with substance. Its win-win situation, because if you get rebuffed by the Republicans, then you got that much more ammo going into the next elections.

I think these results mean much less than republican/democrat and much more about people fed up by what is happening in our country in general. 

My question is: how long are we going to stay on this swing between 'one side' or 'the other' (while they continue to take money from the same troughs) before real lasting change in instituted (e.g. campaign finance reform, etc.). 

The reality the electorate is facing and voting on now has much less to do with right/left and much more to do with have/have not. 

Let me return your minds to the wild Northwest of Minnesota.

Backstory.  Randy Kelly who until last night was Mayor of St. Paul had represented much of the city in the State Legislature for over 30 years before Norm Coleman recruited him to run for his Mayorial seat in 2001.  Kelly won by a small margin. 

Prior to 2001, Norm Coleman who had been a DFL'er (Democrat if you don't know Minnesota) served two terms as a DFL elected Mayor -- but mid term he got rebaptized as not only a Republican, but a rudy boschwitz loving Neo-Con.  Karl Rove and Bush set him up to run for the Senate in 2002, and before that 2002 elecion, Randy Kelly would not formally endorse Paul Wellstone, our incumbant DFL'er.  When Wellstone Died, and Mondale picked up the flag, Kelly not only endorsed Norm Coleman at the last minute, but he also pulled party assets in St. Paul from Mondale. 

In 2004, St. Paul went for Kerry by just slightly less than the index of yesterday's election.  St. Paul is a Democratic city -- it was Gene McCarthy's base.  It has a conservative thread in that it is Irish and Catholic. 

The City election of 2005 was the first chance the populus had a chance to straightforwardly say what they had in mind.  They did not like Kelly's remarks about needing to have "juice" in DC in order to get anything done when that Juice was accomplished by endorsing Coleman and Bush.  They also know that one of the reasons the hockey strike did not harm the bottom line of the new arena Norm Coleman built for the Minnesota Wild, was because the Bush folk paid top dollar to rent it for political events. 

Anyhow, come along a real DFL'er, Chris Coleman (absolutely no relatio to Norm) and a campaigh that was not much about more than this game playing, and guess what, Chris Coleman beat Kelly by thirty points.  The turn out in St. Paul was about double the rest of the state -- largely because that contest offered the heartland folk a chance to say something, and say it cleanly. 

This was more of a vote against deception and political game playing than it was about any issue.  Norm Coleman and Randy Kelly played a poacher's game, and they got it handed to them.

And never forget that Kofi Annan attended college in St. Paul, and there is great  anger here as to how the former Mayor of St. Paul has treated him. 

Sara:

 Minnesota has always been very interesting politically.  Voting trends in terms of U.S. Senate and Gubernatorial elections would indicate the state is conservative.  On the other hand, Minnesota has voted Democratic in every presidential election over the last 30 some odd years.  Being familiar with the state myself, I personally get the sense that most Minnesotans are fairly conservative, especially fiscally.  The horrible gridlock which the state legislature has dealt with over the last several years shows the political scene of state to be tumultuous.  As such, I don't think Minnesota can be considered any kind of national indicator one way or the other.