

American elections

The shine coming off

Voters punish Barack Obama and the Democrats in two states, but offer solace in New York

See article

Readers' comments



This is symptomatic of voters in general, it is easy to forget how bad things were just a little over a year ago.

I do not however thing this is a slight on President Obama. It might be a rejection of democrats and their silly ways. The can't seem to make up their minds what they want for their supporters.Most of their men seem to wear jumpers, not suit pants.
Very few of this so- called democrats ( blue dogs- as if there were any dogs in blue), hold the entire cast of President Obama's action team to ransom; in the name of fiscal responsibility. Where were these lazy minds, when George Bush went to Iraq, and blew $billion?
Are these money guzzling democrats so soiled brain, that they cannot see the reason to guaranty health care access to all Americans? As a matter of fact all these dogs must go.
It is better for the president to have a conservative congress than a liberal one. I think.

I had written here before, in one of my comments about the ills of the Republican party members. It is also available @ www.ridwanalah.blogspot.com

Uncle Ted


"But these are times when people are driven more by emotion than by reason. And so, in near-desperation, they are lashing out at President Barack Obama and the Democrats. That explains the political misfortune that has befallen the Democratic candidates for governor in New Jersey and Virginia."

It's amazing how you have everyone else figured out, and it's so simple. We're just angry, and we're being petulant. That's all. That's all that it could possibly be.

This entire magazine is based around economics. So my hope is that you understand that some people might be more on the Austrian side of things than the Keynesian side. You know, the kind of people who think that the depression was prolonged and painful because we kept kicking it down the road, and were loathe to get to market clearing levels.

Bad debt needs to be written off, prices need to drop. We are the kind of people that worry about the fiat dollar, and the fact that it's devalued 95% since 1913. We worry that especially during the Carter era, we learned that Keynesian theory doesn't work. We are the type that saw what happened in Japan.

We are the type that actually look at history, and look at what we are doing with great alarm and dismay.

For you to debase such legitimate concerns as sour grapes or bad behavior is a reflection on the extent of your capacity to understand what is happening all around us.

Do us all a favor and just speak for yourself from now on. Don't presume to speak for others.


And therein lies the reason why our federal government is absolutely too big, not-representative of its constituents, and completely out of control.


I don't know if I would agree with your assertion that a Congressional race in NY really "signifies" any national importance. Just because the elected winners serve a national position does not mean it deems national attention. If it deemed the national attention you speak of, people in Tx and Calif, etc. would vote.

Local Congressional elections are represenations of local politics and nada more. Just because YOU think Republicans should become more moderate, and hence your assertion that being too conservative led to their defeat in NY, doesn't mean I or my fellow Texans would want some West Coast liberal as our Congressman. Understand my point?

In regards to senators, now that is a much different story.
Majority of Americans, even some liberals, hate with a passion -
Dianne Feinstein
Barbara Boxer
Charles Shumer
Arlen Spector
You know why? Because these has-been traitors somehow think they have the right to dictate policies and laws in Texas. Now I'm not saying the founding fathers were wrong in their belief of a House of Representatives and a Senate, but in this nanny-state our federal government somehow thinks the 10th Amendment need not apply.
So these disgusting traitors have made it their business to dismantle any type of state sovereignty and make the federal government the boss.


Oops sorry.

I meant the UK has a weak Federal system where the National Government holds the overwhelming balance of power vs. a vs. local regions. Though recently some party has devolved to Scotland and Wales.

Even with this devolution, the structure of the UK Federal system is still much weaker than that of the US with it's Strong Federal system.

American States have many powers other nations consider powers that should only be exercised on the Federal level to ensure equality.

The STRONG Federal US system ensures a large degree of Autonomy for every single state.

The most similar European structure with similar powers would be the autonomous regions like Catalonia or Isle of Man who have the ability to ignore or sit outside of the jurisdiction of the Federal Governments of the UK or Spain.

And probably an even better example is what presides in Hong Kong.

The way the PRChina shares powers with Hong Kong in terms of Authority (not elections) is very similar to how the US deals with her states.

It's hands off unless it's an issue of clear national importance. Otherwise the state gets to do what it wants.

As I recall when Scotland was getting some local powers, there was a debate about granting it the ability to tax....

In the US in regards to our states, that issue is and has always been moot. All US states have such a power.

IF anything should make it clear just how broad the powers of US States are that should be it.


Voters DID NOT punish Pres.Obama.

In the UK's STRONG FEDERAL SYSTEM, votes for Local Candidates CAN BE directly related to a Party's national standing.


Because of these dramatic differences between the UK and USA, it is a huge mistake to interpret state/local election results as you would the council elections in the UK when the party in opposition sweeps the important seats

I can only assume though this AUTHOR did exactly that, assume the US and UK are similar enough to interpret the outcome of a local election like one would in the UK.

States in the USA are akin to "autonomous ethnic regions" in various European nations, like the Basque region or Catalonia in Spain OR the THE ISLE OF MAN in the UK.

There ability to shape their own agenda makes turning a local election into a "referendum" on National politics ridiculous and self-defeating. So voters DO NOT DO THAT.

Instead State elections for Statewide offices reflect State issues.

Local/city elections for local/city offices reflect local issues.

Politicians on both those levels can be extremely different from the National Party on many issues, because party affiliation locally is based on dramatically different reasons.

In the South until recently Democrats ruled despite the national party being dramatically out of step with the Southern Mindset, and even more recently Republicans held large areas of the Mid-Atlantic and New England despite those politicians being moderate to liberal and basically UNwelcome on the National Republican scene.

The one election with some "national" significance" was the NY Representative race, for it involved the NATIONAL parties on both sides, and it was to elect a "national office" from New York.

When one considers that Republicans have won in that district for about a Century, and as a result is about as safe a seat for Republicans as can be, losing it yesterday is a screaming msg. to the National Republican Party.

As some in the Republican party said, if we go too far right and absolutist we'll lose the middle.

And lose the middle they did.

So the Democrat won.

Alienating the middle of the road voter is a sure recipe for permanent minority party status.

Luckily for Democrats the Republicans are crowing about winning in NJ and VA and ignoring the clear msg. the NY election sent the party.

NY and VA both have a history since wwII of regularly switching between Republicans and Democrats for higher office.

What's more the typical NJ Democrat is mainstream, and far outside the Extremist Republican mainstream/Libertarian wing of the Republican party.

For them, a win in NJ is meaningless.

VA too did NOT elect one of the extreme right wing candidates but a more mainstream traditional Republican which the extremist conservatives are trying to oust from the Party.

Bottom line is Obama got a msg. alright, and that is keep on doing what you're doing, because the Republican party is so deep in denial it cannot recognize what a self-defeatist strategy it has at the top.

Local/STATE Elections for LOCAL/STATE OFFICES ARE NOT referendums on NATIONAL elections.

Only elections to federal offices from the states can be viewed as potentially being a msg. to Washington DC.


Hospitaller is absolutely correct.
Economist- Quit trying to interpret American politics k? You don't see American media trying to interpret your police-state' politics.
As far as this magazine basically decrying what a success it was for the Dem to win in the Upstate NY Congressional battle, DO A LITTLE MORE FACT-FINDING before such assertions are made.
Hoffman barely lost that race ( 4,000 votes) That pig Scozzafava got close to 5,000 votes, with a majority of them being write-ins. So do the math....if 5,000 people thought they were voting for the Republican and were oblivious of the traitor' decision, then don't you think the 5,000 votes would have put Hoffman as the clear winner??? Hmm?
As far as the interpretation of yall's view on the future of the Republican party, once again the Economist has completely missed the mark. In case yall don't know, independents comprise somewhere near 40-45% of the voters. Now go back 8 years and see the huge increase in the number of independent voters. Why is that Economist?
It's because people like myself and probably people like Hospitaller that became independents because the GWB presidency was such a slap in the face to REAL conservatives. And there were ALOT of former Republicans who converted. So spare us when saying that independents are going to be turned off by conservative leaders. I DO NOT THINK SO.
No common sense Constitution-loving American is going to let this Insurance-bailout health care bill, this cap and scam bill, any Amnesty legislation, any gun-grabbing laws, any internet censorship bill, etc.
And this is why Economist.....because in this Republic, unlike yours, we have 50 states who in no way have to sign on to this garbage. So I can tell you control freak liberals out there that we know this administration and that traitor Pelosi are going to push all their legislation down our throats in 2010. However, we the people are going to push 100 times harder and I can guarantee you NUMEROUS states are going to advocate HEAVY HEAVY 10th Amendment bills. So good luck with yall's police state. Stay out of our business.


Here are some lessons: 1. Obama after one year is truly unready to lead as CIC, our economic rebuilding as a capitalist: he's a socialist pacifist. 2. His arrogance and that of San Fran Nan and Harry have put many House seats in jeopardy at which America in 2010 should take advantage of by trouncing the Dems there and in at least 3 Senate seats. 3. 2010, will see Owens lose that seat in NY because finally, the Stupid Party (The GOP) will have learned to unite, listen to their BASE and still have enough of a Big Tent to oust not only Owens, but many Blue Dog Dems in the South. 4. It is time for black voters to grow up and stop voting Dem as if Pavlov instructed them. They will turn out in 2012 again, but for once should ask themselves, just what Dems have done for them since 1964.


An incidental issue of some concern is the fact that the President himself openly canvassed for the candidates. Maybe,this permissible under the law and is inaccordance with past practice. Still,it raises a fundamental issue about the neutrality , independent and bipartisan role of the highest constitutional authority.


The Republican leadership displayed shocking incompetence in New York - they picked a screaming liberal candidate who had no support and who did not even like being in the party and they compounded the error by spending a million dollars to support her long after it was clear that she was a huge mistake. She quit the race and endorsed the Democrat anyway, and he won. The GOP spent a million dollars to elect the Democrat! I have never seen anything so stupid!

Conservatives are entitled to be annoyed and if they want to go at the party leadership with pitchforks, then good on them. Conservatives have been ignored and abused by the GOP leadership and now they are fighting back for what they believe. The biggest mistake in politics is to ignore the people who vote for you, but the GOP leadership has been doing that for years. Now they are going to pay the price. By the way - that is called 'democracy' and debate and dissension is part of the political process. Only stalinists believe that there should be not debate and no dissension in politics, so 'The Economist' sounds like it is run by stalinists and read by them too.


There you go again, insinuating the fall in Obama's popularity, every chance you get. So typically right-wing partizanship!!

The trouble with Americans is that they are always looking for 'instant gratification' & seem to have such short/selective memories.

The right-wing neo-Con supporters have to shake off their incredible denial modes & learn to acknowledge the harsh reality, that their country is in such an abject economic mess, entirely because of the monumental bunglings of their erstwhile right-wing Republican administration(s). And that it will take years of intensive damage control by Obama & the Democrats, to pull your nation out of the woods - if at all.

So, swallow your infantile right-wing pride/hubris & quit your ludicrous finger-pointing & mud-slinging of Obama. Instead learn to rally round & support your Prez in his laudable quest to save your country from total collapse.

'Denial & Hubris' won't save your nation. Wake up America!

Pepsi Cola

Sarah Palin is "the leading player in Republican politics"

Is she a leading player or simply a person who has found her niche and a meal ticket by helping conservative Republicans identify their values? Palin has undoubtable appeal to far right ideologues that prefer ranting to reason and to anyone who could project themselves into a Disney feature entitled "Soccer Mom goes to Washington". However her decision to abandon her post as Governor of Alaska mid-term to pursue a speaking tour and a book contract make her observable aspirations seem fairly shallow. “Player”, in all connotations may be a more fitting description of her than I had originally anticipated. But let us not forget that the Conservative Candidate she backed in upstate New York lost. Back to playing.


Give us Yankees a break Economist! These elections had little to do with Obama and a lot to do with the economy, lack of jobs, greedy bankers, and, yes, bad economics. Who brought us that? It was George W. Bush and the GOP, the party of me first, and just say no, then die!

Tom Silo

Dear sir, seems like a fairly balanced piece of work with only a couple of issues. Perhaps minor is that I believe Virginia is usually a republican state and the dems where basically lucky to win it before. Plus it seems these more local elections tens to go against the incumbent and so not entirely surprising. This latter comment probably goes towards the incredible partisanship of US plitics in that no US President can govern without continuous attacks from the other party which reduces their ability to govern, starts to turn some swing voters against the Pres and this is reflected in elections after the Pres won. Although Pres Obama has less to complain about as he has near complete control of the levers of government.

The second point is that you fall into the democratic trap and equate conservatism with the republican party. As we have seen with pres bush this has not been the case for at least 8 years. conservatives are people who believe individuals know more about how to run their own lives and this means less government. Of course there needs to be some government for education, crime, disaster, war and a safety nets such as health, legal aid and welfare.

On the other hand the democrats believe everyone is an idiot except for themselves and believe therefore that they should dictate what individuals should do and not do and consequently believe in massive government to force this to happen.

Although the democratic ideal is bankrupt the republicans have not shown themselves any better in the last 8 years. My point is this, if the republicans become more fundamental to this conservative view they will not alienate anyone and in fact will trounce the democrats. Although I agree if they become more fundamental in their current perversions then they will lose and deserve to do so.

(apologies for spelling and syntax, typing on a small iPhone screen on an airplane)...


The conservative candidate would have won in New York State if Scozzafola's name had not been on the ballot and took votes away. She had pulled out of the race and instead of endorsing Hoffman endorsed the Democrat. Her views were in line with the Democratic party and she could be called a Republican in name only. I think in 2010 in the regular election, Hoffman will be back and he will win. There was only a 4 point difference. Democrats have very little to cheer about today. They have been tone deaf to the cries of the nation protesting Obama's very leftist policies.


Yonkers, New York
04 November 2009

Those voters in New Jersey and Virginia have been deluged during the last eight months or so with nothing but bad if not scary and infuriating news about:

how the economy all over the United States, including their two states of course, continues to hemorrhage jobs in the hundreds of thousands a month so that now the unemployment rate is at an all-time high of 8.5% and is slated to rise to over 10% by early next year,

how home foreclosures are going on week after discomfitting week,

how big banks are still not lending in spite of the fact that they had gotten taxpayer bailout money in the billions from the Obama Stimulus Package, but continue brazenly to give those obscene bonuses to their top executives,

how both the Senate and the Lower House have been stalled on deciding to pass a Comprehensive Health-Care Reform Bill,

how the Federal deficit goes merrily up and up and is estimated to reach $1.5 trillion this year, with Republicans scaring the wits out of millions of Americans over how the next generation will be saddled with heavy debt,

how Afghanistan is still in "a downward spiral",

how Iran is apparently playing games with everybody regarding its program to make nuclear weapons---on and on and on, ad nauseam!

In the nature of things, with expectations of a Barack Obama takeover of the reins of power last November that high, the American people--those who voted for him and gave him that heady 6-million-vote majority anyway--expected him to work wonders right out of the starting block on Day One!

But Barack Obama, unfortunately, does not have a Magic Wand which he could wave just like that starting on Day One of his presidency. He and a Democratic-controlled Congress, as well as the Federal Reserve, are desperately doing everything humanly possible to stop the serious economic crisis dead in its tracks, using bold and even innovative fiscal as well as monetary tools available to them.

This is an economic crisis which is at least eight years in the making during Republican President George W. Bush's watch. To expect President Obama and his administration to undo in eight months what took eight years to do under a previous administration, is obviously to irrationally expect the impossible.


Mariano Patalinjug


These elections by their turn-out in an off-off year and the results seem to me to indicate that people are chomping at the bit to get to the polls and make some change. No matter what some people say there is great buyers remorse in the land. NO ONE expected Obama's hard left turn and his lack of executive skills. He may do well in 2012 but this Congress will be rightly slaughtered in 2010. What pigs. The earmarks, pork projects and overreaching just were a continuation of the Bush Congress. They have set Obama and themselves up for a spectacular defeat in 2010. But Pres. Obams might be okay with a different composition of Congress where he can't run so free with poorly thought out programs and attempts to let the far left set his agenda. It worked for Clinton and if he was less of a lecher he would have accomplished much more. He gave his foes the rope with which to hang him. Obama will do better. We'll see.


I think the only thing that can be read from this election is that the Republicans are a badly divided party. Which as far as I am concerned is a good thing.

Simply thinking about the McCain campaign: McCain was the moderate candidate for the Republicans. However as soon as he was nominated he flew so hard to the right that he chose Palin as his running mate. The only purpose for this selection of course was to sooth the drooling rabid right wing of the party.

To me this election is only further proof that the Republican party is split between its far right wing and it's more moderate voters. they would do well to keep in mind that being moderate is the only way to get the independent vote, in other words, win elections.


When I say "everyone should have the right to be President..." ...I meant at the same time!!!


This is a great debate to put everyone on record, because its one where we will know the answer.

I especially like when progressives involve themselves in a contest where there has to be a winner and a loser, given that their whole worldview tries to avoid that. I'm surprised they haven't argued that everyone should have the right to be President. Anyway...

Watch what the Blue Dog Democrats do. For a similar reason that consumers are the best to know the true value of the good or service they purchase (because its the consumers money on the line), the Blue Dogs are best to determine what impact, if any, these elections have (best its their neck on the line, and to survive they better get it right). If the Blue Dogs and to a lesser extent moderate Republicans go along with health care and cap&trade, then we should read nothing into the elections. If they don't, then we should.

And of course there's the 2010 elections, where we'll know for sure. Blue Dogs that go along with Obama will either get crushed or survived, and Blue Dogs that don't the same.

Its going to be one or the other and the only purpose it serves for us to argue about it is to be on record and see who's right in the end.


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
Home ownership: Our house
Blighty 19 mins ago
Crimea votes to secede: Ukraine's amputation
Eastern approaches 58 mins ago
Car ban in the French capital: Paris in the smog
Charlemagne 2 hrs 50 mins ago
Bitcoin: New money
Free exchange March 17th, 8:18


Products & events