April 24, 2009
TEDISCO CONCEDES, STEELE SWEATS?.... It took a little longer than expected, but Republican Jim Tedisco conceded the special election in New York's 20th today, and Rep.-Elect Scott Murphy (D) is headed for Capitol Hill.
Murphy takes over in the seat from its previous Democratic occupant, Kirsten Gillibrand, whose appointment to the United States Senate set up the special election for this marginal district.
The election was on March 31, three and a half weeks ago, but it took this long to get a winner because it was so close and involved a lengthy process of counting and litigation of absentee ballots. Still not all of the ballots have been reported in, but it became very clear over the last few days that there was really no way Tedisco could have pulled it off.
Murphy's victory, while expected as the vote tallies came in, is nevertheless something of an upset win for Democrats. New York's 20th is a Republican district -- as recently as 2006, GOP voter registrations in the district outnumbered Democratic registrations by 15 points -- and Republicans invested heavily to win this race. For that matter, Tedisco is a well-known leader in the state legislature, while Murphy only moved to the district three years ago.
It was, at least on paper, a race Republicans should have won. They didn't.
Which leads us to the next question: just how painful is this defeat for RNC Chairman Michael Steele? He not only poured a lot of money into this race, Steele also pointed to New York's 20th as a race that would help turn things around for the Republican Party.
Back in January, Steele boasted, "That win will send a powerful signal to the rest of the country ... that our game is not up,"
That seemed like safe bravado in January, when Tedisco looked like a sure thing. But "that win" has become "that loss." Does that mean, by Steele's reasoning, that a powerful signal has been sent to the rest of the country that the Republican Party's game is up?
There were some rumors in February that a GOP defeat in this special election would put Michael Steele's job in jeopardy. Something to keep an eye on.
—Steve Benen 4:35 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (20)
I hope Steele is around for a long time. If he was publicly elected, I would donate to his campaign.
Posted by: ScottW on April 24, 2009 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK
Even more, the Republican was ahead based on election day voting but lost because of absentee ballots. The fact that the Republicans could not run an absentee ballot operation in a targeted race means that they don't have the fundamentals of elections down.
Posted by: Mainer on April 24, 2009 at 4:37 PM | PERMALINK
Josh Kraushaar at Politico writes:
"The Republican radio silence on the race is revealing. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who made the special election a national priority for the party, hasn’t commented on the race in nine days."
also noted in the article, some attempted voter suppression shenanigans/election fixing: "Republican sources said that the campaign’s legal approach to the absentee ballots was geared as much towards the 2010 elections as it is to help Tedisco win this particular election. The party has an interest in establishing the legal principle that the many dual-residency voters who live in New York City cannot vote elsewhere in the state.
A favorable court ruling could prove useful, since the GOP hopes to target as many as six Democratic-held upstate New York seats next year."
Posted by: dj spellchecka on April 24, 2009 at 4:40 PM | PERMALINK
The party has an interest in establishing the legal principle that the many dual-residency voters who live in New York City cannot vote elsewhere in the state.
I imagine there are a lot of people with primary homes in NYC and Long Island, with cabins in the Catskills, but I doubt a significant number vote upstate. Certainly not enough to win Republicans elections there. Especially if they didn't even get around to the challenged ballots in the congressional district with the highest pct of Republicans in the state.
Posted by: Danp on April 24, 2009 at 4:51 PM | PERMALINK
now the D's need to figure out how to use this concession to increase the public pressure on Coleman and Pawlenty to do the right thing. . .
Posted by: zeitgeist on April 24, 2009 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK
The fact that the Republicans could not run an absentee ballot operation in a targeted race means that they don't have the fundamentals of elections down. -- Mainer, @16:37
Absentee votes will always skew towards Dems because, ever since 2000, we've had a very good reason to learn to be paranoid about having our votes stolen, "disappeared", etc. Until fraud of the same magnitude happens to the Republicans, they won't bother to take those few extra, preventive, steps. Especially in places where the law doesn't allow the "no reason" absentee voting. Virginia is the same way; some people had to lie and lurk to vote absentee...
Posted by: exlibra on April 24, 2009 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK
It also highlights the real reasoning behind Norm Coleman's continued delay tactics. Why didn't the Republican party fight hard for Tedisco's seat? Aren't Tedisco's constituents worth fighting for? Or maybe it's because a House of Representative seat isn't as politically important as a Senatorial seat? Maybe the GOP really doesn't care about 'counting every vote' and really only care about obstructing.
Posted by: JWK on April 24, 2009 at 5:14 PM | PERMALINK
>> There were some rumors in February that a GOP defeat in this special election would put Michael Steele's job in jeopardy.
Oh God, I hope not! Democrats need Steele at the helm of the GOP!
Posted by: JJC on April 24, 2009 at 5:16 PM | PERMALINK
George H.W. Bush spent most of his time for a large part of his life in Washington D.C. and during his time as Vice President and President, he spent much more time at the family compound in Kennebunkport Maine than anywhere else outside of Washington. Nevertheless, his "official residence" for both voting and tax purposes was a hotel suite in Texas. This helped him maintain his "native son" popularity there and saved him a fortune in state income taxes.
By comparison, forcing people who work in NYC and maintain residences both there and out of the city that they spend more than half their time in the upstate district is insane. Unless you can show they are trying to vote in both places or that they really spend virtually all their time in one place, home is where the heart is.
Posted by: tanstaafl on April 24, 2009 at 5:22 PM | PERMALINK
Hmmmm, perhaps the Friday before Memorial Day weekend would be a good time for Mr. Steele to announce that he needs to spend more time with his family.
Posted by: Outis on April 24, 2009 at 5:36 PM | PERMALINK
The whole thing was just a ploy, didn't you know? Steele let Tedisco lose so Steele could see where he was "on the chess board" and to draw out snipers to see where they were.
Posted by: Neil B ☺ on April 24, 2009 at 6:08 PM | PERMALINK
Mainer: Actually, Murphy was ahead on election night, but his lead grew by more than 300 votes after counting the absentees.
I think the Republicans will be hardpressed to say that people can't vote from their weekend homes, as long as that is the only place they vote from. Even if you declare a NYC address as your primary address, which you have to do to maintain rent stabilization, as long as the upstate address is your own, I'm pretty sure you can vote from there. College students vote from their school addresses all the time, even though their legal address and primary residence is still their parents' home.
Also, as someone else pointed out, most weekenders vote from their city addresses, since that's where they are during the week, when Election Day falls. We have an apartment in Brooklyn and a house in Ulster County, and I don't even know where the polling place is up here. Whereas I can walk to it, three blocks away, in Brooklyn.
Posted by: mauro on April 24, 2009 at 6:08 PM | PERMALINK
But "that win" has become "that loss." Does that mean, by Steele's reasoning, that a powerful signal has been sent to the rest of the country that the Republican Party's game is up?
Duh -- no! Because Steele only said what a win would signal; he didn't say what a loss would signal. A loss might signal nothing. Nothing to see here, folks!
Posted by: Grumpy on April 24, 2009 at 6:12 PM | PERMALINK
"There were some rumors in February that a GOP defeat in this special election would put Michael Steele's job in jeopardy."
I'm with JJC. I also hope not.
I invested what's left of my 401(k) in popcorn futures.
Posted by: Cal Gal on April 24, 2009 at 6:19 PM | PERMALINK
I have an apartment in NYC and a house in Rhinebeck, and I vote upstate specifically because it's more helpful for the Democrats to vote here; Carolyn Maloney doesn't need my vote.
I own a home and pay property/school/mortgage taxes. NO ONE is going to tell me I can't vote upstate. I think they have a name for that: Taxation Without Representation.
But mauro is right. Most people I know with dual residences vote in the city, for the convenience and also because they don't want to get stuck on jury duty upstate, and they pull those names partially from voter rolls.
Posted by: lcross on April 24, 2009 at 6:23 PM | PERMALINK
This is off the hook! Word!
Posted by: Remington Steele on April 24, 2009 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK
http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2009/03/un-gerrymandering-new-yorks-20th.html
Here's a picture of the 20th CD, by the way, gerrymandered to incorporate every Republican vote in the 10-county landscape.
Posted by: mauro on April 24, 2009 at 7:17 PM | PERMALINK
Let's give Tedisco credit for conceding at an appropriate time and with grace. Maybe he will set a new example for the party.
Posted by: mikeyes on April 24, 2009 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK
Here's a picture of the 20th CD, by the way, gerrymandered to incorporate every Republican vote in the 10-county landscape.
Goodness, that's one zigzagy looking district. If you squint, it almost looks like a Native American trustingly signing a government treaty. All in all, a fitting symbol of Republican crookedness.
Posted by: palinoscopy on April 24, 2009 at 11:00 PM | PERMALINK
Tedisco concedes? Aw, crap. I was hoping Sarah Palin would fly down to speak at a rally for him or something.
Posted by: jonas on April 25, 2009 at 3:00 AM | PERMALINK