Oct 17 - 46/45 - McCain +01
Pryce Wins. What Can We Learn?
Why did Democrats lose so many Congressional races in Ohio in 2006?
It was announced yesterday that Republican Deb Pryce beat Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy by 1,055 votes in the recount. I've got a few emails from some organizations in Columbus saying that the number isn't yet official and that an automatic district wide recount will now be automatically triggered. I'm betting 1,000 votes is decisive and unfortunately this race is likely over.
Question: The big question for me after the 2006 election in Ohio is why were Democrats able to clean-up at the state level and spank Mike Dewine, but only pick up one Congressional seat? (Space beat Padgett OH-18)
My answer: Gerrymandering - It is awful for our Democracy and gives us extreme candidates whose incumbency is guaranteed not by their job performance, but instead by the D or R next to their name. Second, unlike Mike Dewine, it seems these candidates where able to position themselves away from the disgust with state government and the unease about President Bush. They also had a lot of money. Deb Pryce raised about $3.8 million to run for fucking Congress. Democrat Kilroy raised $2.4 million. That is absolutely disgusting.
If I were a Republican looking to campaign statewide in 2008, I would target these Congressional Districts which held for Republicans. It is unlikely that there will ever be a political environment in the State of Ohio as toxic for Republicans as 2006. The districts of Steve Chabot (OH-1), Jean Schmidt (OH-2), Pat Tiberi (OH-12), and now Deborah Pryce (OH-15) are all places where Republicans held onto their seats in competitive races during a Democratic tidal wave. (click map) The Republicans deserve credit for holding on to these seats and should look at those areas as their swing districts and target them next cycle. Democrats need to study these districts and see why we lost and why Republicans won. We need to work over the next two years in these areas and give them another run in 2008. Despite the success of Democrats in Ohio this past fall, there is still work to be done within out party. Hopefully 2006 is the begining and not the peak for Democrats in Ohio.
It was announced yesterday that Republican Deb Pryce beat Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy by 1,055 votes in the recount. I've got a few emails from some organizations in Columbus saying that the number isn't yet official and that an automatic district wide recount will now be automatically triggered. I'm betting 1,000 votes is decisive and unfortunately this race is likely over.Question: The big question for me after the 2006 election in Ohio is why were Democrats able to clean-up at the state level and spank Mike Dewine, but only pick up one Congressional seat? (Space beat Padgett OH-18)
My answer: Gerrymandering - It is awful for our Democracy and gives us extreme candidates whose incumbency is guaranteed not by their job performance, but instead by the D or R next to their name. Second, unlike Mike Dewine, it seems these candidates where able to position themselves away from the disgust with state government and the unease about President Bush. They also had a lot of money. Deb Pryce raised about $3.8 million to run for fucking Congress. Democrat Kilroy raised $2.4 million. That is absolutely disgusting.
If I were a Republican looking to campaign statewide in 2008, I would target these Congressional Districts which held for Republicans. It is unlikely that there will ever be a political environment in the State of Ohio as toxic for Republicans as 2006. The districts of Steve Chabot (OH-1), Jean Schmidt (OH-2), Pat Tiberi (OH-12), and now Deborah Pryce (OH-15) are all places where Republicans held onto their seats in competitive races during a Democratic tidal wave. (click map) The Republicans deserve credit for holding on to these seats and should look at those areas as their swing districts and target them next cycle. Democrats need to study these districts and see why we lost and why Republicans won. We need to work over the next two years in these areas and give them another run in 2008. Despite the success of Democrats in Ohio this past fall, there is still work to be done within out party. Hopefully 2006 is the begining and not the peak for Democrats in Ohio.
By Kyle - 11/28/2006
13 Comments:
On a side note, looking at the Ohio fundraising numbers from 2006, Capri Cafaro spent $1,961,176 in her primary run against Betty Sutton. Do you think the Cafaro family was trying to send a message to future opponents? I do. Cue the Godfather music.
I hate that worthless piece of crap.. she is as dumb as a stump, and jumps from distrcit to district-what a worthless carpet-bagger. She spent 2 million on a primary-at this rate kyle you may have to run againsts that troll.
We can perhaps question what the national and state parties, as well as the house caucus committees were really doing for Ohio's Democratic Congressional candidates.
I live in the 14th Congressional District and know that if ever there was a year to rid Congress of that fatter than ever fat-cat LaTourette, it was 2006. Yet, the candidacy of Lew Katz was ignored by the Democratic powers that be.
So now we will continue to pay LaTourette's salary as he again fills his belly and his pocketbook at the expense of our working men and women.
Ohio was a miracle for House Republicans. To get killed like that on the national level but to only lose the Ney seat here was incredible. It speaks to the power of incumbency and gerrymandering. Ohio Repuiblicans also saw far ahead that it was going to be a brutual yr and they were going to have to fight for their political lives.
Democrats can redraw the maps in 2010 if the control the state apportionment board in Ohio (likely) post census, so they could gain 1-2 seats that way, but usually that is the max one party will draw for themselves since both sides just want to protect incumbents.
Ohio is also basically guaranteed to lose a House seat after the next census anyways.....which makes who draws the lines even more important.
Mongoose, Capri may be an incumbent the next time she runs because she has been appointed by Marc Dann to fill his Senate seat. The Youngstown Vindicator said she may not get the seat because of her residency.
Anonymous, hopefully better fundraising by Howard and Rahm will bring in enough resources to help out candidates like Lew Katz. Hopefully Lew will run again for another seat now that his name ID is up a bit.
gerrmandering---It is a tool of those that make the rules. I dont veiw it as much as a tool for those in power although they wilpick up some adfvantage along the way. It is a process to ensure that the incumbents are not seriously challanged. It is become a threat to our democratic process and an impediment to 3rd parties.
i don't really know how we fix the gerrymandering problem since the supreme court basically punted the issue back to the states. california wanted to fix the problem to make it more fair but the voters rejected the fixes - but this wasn't because they didn't want it fixed, it was because they didn't want to give up a bunch of democratic house seats until red states also fix their gerrymandering that would give up some of their republican seats. a national solution is needed - i don't know if there is a constitutional way to do that though w/o a different supreme court case.
Tim
good point tim
There has got to be some computer program that can do the gerrymandering fairly. Maybe we can get a company like Diebold to throw something together.
I also think a bi-partisan board like we have at the Board of Elections to draw the districts.
LaTourette's 14th district is a relatively evenly split one (Rs vs. Ds). Perhaps the fact the LaTourette saved Cleveland from BRAC and governs like a true moderate (Roll Call put him as one of the congressman closest to the center) is the reason he wins elections.
If the DNC thought he was vulnerable in a close district like the 14th is, don't you think they would have spent money on it?
Bummer about Pryce winning.
Bummer that Cafaro is my Senator!
Katz was not a horrible candidate, but wasn't great either.
More importantly, his general election staff was a joke--bloated, over-paid, run by a law student who knew nothing about politics (& knows nothing about the law either). My gosh, how many people were they paying at the end?
A better candidate who can raise $$$ has a shot in the 14th. I suspect that LaT won't even finish out his term--I smell a federal judgeship.
Cant remember where I heard the idea. Open the primaries. No party affilation necessary when voting. It has a number of potential positives.
1. weakens the postion of the incumbent
2.lessens the power of gerrrymandering
3.lessens the power of the party machine.
4. increases the potential for 3rd party candidates.
of course the current 2 party monopoly would do everything it could to kill this puppy.
Post a Comment
<< Home