The Democrats lost a special election tonight in Florida’s 13th District. It probably doesn’t mean much, at least, that’s what some smart Republicans were arguing when they thought they were going to lose the seat. It was actually an interesting campaign with a lot of story lines, but the main reason it is a disappointment is because the polls showed a persistent (if narrow) edge for Alex Sink, the Democratic candidate. So, it’s an upset.
Yet, it’s an historically Republican district, and the only reason that the Democrats were so hopeful is because they had the superior candidate, they did well with early voting, and because they believed the polls.
It looks like they got thumped on Election Day voting, and that’s the turnout problem that Democrats have to deal with in off-year elections. The margin is close enough, just a few thousand votes, that this district is easily winnable in November. So, not a good showing by the Dems, but maybe it will help them learn some lessons for the general.
Yet, it’s an historically Republican district, and the only reason that the Democrats were so hopeful is because they had the superior candidate, they did well with early voting, and because they believed the polls.
And Obama did carry the district, barely, in 2012. Calling Sink the superior candidate in this race isn’t really saying much. She couldn’t beat a criminal(aka Lex Luthor aka Rick Scott) in ’10 so why did anyone expect any better now?
I understand she is a bluedog
I think we should keep in mind that Sink decided a winning strategy in Florida – FLORIDA – would be to run on a promise of cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Genius.
And there it is in a nutshell…the problem w/the two mainstream branches of the PermaGov Uniparty.
DemRats and RatPubs both have no real platforms or backbones.They are all electioneering and subsequent quid pro quo moral bargains, right up to the top of the sorry garbage heap. This results in public relations/branding/beauty contests like the 2008 and 2012 presidential (
s)elections. The on-the-ground American voting public…lame as it might be in many respects…is getting wise to the scam. The rise of the real right wing has to do with its essential honesty. It may be crazy in many respects, but it is consistently crazy. Voters are losing trust in the mainstream elements of both parties because they offer no consistency. “Vote for Obama!!!” they say. He’s gonna restore hope to America!!!” And then he proceeds to continue establishing the criminal security state that Bush II and the neo-cons started. “”Vote for Obama!!! He’ll solve the Wall Street criminality problem that resulted in the Great Recession!!!” And then he hires the very criminals who caused that recession to oversee the so-called recovery.I am telling you leftinesses now…if you do not want a libertarian revolution in 2016, you’d better start looking for a presidential candidate other than Hillary Clinton. She is the essence of quid pro quo, and this time around the electorate is not going to fall so easily for grand slogans after watching Obama drown in his own sloganeered bathtub over the past several years.
Watch.
It’s happening as we speak.
If it’s Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton in 2016?
Remember that old ’60s anti-Vietnam War lick? “What would happen if they threw a war and no one came?”
What would happen if they threw an election and no one voted?
VOTESTRIKE!!!
The ultimate newsstrike.
Let us pray.
AG
so in other words, there wasn’t a Democrat running at all. For the sake of the Democratic brand we’re better off that Sink lost.
The candidate simply wasn’t progressive enough.
This is always the solution.
That is all.
How do you think running a former Bank of America executive, who couldn’t even beat a Lex Luthor-looking criminal in ’10, looks to a lot of Democrats? Not exactly a good recipe for inspiring people to vote.
is one of two candidates to win a statewide race in Florida since 1998. She ran a race in 2010 where she was badly outspent in the worse possible environment possible.
The idea that there was some magic candidate who was going to win this seat strikes me as nonsense.
It was close. If you understood the district, it was always going to be close.
Sink is not my cup of tea – but the notion floating around blogsphere that she wasn’t Democratic enough is silly.
Sink is not my cup of tea – but the notion floating around blogsphere that she wasn’t Democratic enough is silly.
What did she campaign on, this time? Did she campaign on cutting SS and Medicare(which could mean she was touting Bowles-Simpson), as is alleged elsewhere here? Did she campaign on increasing the minimum wage? I’m curious to know.
On Medicare and Social Security:
“Medicare and Social Security are promises that Pinellas seniors have earned, and we deserve to have these vital programs protected – end of discussion. In Congress, I will stand up to protect the Social Security and Medicare benefits that Pinellas County seniors have earned over a lifetime of hard work, working to strengthen and preserve these critical programs for seniors today and for future retirees.”
She did not campaign on cutting ss and medicare.
She supported the minimum wage increase. She defended Obamacare, though suggest modifications.
Most of the writing in blogsphere on Sink has been done without reading a Sink speech in the last 30 days.
And she also campaigned on “working across the aisle” .. and other stupid slogans … why do “Democrats” always campaign on such stupid and meaningless slogans? How does that excite voters?
That’s good then. What were her commercials like? What about the commercials groups like EMILY’s List ran for her?
ok. This race wasn’t a mystery. Obama carried the District – barely. Given the dropoff from Presidential to non-Presidential years, you can argue that you would expect the Republican to win by about 5.
Democrats have not found a way to avoid the drop-off from Presidential to non-Presidential years. There was hope that the data people knew something after 2012 – that does not appear to be the case.
I’m sure they have the data to know who, exactly, are the voters who don’t vote in off-years. Are they college students? Middle and lower classes? I wish I knew. If I knew I think we could figure out what could be done to get them to vote in off-years.
when he was at openleft wrote once he was surprised at how little research there really was on methods that stemmed the drop-off.
If anybody has an answer I don’t know it. In 2010 2 dems lost in Florida, one was Grayson and the other was a blue dog. The drop-off for each was identical.
I do not believe there is any objective evidence that indicates that having a blue dog or a progressive makes much difference in base turnout in congressional elections.
This is why some of the talk in blogsphere is frankly really silly.
I do not believe there is any objective evidence that indicates that having a blue dog or a progressive makes much difference in base turnout in congressional elections.
No, because most times Blue Dogs don’t campaign as Blue Dogs. You just find out they are such once they are elected. And that’s when the problems begin.
Like Melissa Bean and Tammy Duckworth. Bean ran as a Liberal, was a Blue Dog after election and lost to Joe Walsh. Duckworth didn’t run as far to the Left as Bean. In fact her campaign was mostly, “I lost my legs in Iraq!”, but the voters knew Walsh by then. She was actually losing by a hair when newly gerrymandered Elgin votes came in and made it a landslide.
I’m thinking Party bias trumps most everything and the candidate only makes a few percentage points difference unless they do something stupid like calling rape babies a gift from God. That’s why BOTH sides are dissatisfied with their Congresspeople.
So you’re saying the Democrat wasn’t Conservative enough? Do you know anything about how she campaigned this time around? Do you know why the DCCC keeps putting up these “mystery meat” candidates, as Howie Klein calls them?
Being against SS and Medicare in Florida isn’t being not progressive enough. It’s being stupid,
A truly progressive candidate would have won this election — any election — in a walk.
Run social democrats, you win every time. In every election. By Landonesque margins.
On the sheer rightness of their positions. Nothing else is necessary. You won’t even need special GOTV —
if the candidate is just left enough, the turnout problem solves itself.
There are tens of millions out there, an invisible army of social democrats, turned off by middle-of-the road, or worse, candidates, silently waiting… and not-voting while they wait.
They have to be out there. If they weren’t out there, too many people on the internet would be wrong.
Very funny with your sarcasm. Haha!
just like 2010 did?
How many times do they need to learn the same lesson?
Oh, nevermind.
Worth pointing out that before C.W. “Bill” Young died, there was already a Democrat contesting the seat, Jessica Ehrlich. When Young died, the party pushed her out to make way for Alex Sink.
There’s no guarantee that Ehrlich would have done better than Sink, but I find the whole story embarrassing as a Democrat. How can we hope to retake the majority when the party shows no real interest in a seat, even in a district as winnable as FL-13, until it is vacated? Or when candidates who are willing to challenge incumbents are unceremoniously dumped in favor of well-connected retreads like Alex Sink?
This was an unforced error. I never want to hear Sink’s name again.