Could it be a trend?
I’ve already commented on Bevin’s surprisingly strong win in Kentucky. That’s a victory not just for Republicans, but for conservatives. And it may not be an isolated trend limited to Kentucky, either.
Commenter “physicsguy” writes:
The earth shook yesterday! In my little corner of the world in eastern Connecticut, the GOP made some huge gains. In Norwich the GOP swept the entire city council. In my own town we have a GOP 1st Selectman and new GOP selectmen for the first time in 25 years, and the BoEd now has 4 new GOP members. Similar results throughout eastern CT (which is fairly rural, BTW). Never would I have ever thought such could happen. Does local translate to national??
That’s the billion-dollar question. I’d say that add enough locals together and it does translate to a possible national trend. At least, it’s a snapshot of where we’re at as of now.
There are other indications from yesterday’s elections, small tremors that might indicate something bigger coming. Wishful thinking, perhaps? After all, this is an off-year election, and those tend to run more to the right than in presidential years.
But take a look at these results:
(1) A Houston equal rights measure passed by the City Council but now subjected to a popular vote, and widely perceived as allowing men alleging to be transsexuals to use women’s bathrooms, is soundly defeated (also see this for a much more detailed explanation of what went on there). I wonder if, as with other such popular defeats of the LGTB agenda, the vote results will now be declared unconstitutional by the courts.
(2) The Virginia Senate failed to flip over to the Democrats, holding its slim Republican majority. This was not as local a race as it sounds, either. Virginia has a Democratic governor who was intent on getting a Democratic Senate to work with, and outsiders contributed money to accomplish that result. The effort failed:
…[T]he biggest prize the elections offered was momentum ”” the opportunity for the winning party to claim that voters in this key presidential swing state were leaning its way one year ahead of the White House contest.
McAuliffe, once a record-smashing fundraiser for his close friends Bill and Hillary Clinton, had hoped a win would help sway purple Virginia in 2016.
National donors and outside groups on the left and right seized on the state Senate races.
(3) A San Francisco sheriff who is a strong defender of its sanctuary city status was not re-elected.
(4) Ohio rejected legalization of recreational pot.
Of these four results, I think Virginia’s is potentially the most important.
[ADDENDUM: More here.]
We must keep fighting the good fight.
On a related note, Rush Limbaugh’s essay in the upcoming (Nov 19th, National Review):
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426529/rush-limbaugh-national-review-conservative-media-revolution
Yeah well, big loss in The Jefferson County Colorado School Board races with all 3 reform candidates being recalled as well as the full slate of union candidates winning the other 2 spots. Also union wins in 2 other school districts in CO.
So whats the big deal you might say, only a school board, but the teacher unions spent really big to win those spots, and more significantly started their campaigns right after the last election in early 2014 building grass roots support.
Those elections will embolden the unions in other areas of the country. The reform candidates underestimated the effort put out by the unions in those races. Conservative School boards in other states should take note.
I wouldn’t call a trend but it’s promising.
In PA three Democrats won seats on the Supreme Court.
I lived in VA, that is nothing new. They have gone back and forth between democrat and republican for about 20 years now.
However, the rest of the trends are amazing. I do think it is as a result of Trump/Carson mania. People feel hope for real change, and they show that in those local and state elections.
Did you read about the Lt. Governor in KY? She is a black, Tea Party member who grew up in Detroit. Very similar ‘success’ story to Dr. Carson. She sounds AWESOME! Way to go Kentucky!
I too live in Virginia and went to the poll to vote against the candidate from Bloomberg. Outside interests were spending big money in the state to turn the legislature Democrat.
I don’t know about prediction of a trend, but historically, local races are important because they produce candidates that can move on to higher office. Of course, that may be changing, with the Tea Party tending to support newcomers.
Good to see that SF Sheriff lose. That must be a tough one for the Left.
Sorry, but Ohio’s vote-down of legalized marijuana I think had more to do with the fact that the proponents intended to cement a monopoly for themselves on pots sales in Ohio and less to do with moral objections to legalizing drugs. As such, I don’t think it was a political left-right issue.
Every ‘establishment’ organization I can think of was against it, including the Dems, Repubs, all ‘major’ newspapers, good-government groups, chambers of commerce, service organizations, police, etc. etc,
The attempt to legalize pot in Ohio was seen by most voters as a shameless money-grab and I’m proud of my state and of the fact that common sense prevailed over the renegades.
Everyone in Kentucky knows that they are centered in Barry’s crosshairs. I’m surprised the Democrat got any votes. I’d bet that even among union members — especially among union members — the Dems got much lower votes than they expected. It just doesn’t occur to them that losing your job for climate change is not looked on favorably by most people.
I hope this is a national trend, but doesn’t feel that way here in PA, where Dems swept the election for the Supreme Ct. The GOP candidates were far outspent, of course:
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-local/2015/11/03/Polls-open-at-7-a-m-in-Pennsylvania-voting-pittsburgh-election-day/stories/201511030149
Nick Says:
I don’t know about prediction of a trend, but historically, local races are important because they produce candidates that can move on to higher office. Of course, that may be changing, with the Tea Party tending to support newcomers.
This is a change in parties, not process.
For many years, I’ve compared state and local offices to baseball’s farm teams. Their elected officials will move up from one level to the next as they gain political skills and their value to the party increases. Finally, the best get promoted to The Show, campaigning for national office. Occasionally, a really talented player is signed directly to the Bigs without going through the training system.
While the Democrats and Republicans have had their farm system in place for more than a century, the Tea Parties Party (for lack of an official name, the TPP) began a mere 6 years ago. They had no candidates of their own, so they had to have unvetted newbies jump in, or were forced to choose from those already in the pipeline (all Republicans, for obvious reasons).
This has led to betrayals by lots of those they backed (Ayotte, e.g.) and accusations of making poor choices. However, the TPP movement ushered in some 900 new state and local Republican officeholders from 2010-14, a good chunk of whom are solid conservatives. Team TPP will have a lot of their own draft picks to choose from in the near future.
Added to those successes we backed in the past couple elections (Cruz, Lee, Paul, Brat, etc) I believe the TPP will be a force to be reckoned with within the next few elections.
This all assumes that neither Hillary! nor any other Democrat, nor any Republican in favor of amnesty, becomes POTUS in 2016, because if ten million new Democrat voters are legalized and/or we get more leftwingers on the SCOTUS, there will be no way to stop ourselves from slouching towards 1984.
physicsguy
The earth shook yesterday! In my little corner of the world in eastern Connecticut, the GOP made some huge gains. In Norwich the GOP swept the entire city council.
That prompted me to investigate how Norwich voted in 2012:
A town that voted more than 2:1 for Obama, elected an all-Pub city council three years later. That is impressive. I will conclude that the voters of my home state will have wised up if , upon electing Pubs to office, they vote them back in after Pubs have taken measures to stop the decay of CT- by cutting money from everyone’s favorite government program.
CT had a built-in advantage, being between two high-tax states, NY and Massachusetts. For decades it had the highest per capita income in the nation. CT politicos blew that advantage by assuming that the golden goose couldn’t be killed. Former Pratt and Whitney workers, among others, will sadly inform those politicos, that yes, you can kill the golden goose.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/112624971/Votes-for-President-by-Connecticut-town