And thus ends the Democrats’ dream of a 60-seat majority.
Polls ended up being widely wrong, as pollsters were unable to model turnout accurately. Unfortunately for Democrats, the error was not in their favor but in Saxby Chambliss’s. The Republican Senator crushed his opponent by a substantial margin tonight. With 97% of precincts reporting, he led 57,4% to 42,6%.
Simply put, the Democratic base deserted the polls while conservatives were even more energized than anticipated - a stark reversal from the enthusiasm gap we had observed for the past three years and the turnout differential that carried Democrats to stunning victories in three special elections this spring.
As a result, what was a 3% squeaker on November 4th transformed itself into a 15% rout - and a rare triumph for the GOP.
Of course, it is not surprising that Republicans would be more interested in going to the polls given that they were treated to visits by all of the party’s luminaries over the past few weeks. The GOP made sure that all of their voters remembered that a Chambliss victory was essential to keeping Democrats from a filibuster-proof majority. Democratic voters, meanwhile, must not have gotten the message that electing Martin could help Barack Obama implement his agenda in Washington.
Republicans will now crow that Georgia’s results mean that Obama’s honeymoon is over and that they should expect strong gains in 2010. “You have delivered a message that a balance of government in Washington is necessary,” Chambliss said today, “and that’s not only what the people of Georgia want but what the people of America want.” This is somewhat disingenuous, however. This is Georgia we are talking about, after all, a red state in which Democrats have had trouble winning any statewide race throughout the decade.
Also, the magnitude of Chambliss’s victory is bound to ignite talk about the strength or the permanence Obama’s electoral coalition. Much was made of the fact that red states like Georgia turned purple on November 4th (Obama only lost the state by 5%), and the surge in African-American turnout held promises for Democratic candidates. Was that dependent on Obama’s presence on the ballot, and will other Democrats not be able to bring out those sporadic voters? Here again, it would be somewhat disingenuous for Republicans to start celebrating: the spring’s three special elections in heavily Republican territory demonstrated that Democratic enthusiasm went far beyond Obama’s candidacy.
But then again, Republicans cannot be blamed for drawing larger conclusions after such unexpected scope. After all, they have not had a good election night in quite a while.
Chambliss’s landslide win in a low turnout runoff election says nothing about GOP chances in 2010, in which the field seems to once again be stacked against them. As of right now, the only seats that the Republicans would have a chance in 2010 is in Hawaii, Nevada, and Colorado, but Hawaii and Nevada are lean Democratic even if the GOP gets’ their strongest candidates for those seats (althrough if Obama becomes very unpopular in 2010 all bets are off) and in Colorado only former GOP gov. Bill Ownes would make that race an instant toss up. And lets not forget that at least right now 4 GOP seats in 2010 are likely toss ups: Kentucky, Florida, Missouri, and Ohio, with other GOP seats becoming vulerable depending on if the Democrats can get a strong candidate in.
Also, Obama never went out and campainged for Martin, which probably greatly contributed to the lax turnout among African Americans and other strong Democratic constiuences. Martin was a weak candidate who only did well on Nov. 4th because of Obama’s coattails: he basically talked mainly about Obama and not about how he would help the people in Georgia: no wonder they rejected him.
I’m disappointed that Chambliss survived, but I’m not surprised. Martin ran a fairly lackluster campaign especially after November 4th, (He attached himself too much to Obama in a state that he just lost.) and the Democrats put surprisingly little effort into this race.
I think Martin could have won had the DSCC tried harder from the beginning however.
JR, North Carolina should also be a top Democratic target in 2010. If a big name like Dole can be beaten by a virtual nobody there this year, I’m sure Republican Senator Burr is sweating it. About all he’s got going for him is the GOP brand. No doubt Obama on the ballot was a factor in pulling Hagan (over Dole) and Democrat Purdue over the Republican candidate for governor, but North Carolina doesn’t look like a reliably red state now (if it ever was).
I think GA was always a pipe dream. We’re talking the heart of the GOP base.
Ken - Hagan actually did better than Obama in her race by beating Dole by 9% - Obama helped but so did Dole being an out of state candidate and her terrible athiest adverts at the end.
Saxby won GA - wow was it ever in doubt that a red state would return a GOP senator. This says nothing about 2010 or Obama’s campaign muscle. When he wants results he will put a plan in action - for example the mid terms but a run off in GA is not important. You don`t need 60 Dem senators to close a filibuster. The two GOP senators from Maine, Spector from PA, maybe Coleman from MN and Voinvich in OH will all be amendable to voting with the Dems sometimes.
Chambliss said last night he would oppose Obama “when he wants to raise your taxes….when he wants to make proposals with respect to health care that is going to take your choice of choosing your doctor away form you…”. Ok…so he will oppose a tax cut for the overwhelming majority of Georgians in order to protect the tiny percentage who make over $250k a year. That shows you who he represents, and it looks like Georgians fell for it. And is there anything in Obama’s health plan that takes away your right to choose your own doctor? No, that’s a lie. Chambliss is a disgrace.
Oh, and I loved all the talk about protecting “balance” in the senate. This morning, NPR featured a Chambliss supporter who claimed that the founding fathers wanted such balance, blah, blah. Hilarious. How concerned were they about “balance” when the GOP controlled the senate?
“Chambliss’s landslide win in a low turnout runoff election says nothing about GOP chances in 2010″
- Actually, it says that when GWB is not part of the campaign rhetoric and Obama is not on the ticket, Republican performance improves (at least in conservative or conservative leaning states). That bodes well for Sen Burr in NC and Sen Bond in MO. They are likely breathing a bit easier this morning.
“Also, Obama never went out and campaigned for Martin, which probably greatly contributed to the lax turnout among African Americans…”
- Not exactly. Obama’s radio ads got plenty of air time on urban radio, but even if he did make a personal appearance, black turnout would still have been down. The high black voter turnout on Nov 4th was to cast a vote for Obama. If they can’t do that, fewer will show-up. That’s just common sense. The turnout in 2010 will be down as well.
As far as the 2010 races mentioned:
HI - If it’s an open seat, Gov Lingle runs and the race will lean her way. If not, safe Dem.
NV - Reid’s approvals at home are AWFUL. We’re talking near Bush level. Even if Porter doesn’t run, an ambitious state senator could pull a “Hagan” on him.
CO - If Owen’s runs, its a toss-up against Sen Salazar. If it’s Tancredo, the RNC and NRSC won’t even bother with a post-defeat condolence card.
MO - Kit Bond’s numbers are decent and it’s still a red state. Bond is favored.
NC - A slightly bluish state, but still fairly conservative and without Bush or Obama, it leans towards the low-profile Burr.
KY - Bunning’s approvals are under 50 and basically have been since his re-election (SUSA). If Bunning does indeed run again, it leans generic Dem.
FL - Could be a toss-up. It would probably lean towards CFO Alex Sink, but would be favored towards Jeb Bush and safe with Gov Crist.
OH - Vionovich’s numbers are not good, it’s now a blue state, and the Dems actually have a bench to draw from. Lean generic Dem.
PA - Spector performed well in 2004, but he will face another primary and a tough general, but this time he’ll get no help from a Bush re-election campaign or a weak Democrat opponent. Toss-up.
“How concerned were they about “balance” when the GOP controlled the senate?”
- About as concerned as the Dems were this cycle after the campaigned on it in 2006. It’s politics, Jason. Both sides play it.
If Jeb Bush runs for Senate he will be a marked man. The U.S does not need another Bush in Washington. I’m shocked he would even consider running. But this could be a boon for Democrats. “Look. See how corrupt and detestible the GOP is!” So, bring it on, Jeb! We’ll eat you for breakfast.
Jeb was a “marked man” by the DNC in 2002, and left the gov office with approvals over 60%. I doubt he’s worried about being anyone’s breakfast.
To be honest, the victory for the GOP is more of a morale booster than a real victory. Georgia is solidly a Republican state, and Obama has very rarely been ahead in the pools before the election on Nov. 4. And even in the 1990’s runoff after Bill Clinton’s election, the GOP crushed the Dems there. And African-Americans are usually more energized by the top ticket, so they usually disregard runoffs there once their favorite candiate (in this case, Obama) wins. There is less urgency for Dems in Georgia to feel they have to vote when their Party wins massively in 2 straight elections, and the demoralized GOP is usually desperate to the point that it tries everything at its disposal to try to keep losses at a minium — and Georgia illustrates this point.
Taniel, even if Samby loses, I don’tthink it translates into a 60 votes as there are enough conservative Dems who will be more concerned about their political careers in cosnervative/GOP states; likewise, there are sufficient Republicans who are moderate enough to vote on issues dear to Democrats. So, what really matters here is how many moderate GOPers and how many conservative Democrats there are, not merely sixty Demoxrats vs. sixty Republicans in the Senate.
Teezy, no Republican will win a federal race in Hawaii. Obama carried this state by around 45 points.
Ron,
An outsider “mainland” Republican is quite different than a two-time statewide-elected Republican. Lingle may not ultimately win, but she is popular enough (over 60% approval) and liberal enough to start with an advantage and keep the race very close. It’s a similar situation to popular Democrat Gov Sebelius in the very conservative Kansas.
In addition, Obama is a native son, which is why he won huge. Kerry only won the state by 9 points.
Sebelius would likely never win a Senate seat in Kansas, just like Lingle would probably never win a Senate race in Hawaii.