Now that the streamers and party decorations are down over at Fox News, let’s have an honest and frank look back at the elections that took place last Tuesday. Yes, for those of you who didn’t know, there were elections last Tuesday, mostly for state races in states outside of South Dakota, but the mainstream media treated it as if the fate of America depended on the results of these elections. Fox and other networks were declaring a severe defeat for the Democrats because they lost the governor’s seat in New Jersey and Virginia. What they failed to mention were the two special elections for seats in Congress, but I will get to those races shortly.
If one actually looks at these elections they would see that it was not quite the monumental defeat many pundits would like you to believe. In New Jersey, Gov. John Corzine was unbelievably unpopular and had to spend well over $20 million of his own money just to stay in the race. A defeat in that election was not a rejection of the Democratic party as a whole, but the candidate himself.
Again in Virginia, a traditionally Republican state, Bob McDonnell, the Republican, had a huge lead from day one and Creigh Deeds never really stood a chance. Both Democratic candidates received a few campaign appearances from President Obama, which brought the polls closer but could not close the huge gap that was already present in the races. These races reflect politics at the state level and are not a clear indicator of how people feel about the Obama policies on the whole.
The two races people should have paid attention to were those in the 23rd Congressional District of New York and 10th Congressional District in California. The Democratic candidates won both districts, which was quite surprising because both of these districts are traditionally Republican, with the NY-23 district having not elected a Democrat in over 100 years. The NY-23 election was especially important because it featured a Democrat against a Conservative Party candidate who was brought to the ballot by the “Tea Party” movement and eventually made the Republican candidate concede prior to Election Day.
So this election boiled down to the policies of the Obama administration and the DNC going up against those of the “Tea Party” movement. With the Democrat coming out victorious, this was a great sign for members of the Democratic Party in 2010. This small sampling of voters showed Americans still have more faith in the ideals of the Democrats than those of the Conservatives who protest all over the nation and caused quite a fuss at town halls. This election was a clear affirmation of the Democratic policies and proves that election night was not a rejection of President Obama. And on another note, the people of Maine repealed a law on Tuesday that allowed gay/lesbian marriage in the state, marking the first time a civil right granted by the government was removed by the electorate. How sad is that?
It seemed if the media as a whole wanted to report negatively on the Obama administration. Every pundit and talking head who could get 30 seconds of air time was jumping out saying the public has officially refuted the Obama Administration. Although the elections came out 2-2 for the Democratic National Committee, if you followed the news you would have thought the Democrats lost every seat in Congress, every gubernatorial race and dissolved overnight. What really happened was that Democratic ideals were held up and affirmed in the only federal elections on the night. If people were truly as upset as the right wing would have us believe, the Tea Party candidate and the Republican would have won their districts by a very large margin. What this all boils down to however, is that Americans need to break away from the 24/7 news cycle, where stories and conflict are created to increase viewers, and do their own research to find the facts.
Reach columnist Bill Muller at Bill.Muller@usd.edu.
COLUMN: Election outcomes portrayed unfairly
Published: Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Updated: Wednesday, November 11, 2009
3 comments