NY9

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

So, let's do a little post-election analysis. I don't know who here, if anyone, was following the NY9 election to replace Anthony Weiner. It was won by Bob Turner, a Republican who was backed by the TEA-party.

So NY9 is a heavily democrat registered district. But here's where I think the campaign of David Weprin (the Dem) went wrong:

He didn't get the support of the Jews.

In his district, they are a significant portion of the voting block. Weprin as a member of the NYS assembly, voted for gay-marriage. This goes against the Jewish religion, but Weprin wasn't voting on gay rights as a Rabbi, he was voting on it as a secular official. Officials may believe as they wish, but they swear an oath to the constitution--not their religion. If, as a legal scholar, Weprin couldn't find a reason to vote against gay marriage, then he is to vote for it and that's exactly what he did.

However: this is exactly why I, as an atheist, get pissed at religion. This stupid shit just cost a democrat an election.

Now, Weprin was nobodies dream candidate. Pretty dull and not charismatic or insipiring. But then again, take a look at Bob Turner. I definitely don't want him in office.

I actually grew up in NY9--I didn't know it at the time, and by the time I could vote I lived elsewhere. However, two of my friends from childhood still live round there, as do their parents. I have a question to ask of the community: do you think the following is a dasterdly campaign tactic and shouldn't be used:


aicPAC sent out a text message saying that Weprin abandoned israel and that you should call him and ask why

it's not true that Weprin abandoned israel (go ahead, do your research, it's a totally bogus claim) and the goal behind the aicPAC sending this text message was to clog the phone lines of the Weprin office, and to sway any Jews who didn't call up and get their facts straight to vote against Weprin.

Also, the way the text was sent, it appeared as if the message was sent from the office campaign number. Turns out that number was a landline that couldn't possibly send text messages.
Oh republican trickery, know you no bounds?

All that said, how do you view this special election? Is it merely the offset to the NY26 race where the dems got a seat that had been held by repubs for decades? Is it a referendum on Obama? Is it a referendum on the gay marriage vote? Is it just another election won over by dirty tricks?

Who would you have supported in this race?

Comments

[telemann.livejournal.com]

This area's demographics are changing, as you noted, it's becoming increasingly Russian Jewish (especially in the area of the district that's in Brooklyn: e.g. Sheepshead Bay, Brighton Beach, et al). It was a special election with very small numbers of voters. Had this been a regular election cycle, there's no doubt in my mind the Republicans would have lost. The other thing-- the district will be phased out anyway due to the census in 2010.

Let's not forget the big win in upstate New York, a Republican district for over 100 years flipped to the Democrats this year and that was immediately after the Ryan plan was released.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Sure, the NY26 was a response to the Ryan plan and the NY9 was a response to the Obama jobs bill. You could spin it that way.

But there's no reason that the Russian Jewish community shouldn't have gone for Weprin. Weprin is an orthodox Jew. Turner is a catholic. If the orthodox Jew loses the Jewish vote, something went wrong, no?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Well, in 2010 the turnout was primarily the kind of people who would vote in midterm elections: older white people who like identifying their politics on religious grounds. Too, a full third of Congressional seats were never even contested and only one of the progressive caucus was not re-elected, with Democratic losses primarily affecting blue dogs. If turnout is 1/3 of what it should be but only 1/18th of the 1/3 vote progressive, the majority of that low turnout that vote reactionary will win by actually being the majority. But if US progressives want to be juvenile hissy-fitters and stay home then people like Rick "I'm the new Jeff Davis bitches" Perry will win by default.

The important thing...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Before I pass judgment, I need to get a photo of Bob Turner's junk. Is he better hung than Anthony Weiner?

Re: The important thing...

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

This is not the penis you are looking for.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

If there is a Jewish majority in that district, and he doesn't represent them, then they have no obligation to vote for him. It doesn't matter what particular issue they feel he doesn't represent them on. It doesn't matter what party he belongs to.

To blame a text message is pretty idiotic, imo.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

The text message sent out a blatantly false message. It was also a lame attempt at a DDoS on their phones.

And I don't know if the Jews are the majority, but they are a large segment (certainly more than the margin of victory in this election).

And obviously they don't have an obligation to vote for him; nobody has an obligation to vote for anybody. That you even feel the need to mention this shows your thinking is a little odd.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

How does supporting the interests of a foreign country represent the interests of Jews in the United States?

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

I live in the district and voted for Weprin.

A few reasons:

1) I am a liberal and therefore am going to vote Democratic, 9 times out of 10. Duh.

2) The NY state GOP mailed this out the week leading up to 9/11:



Fuck you, Bob Turner, you 1st amendment-hating piece of shit.

3) The GOP used Weprin's vote for gay marriage to turn off religious voters. Again, fuck you.

What really killed us was the lack of a primary here first. It would've gotten us the best candidate possible, and gotten the Democratic base engaged earlier on.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Sure, lack of primary did yield some crappy candidates. And yes, I heard about those 9/11 mailers. Did you get that text message from the aicPAC? I do wonder if those only hit the Jewish communities or what.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Ah, another candidate in the Herman Cain mold of ignoring the Constitution.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I know, if only more Democrats were elected, things might actually change around here.

No wait, that doesn't make sense at all.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Well, it is possible that some tax-loopholes would be closed; or a marginal increase in the tax rate on the super rich. I mean, Clinton managed a minimal tax rate increase on the rich, right?

[devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com]

Is it just another election won over by dirty tricks?

If that is indeed the case, I would shocked... no, APPALLED... NO, OUTRAGED!!!

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

I mean, there's also the legit fact of Weprin voting for gay marriage. That lost him quite a few votes--and is accurate. All the BS about him abandoning israel though is a total canard.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

It was those left over Warren Harding Republicans who did Welprin in, they came out in droves to support the GOP... (hatip: Mark Steyn)

I think Welprin was more likely done in by Obama's positions regarding Israel than gay marriage. Whether or not Welprin himself would abandon Israel, it is a growing meme within the Jewish community that Obama is willing to toss Israel under the bus. Combine this with Obama's general unpopularity and you have a set up for an up set.

All that being said, Ockham's Razor is probably better applied, mohel-like, to former Congressman Weiner. That kind of scandal can leave an unpleasant taste in the voters's mouths. Had Weiner not gone completely batshit crazy, chances are he would have been in the NY 9 chair for as long as he wanted it.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Oh sure. There were plenty of voters who contemplated writing Weiner in for this election. They didn't cause they saw it would be futile, but they wanted to.

Also, are you doing it on purpose? His name is WEPRIN. No L. Or were you trying to insult the guy? Or just a slip of the fingers?

So you see it as a referendum on Obama. Interesting.

What do you think of the text message sent by aicPAC? does that leave a sour taste in your mouth? or is it the sort of thing you expect from politics and thus are OK with?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

What differentiates his position as regards Israel from that of his precursors? Being a Democrat?

[ytterbius.livejournal.com]

"it is a growing meme within the Jewish community that Obama is willing to toss Israel under the bus"

Pretty much what this means is that Obama does not sell out any and all other interests to the immediate desire of the State of Isreal.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Why do Jews get so worked up over Israel? Isn't it an independent nation? I know we flip them a couple billion in free $ every year, shouldn't that be enough?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Meh. It's never enough to defend the homeland.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

It's a sign of the bizarre influence of Israel on US politics. US support of countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Colombia has much greater impact on our geopolitical power than supporting or not supporting Israel but no US politician will be sunk for being soft on Colombia. I should note if Rick Perry is the GOP nominee not to worry, enough votes against Perry will ensure Obama wins re-election by default. The GOP gets the vote of old white people who don't want young people to have Social Security and to pay for theirs, so if someone who wants to do away with Social Security wins the nomination......everyone tied to him will die on his coattails.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

I don't know who those people with those strange names are... :(

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

google/wikipedia is your friend?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

All that said, how do you view this special election? Is it merely the offset to the NY26 race where the dems got a seat that had been held by repubs for decades? Is it a referendum on Obama? Is it a referendum on the gay marriage vote? Is it just another election won over by dirty tricks?

As I posted on Monday (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/1153654.html#comments), this was quite clearly a referendum on Obama - a 31% approval rating definitely brought Weprin down, and the Israel policy sentiment, also linked to Obama, was registering in polls long before any (unproven as to the source or much else) text message went out. The reality is that voters are coming to the conclusion that the Democratic agenda isn't working, and coming to that conclusion very quickly.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

We all also know that Sharron Angle's replacing Harry Reid was inevitable and a sign that people were just so disenchanted with those damn dirty Communist Democrats.

Oh, swear not by the inconstant moon...

[montecristo.livejournal.com]

Officials may believe as they wish, but they swear an oath to the constitution--not their religion. If, as a legal scholar, Weprin couldn't find a reason to vote against gay marriage, then he is to vote for it and that's exactly what he did.

So many presumptions in such a small package... If you think politicians take seriously that oath then I wonder where you're getting what you're smoking.

As for the gay marriage vote, as an anarchist I believe the State, certainly the federal government, should be kept out of social arrangements between consenting individuals. That said, the concept of marriage has a traditional meaning which is written into years and years of legal jurisprudence and legislation. A disingenuous attempt to circumvent "the consensus" such as it is, by sneaking in through a legislative back door gives any legal scholar all the Constitutional cover he needs to vote against it. Almost certainly the politician voted according to his personal beliefs and world view.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's "This woman offers us a dowry and a lot of wealth, that one offers us a dowry and minimal wealth, we'll take the first one!". It was definitely not "God made man to marry one woman."