Though it would be easy to dissect this race at a tactical level, allow me to make a bolder statement about the strategic implications of Mike McGavick's loss, and other recent statewide elections. Washington may be joining blue states like Massachusetts where Congressional Republicans are an endangered species, but where state-level positions like Governor and Attorney General are attainable with the right candidate.
Joni Balter today examined the difference in county victories between Slade Gorton's run in 2000 and McGavick's this year. Setting aside Balter's overall analysis, the contrast is alarming.
Dino Rossi and Rob McKenna did well in 2004 because the nature of the positions they were running for allowed them to focus on issues such as balanced budgets, economic development, and law enforcement that can easily transcend party boundaries. In contrast, it is nearly impossible to run a campaign for federal office that ignores the inherent partisanship of Congress and the issues on which that branch of government toils.
Even Gorton's comparative success in 2000 owed much to his tenure in the Senate, which created a record of service to local communities that helped him win blue-collar, Democratic communities on the Olympic Peninsula and in Southwest Washington, while doing well in swing counties like Snohomish, Pierce, Clark, and Spokane, all while racking up huge majorities in much of Eastern Washington. Short of a Republican running for U.S. Senate after serving in another statewide office, how else can a Republican establish good will in necessary battlegrounds on both sides of the Cascades?
In fairness, McGavick was a candidate who didn't excite the base, but who also faced the terrible challenge of having an R next to his name on the ballot in one of the worst possible years. Gorton himself probably nailed it when citing the anti-Republican tide against the Iraq war as ultimately an insurmountable obstacle for McGavick, no matter how the race itself unfolded.
If one wanted to break down the campaign itself, one could point to the bumbled DUI mea culpa, or the failure to run contrast ads weeks earlier in the race and thus define Maria Cantwell, who oddly as an incumbent remained an unknown quantity to many voters until her own campaign kicked in during August. Furthermore, one has to consider in retrospect the near impossibility of running a "civility" campaign against an incumbent - when the only way to force the incumbent out is to convince voters such a move is necessary. A candidate can run a "clean" campaign that aggressively highlights differences between the opposing foes, and that merit one's victory over the other, but the "civility" theme and its related limitations proved nigh impossible. Perhaps it could work in an open race, but such opportunities are rare.
Based on major statewide races in 2000, 2004, and 2006, it seems rather clear what the formula for a non-incumbent Republican victory has to be: run a near perfect campaign, which minimizes R v. D partisanship, but which offers a clear contrast between the two sides (Rossi and McKenna both achieved that contrast in spades). Note I said minimizes partisanship, not minimizes conservatism. Rossi ran as a conservative candidate, and emphasized his positions accordingly on important issues relevant to the Governorship. But he didn't run as a partisan.
Moreover, the Democratic opponent has to make a mistake. In Gregoire's case she ran a tepid race, which had a major issue - her stem cell research initiative - unravel in part on the campaign trail, thus acting as drag on momentum. In Senn's case, her controversial record as Insurance Commissioner made her highly vulnerable to successful attacks from a well-qualified opponent. She failed to respond effectively to that.
In 2006, Cantwell, much like Bob Casey, Jr. in Pennsylvania, ran a safe campaign, keeping a low profile in public appearances, and avoiding mistakes at all costs. At the same time, the campaign pumped the airwaves full of a combination of ads chipping away at McGavick, while concurrently elevating her own positives. She was unexciting, but she didn't screw up. In 2004 that might have made her vulnerable. In 2006, that made her nearly impossible to beat.
More can be said of individual events in this year's race between McGavick and Cantwell, but it seems at least worth considering that this increasingly blue state (or at least increasingly Republican-adverse state), poses a real challenge for statewide Republican candidates, especially those seeking the Senate. The basic formula for victory seems relatively clear, yet also increasingly challenging to achieve. That reality should be acknowledged, even before the traditional debate between those who want more conservative candidates, versus those who recognize this blue state requires consideration of electability as well. That ongoing argument doesn't matter if the broader lesson of Washington's evolving political reality is lost.
It would be interesting to compare how McGavick did in the 8th District compared to Reichert. I think that could be telling.
McGavick was never a very appealling candidate beyond the Slade Gorton loyalist wing of the state GOP. He was late to run on the issues and tried to run on who he presented himself as, and his effort to market himself was not convincing.
Any analysis must include the fact that McGavick ran more conservative than most of the voters of the state. He attacked people who are pro-choice as "extreme." He never developed any credible environmental credentials. He huddled up with the most radical elements of the gun lobby. He reeked of big oil and courted it up in Alaska. He sided with the "dividers" by highlighting his support for a constitutional amendment to ban any civil rights for gay people that other people have - a position viewed as extreme by many on the right and left.
McGavick just didn't seem reasonable to most people. And his final numbers may be worse than Ellen Craswell's. He ran as an anachronism because he could never shake the idea that he was just son of Slade.
Unless the state GOP decides that it wants to be an urban party in an increasingly urban state - forget about it. Yes, there was a wave. It didn't hit the 8th. It was felt in the 8th. But the wave didn't decide the 8th. I doubt Mcgavick would have had a chance if there weren't a blue wave - just because of the way he ran.
Posted by: thor on November 9, 2006 08:10 PMApparently, the liberal/progressive/socialist/communist among the Democrat party are already attempting to eat the centrist Dems.....
http://blog.usefulwork.com/cgi-bin/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=7447
Let's hope they do themselves "in" before they do "in" our country.
Posted by: Deborah on November 9, 2006 08:31 PMI think your right to a point. yeas you have to sand for something, but not just anything. Standing for banning abortion, ending food stamps, or denying global warming will NOT get you elected.
Posted by: Giffy on November 9, 2006 08:42 PMDon't you mean they will NOT get your vote?
Posted by: Michelle on November 9, 2006 08:57 PM"Standing for something" by itself, won't get you elected to anything anymore than being tall, strong and physically coordiated makes you a basketball player. That is a pipe dream of those completely inexperienced with Politics. What I'm talking about is the most fundamental asset in politics, not the only one. And if the Republican Party is to have any hope of becoming a winning Party it must either, once again, regain the leadership of the liberal slide into socialism and debauchery that we had under Evans/Gorton/Pritchard/Munro in the '50s and '60s or take the opposite tack and oppose the destruction of America by a return to the Judeo-Christian principles that founded America and led to the greatest freedom and prosperity in Modern World History (the last 2500 years or so), that INVENTED free enterprise economics and stable, happy, productive families, led the world in ending Slavery, crushed Soviet Communism and gave us the prosperity that my generation has squandered on self-serving materialism. We have two roads to choose from as a Party.
Choose Life.
Posted by: Doug Parris on November 9, 2006 09:02 PMI held my nose and voted for a Repub, who may as well been a Dem.
However, the best news is, if anyone remembers, Bill Clinton came in on a growing Economy and every Dem forgets that. We are at, what is a high point of a very long growing cycle and even without the Dems help, there are slow times a-coming.
It is best the Dems control the Hill at this time, as they can no longer blame Bush or the Repubs for what is coming. Let them tear, let them give away all they want, they cannot blame anyone else, if the economy slides as it will when they do what they have said they would do.
Within two years, the odds are, those who we were killing over there, will be over here to do the same in our cities. Whey you do it for God, God will let you do it anywhere and where better, than in the belly of the Great Satin.
It will only take a couple of buses or market places and the same people who pooped their pants over .00001 percent of our population being killed "over there" to keep them from coming over here, will really be pooping when those people are here doing what they would have done "over there."
And, if they do, as it is now logical for them to do so, 2008 may make the past four, plus years, the best of the good old days, that will never be close to the good old days, again.
Just remember, they have been killing as many of their own less than a month, just to get what has been done, done. And to them, it has lead to their greatest victory yet, as now the Great Satin will soon be running, instead of staying.
If anyone thinks, those who are willing to kill "over there" to defeat the Great Satin will now, stay over there. Now,they have again been proven correct in their belief that the US has no internal strength and just a little blood is all it will take, perhaps even less than .00003 percent here and they will soon own their own cities and towns as the Dems poop and PC.
Just remember when they arrive, they have come at the specific invitation of many of you. So, do not blame them for the blood of non-combat Americans pouring into the gutters of the streets of our cities, that is on your hands, as well as theirs.
We who did not want that, will remember, but we are also certain that no blame will be upon you, it will be twisted somehow to be the fault of the Repubs. As a country, we have known for years, it all depends on the meaning of "is."
You got it, keep it afloat and going just as well and let's hope, "they" are as dumb as you apparently think "they" are.
Welcome to it, now lets see you keep it going and them out? Betcha can't.
It will be interesting watching Hillary in a couple of years, explaining to the real dummies, why she and they cannot be blamed for everthing sliding into a waste basket their own Party is setting up to create right now.
Posted by: oneofKerrysdummies on November 9, 2006 09:13 PMI held my nose and voted for a Repub, who may as well been a Dem.
However, the best news is, if anyone remembers, Bill Clinton came in on a growing Economy and every Dem forgets that. We are at, what is a high point of a very long growing cycle and even without the Dems help, there are slow times a-coming.
It is best the Dems control the Hill at this time, as they can no longer blame Bush or the Repubs for what is coming. Let them tear, let them give away all they want, they cannot blame anyone else, if the economy slides as it will when they do what they have said they would do.
Within two years, the odds are, those who we were killing over there, will be over here to do the same in our cities. Whey you do it for God, God will let you do it anywhere and where better, than in the belly of the Great Satin.
It will only take a couple of buses or market places and the same people who pooped their pants over .00001 percent of our population being killed "over there" to keep them from coming over here, will really be pooping when those people are here doing what they would have done "over there."
And, if they do, as it is now logical for them to do so, 2008 may make the past four, plus years, the best of the good old days, that will never be close to the good old days, again.
Just remember, they have been killing as many of their own less than a month, just to get what has been done, done. And to them, it has lead to their greatest victory yet, as now the Great Satin will soon be running, instead of staying.
If anyone thinks, those who are willing to kill "over there" to defeat the Great Satin will now, stay over there. Now,they have again been proven correct in their belief that the US has no internal strength and just a little blood is all it will take, perhaps even less than .00003 percent here and they will soon own their own cities and towns as the Dems poop and PC.
Just remember when they arrive, they have come at the specific invitation of many of you. So, do not blame them for the blood of non-combat Americans pouring into the gutters of the streets of our cities, that is on your hands, as well as theirs.
We who did not want that, will remember, but we are also certain that no blame will be upon you, it will be twisted somehow to be the fault of the Repubs. As a country, we have known for years, it all depends on the meaning of "is."
You got it, keep it afloat and going just as well and let's hope, "they" are as dumb as you apparently think "they" are.
Welcome to it, now lets see you keep it going and them out? Betcha can't.
It will be interesting watching Hillary in a couple of years, explaining to the real dummies, why she and they cannot be blamed for everthing sliding into a waste basket their own Party is setting up to create right now.
Posted by: oneofKerrysdummies on November 9, 2006 09:14 PMI held my nose and voted for a Repub, who may as well been a Dem.
However, the best news is, if anyone remembers, Bill Clinton came in on a growing Economy and every Dem forgets that. We are at, what is a high point of a very long growing cycle and even without the Dems help, there are slow times a-coming.
It is best the Dems control the Hill at this time, as they can no longer blame Bush or the Repubs for what is coming. Let them tear, let them give away all they want, they cannot blame anyone else, if the economy slides as it will when they do what they have said they would do.
Within two years, the odds are, those who we were killing over there, will be over here to do the same in our cities. Whey you do it for God, God will let you do it anywhere and where better, than in the belly of the Great Satin.
It will only take a couple of buses or market places and the same people who pooped their pants over .00001 percent of our population being killed "over there" to keep them from coming over here, will really be pooping when those people are here doing what they would have done "over there."
And, if they do, as it is now logical for them to do so, 2008 may make the past four, plus years, the best of the good old days, that will never be close to the good old days, again.
Just remember, they have been killing as many of their own less than a month, just to get what has been done, done. And to them, it has lead to their greatest victory yet, as now the Great Satin will soon be running, instead of staying.
If anyone thinks, those who are willing to kill "over there" to defeat the Great Satin will now, stay over there. Now,they have again been proven correct in their belief that the US has no internal strength and just a little blood is all it will take, perhaps even less than .00003 percent here and they will soon own their own cities and towns as the Dems poop and PC.
Just remember when they arrive, they have come at the specific invitation of many of you. So, do not blame them for the blood of non-combat Americans pouring into the gutters of the streets of our cities, that is on your hands, as well as theirs.
We who did not want that, will remember, but we are also certain that no blame will be upon you, it will be twisted somehow to be the fault of the Repubs. As a country, we have known for years, it all depends on the meaning of "is."
You got it, keep it afloat and going just as well and let's hope, "they" are as dumb as you apparently think "they" are.
Welcome to it, now lets see you keep it going and them out? Betcha can't.
It will be interesting watching Hillary in a couple of years, explaining to the real dummies, why she and they cannot be blamed for everthing sliding into a waste basket their own Party is setting up to create right now.
Posted by: akerrydummy on November 9, 2006 09:15 PMAs for McGavick, demographically this state is hopelessly blue. A federal level race with King County's Moonbat population is pretty hard obstacle to overcome.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 9, 2006 09:42 PMAnd, I don't see that happening any time real soon.
Posted by: Hinton on November 9, 2006 09:47 PMI could go on- but next time it will be a different horse race... Mike did a good job and I hope we see him again...
Posted by: Andy on November 9, 2006 10:02 PMAnd all that "savy" and being well connected got her a rating of 99th out of a 100. A dead orca carcase on the beach of the Sound could do better than that. Admit it, you voted for the person with the D next to their name and nothing more.
Posted by: Savy on November 9, 2006 10:26 PMNo matter what happens now, the democrats will blame the GOP for what they "inherited." EVERYTHING will be the GOP's and Bush's faultDamn those Dems - they're behaving just like Repugnicans! How dare they!
like fencing, great excercise & training. but never a fatal thrust. at some point, battles require live rounds. R's have not learned to 'click off the safety.'
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on November 9, 2006 10:58 PMLarry Sabato & Co. @ the U. of Virginia Center for Politics must have come as close as anybody to hitting the triple-bullseye. A comparison of their last pre-election ''Crystall Ball Predictions'' to Nov. 9 election results:
For Governor, US House, US Senate, respectively:
Predictions...: +7 Dems +29 Dems +6 Dems
9 Nov. results: +6 Dems +29 Dems +6 Dems
Astounding.......
Posted by: Methow Ken on November 9, 2006 11:03 PMThe default vote in Washington is democratic. Given a straight up choice with no other info Washington will go democratic by a pretty sizable margin. However on a few select issues, taxes, national security, and law/justice, republicans can make inroads. Given a weak dem and a solid campaign, an R could eak it out. The Rossi campaign came awfully close and it was by campaigning as a social moderate/liberal and an economic conservative. It many states Rossi(the campaign version) would be a down right liberal.
When it comes down to it Washington will not vote for someone who exposes ant-abortion or "a return to the Judeo-Christian principles". Not going to happen in a state with almost 30% non-religious. If you want that kind of politics go to Alabama.
And Michelle, no I mean Washington. Perhaps you remember Ellen Craswell.
Welcome to the new Massachusetts.
I better start doorbelling for Dino Rossi soon.
Posted by: Andrew Roberts on November 10, 2006 12:12 AMWe're not losing elections because we're a Democrat State. We're a Democrat State because we're losing elections. We have not fought the Democrats on philosophical ground for more than 30 years. They've taken over the issues by default. There are no champions of the truth. We have compromised ourselves into loser status. Pro-lifers come on this (SoundPolitics) pro-aborion choice website and consistently win the debate on human life because it is right. The same holds true wherever there is an open debate. Pro-life is a growing position. Why is that? Because there is a debate and the Pro-life side usually wins it. Washington State is pro-abortion because the Republican Party won't debate. And they want to give in on illegal immigration. And they want to give in on property rights. And they already gave in on socialist/libertine education. This election "strategy" lays the foundation for permanent defeat.
Reagan was "too extreme" to win in exactly the same way you say conservatives are in this State. Democrats controlled everything nationally as they do in Washington today. But he DEBATED THE FRIGGING ISSUES and won. All the conservative issues are fading in this State because our leaders are in philosophical retreat. They have sewn the seeds of your kind of flawed analysis and are now reaping the inevitable harvest.
The State Party has been following your advice for a quarter of a century and the results are worse and worse and worse. Wake up. There are ways of CHANGING PEOPLE'S MINDS.
And we intend to do it.
Put forward a clear conservative and not merely someone who props himself up to be a "no" man, and you'll see better numbers in 2008. Keep pushing the same schlock, and you'll be on the outside looking in.
You won't do any better if you don't learn from your mistakes.
Posted by: ERNurse on November 10, 2006 02:25 AMRossi had the benefit of knowing people throughout the State through his years in Olympia. McGavick knew the State as an employee of Gorton. He was an unknown and then he ran a 'toocivil' campaign. Good for Slade and his name recognition, but bad for a newcomer.
McGavick was unable to chip the teflon off Cantwell. She kept hammering her 'trite' accomplishments and McGavick even allowed her to trivialize his accomplishments at Safeco. Horrible campaign, great candidate (I think).
Didn't Traitor John even get more votes the last time? I still think Dale Foreman should have been the candidate anytime in the last 12 years.
Posted by: swatter on November 10, 2006 06:34 AM
Face it. People vote on their perceptions, not on their issues. Ask any Dem about GWB and they will spout off some nonsense they read or heard from somewhere whether it's true or not. But they got that message from Dem's saying it often enough.
Lesson learned.
If we want to make this state Red, pick an issue and start running with it night and day and tell how the Dem's are screwing the people with it. If they say it's a lie, repeat it louder and more often and with wilder statistics.
There's the old saying that the more ridiculous the story, the more likely people are willing to believe it. It's the old urban legend game and we had better figure it out soon or we are destined to repeat this kind of election again.
Posted by: Ken on November 10, 2006 07:47 AMWhen activists say "That is barbaric!" the dems cry foul and say the evangelicals are trying to control womens bodies.
It is a SICK party that wraps itself around it's rights to kill babies and save owls.
Posted by: Julie on November 10, 2006 09:37 AMMSM played a prominent and successful role as the media arm of the Democratic party.
Posted by: swatter on November 10, 2006 09:57 AMCantwell is "well-connected" all right...I guess that is what you could call "intercourse with a Federal Lobbyist!!!"
Posted by: aaaargh on November 10, 2006 10:52 AMNow, after the 2008 elections, it may be a different story. The Dems have a very key element called MOMENTUM. The momentum as currently at such a velocity it would be incredibly difficult to STOP IT and the TURN IT AROUND in just 2 years. Look for the Dems to control HOUSE, SENATE and PRESIDENCY in 2008.....and a huge shift in Congress again in 2010. It's almost inevitable.....especially when the growing number of retiring baby-boomers get sick & tired of paying for the brainfart, convoluted ideas of the FRINGE LUNATIC LEFT. Even former Socialist Countries in Europe like Denmark eventually did a 180 away from Socialism BECAUSE IT DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Unfortunately, you cannot change folks way of thinking by talking to them...they must SEE IT and FEEL IT!! Comprende??
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on November 10, 2006 11:01 AMBut, Mr. Cynical, you are saying McGavick had no control over his destiny. I think he ran a bad campaign.
Posted by: swatter on November 10, 2006 11:15 AMWasn't he part of the incompetent legal team for Dino Rossi that fumbled the 2004 Governor's contest that led Judge Bridges to no other conclusion but to declare the election over and add 5 votes to Gregoire's total - from the affadavits that the Democrat team provided ? I rest my case, McGavick was a better candidate than Foreman would have been. It was just the wrong election..
Posted by: KS on November 10, 2006 11:48 AMWrong Ken, the arrogant belief by the Republicans that voters are stupid is the reason why the Democrats won.
The fact that no WMD were found was not a perception. The fact that the violence in Iraq is getting worse is not a perception. The fact that our country does not have an exit strategy is not a perception.
Furhermore, the fact that there is corruption in Congress is not a perception and the fact that the Republican leadership did nothing about corruption is not a perception.
Lou Dobbs recent editorial is right. READ IT!.
Oh by the way, I am not a Democratic troll. I held my nose and voted for McGavick I also voted for Reichert.
Until the Republican Party can get away from perception that they are the party of the rich they will have a difficult time winning elections. Supporting issues such as repealing the estate tax will not get rid of this perception.
The Republican Party lied to
registered Republicans by stating this estate tax will take away your farm so they would vote for it. There is an exception for farms in the tax. Furthermore, it only affected a small percentage of people. Why support a tax repeal that only benefits a few!! The same few who supported the campaign against the repeal of the gas tax. Their companies would benefit from the multimillion dollar contracts received from the state and a the expense of a gas tax is a drop in the bucket for them.
National election attorneys ran with the Rossi thing. I am not sure how much the locals had to do with it. Rossi was the one that wanted a quick trial, so they didn't take the time to prepare a good case. After all, Gregoire was ahead at the last count so the burden was on the Rossi camp.
Obviously, McGavick is a better candidate than Dale because McGavick was a runner while Foreman didn't get past or even to the primary.
The west siders pushed Carlson at the last minute. Fine candidate he was; on Tuesday evening he said he had made up his mind, but on Wednesday he had a press conference. Blew my mind.
As for McGavick, haven't you read above comments?
Posted by: swatter on November 10, 2006 12:50 PMMcGavick had some shortcomings, but overall he was a decent candidate - this was a bad year for Republicans. If the 2004 Gov. election would have been held this year, I know that Dino would not have done as well. All we can do is hope that the mood is more favorable for R's in 2008 when we get to vote for the Governor's office again.
Posted by: KS on November 10, 2006 01:11 PM