Scott Jennings: "Special Election Sends A Message [To Both Parties -- A Sobering One For Democrats]".
Special election sends a message
By Scott Jennings
Jimmy Higdon's victory in Tuesday's Kentucky state Senate special election is a warning signal to Democrats running for office around the country.
Higdon was vastly outspent by Democrat Jodie Haydon and his allies in the horse and gambling industries, who attacked Higdon with a class warfare message about legislative perks. The Democratic ads were run-of-the-mill in a political environment not suited for run-of-the-mill negative ads.
Voters weren't buying it. Instead, the race turned on issues discussed in television ads run on the Republican side tying Haydon (who tried to portray himself as a moderate) to national Democrats and their tax-and-spend policies.
The Republican Party of Kentucky painted Haydon as a politician who was looking to bring “Nancy Pelosi style” government to Frankfort. In other words, rule by one party that wants to raise taxes and encourages more government spending.
A national group, the Republican State Leadership Committee, aired one ad specifically focused on jobs and the economy. The ad talked about the number of unemployed Kentuckians and said they are “out of hope,” a direct shot at President Barack Obama. It then used Haydon's own words against him about the need to find more “revenue” for state government.
This is a key point: Political candidates arguing to voters that the government needs more money aren't going to find many takers in 2010. Voters don't want government to have more money. They want government to cut spending, just like families across the country are doing.
The GOP apparatus correctly read the electorate in this race. Voters are angry, and, in this rural, heavily Democratic district, they are particularly unhappy with President Obama and Speaker Pelosi for the direction of a country that they view has having gotten seriously off on the wrong track.
Democrat candidates across the country should take note of what happened in Kentucky Tuesday night. Democrats actually won a state senate special election a few months ago in a rural Eastern Kentucky district with similar dynamics. What changed since then? Voters in these kinds of districts (rural, but registered Democratic) have lost confidence in Obama and are uneasy with the direction of health care reform in Washington D.C. I can imagine that some Democratic consultant will write a memo entitled “Blue Dogs Beware,” briefing their clients on Tuesday's election result.
The key electoral issues are: jobs and the economy, government spending, and taxes. To the extent voters believe that health care reform will cause higher deficits and higher taxes, that's part of the equation as well. Tuesday night's election was a message to the national Democratic Party to back off the spending, back off the taxes, and back off the rapid expansion of government.
Tuesday's election virtually ensured a continued two-party system in Frankfort with which Governor Steve Beshear will have to contend for the remainder of his term (there is little chance Democrats will take control of the Senate in the 2010 general election). That means a continued uphill battle for Beshear to pass the only thing he promised in his 2007 campaign: expanded gambling. It also means Democrats won't have free reign when redistricting comes up in 2011.
I also suspect Tuesday's election was particularly satisfying for Kentucky Senate President David L. Williams. Whether you agree that Kentucky should have expanded gambling or not, Williams got the last laugh by winning a race in which his candidate was vastly outspent by gambling interests – a race that all but ensures he will remain Senate President for the foreseeable future.
Kentuckian Scott Jennings is senior strategist at Peritus Public Relations, and served as special assistant to President George W. Bush from 2005-2007.
By Scott Jennings
Jimmy Higdon's victory in Tuesday's Kentucky state Senate special election is a warning signal to Democrats running for office around the country.
Higdon was vastly outspent by Democrat Jodie Haydon and his allies in the horse and gambling industries, who attacked Higdon with a class warfare message about legislative perks. The Democratic ads were run-of-the-mill in a political environment not suited for run-of-the-mill negative ads.
Voters weren't buying it. Instead, the race turned on issues discussed in television ads run on the Republican side tying Haydon (who tried to portray himself as a moderate) to national Democrats and their tax-and-spend policies.
The Republican Party of Kentucky painted Haydon as a politician who was looking to bring “Nancy Pelosi style” government to Frankfort. In other words, rule by one party that wants to raise taxes and encourages more government spending.
A national group, the Republican State Leadership Committee, aired one ad specifically focused on jobs and the economy. The ad talked about the number of unemployed Kentuckians and said they are “out of hope,” a direct shot at President Barack Obama. It then used Haydon's own words against him about the need to find more “revenue” for state government.
This is a key point: Political candidates arguing to voters that the government needs more money aren't going to find many takers in 2010. Voters don't want government to have more money. They want government to cut spending, just like families across the country are doing.
The GOP apparatus correctly read the electorate in this race. Voters are angry, and, in this rural, heavily Democratic district, they are particularly unhappy with President Obama and Speaker Pelosi for the direction of a country that they view has having gotten seriously off on the wrong track.
Democrat candidates across the country should take note of what happened in Kentucky Tuesday night. Democrats actually won a state senate special election a few months ago in a rural Eastern Kentucky district with similar dynamics. What changed since then? Voters in these kinds of districts (rural, but registered Democratic) have lost confidence in Obama and are uneasy with the direction of health care reform in Washington D.C. I can imagine that some Democratic consultant will write a memo entitled “Blue Dogs Beware,” briefing their clients on Tuesday's election result.
The key electoral issues are: jobs and the economy, government spending, and taxes. To the extent voters believe that health care reform will cause higher deficits and higher taxes, that's part of the equation as well. Tuesday night's election was a message to the national Democratic Party to back off the spending, back off the taxes, and back off the rapid expansion of government.
Tuesday's election virtually ensured a continued two-party system in Frankfort with which Governor Steve Beshear will have to contend for the remainder of his term (there is little chance Democrats will take control of the Senate in the 2010 general election). That means a continued uphill battle for Beshear to pass the only thing he promised in his 2007 campaign: expanded gambling. It also means Democrats won't have free reign when redistricting comes up in 2011.
I also suspect Tuesday's election was particularly satisfying for Kentucky Senate President David L. Williams. Whether you agree that Kentucky should have expanded gambling or not, Williams got the last laugh by winning a race in which his candidate was vastly outspent by gambling interests – a race that all but ensures he will remain Senate President for the foreseeable future.
Kentuckian Scott Jennings is senior strategist at Peritus Public Relations, and served as special assistant to President George W. Bush from 2005-2007.
Labels: General information
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 9:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home