No Winner Yet in NY-20

After a long, bitterly fought, expensive special election campaign to replace Kirsten Gillibrand in New York's 20th congressional district--we still have no winner.

Democrat Scott Murphy leads Republican Jim Tedisco by 65 votes, 77,344 to 77,279, with 100% of precincts reporting. That lead is merely symbolic at this point, because between 6,000 and 10,000 absentee and military ballots have yet to be counted, and probably won't be counted until at least April 13.

Neither side won or lost big here, but in this case a tie goes to the Democrats. But overall, maintaining the status quo is not good news for the Republicans, especially in a conservative upstate district in NY-20. They invested a lot of money into this race, and they really should have won back a district that should rightfully be theirs.

So neither side really gets to spin this their way--Republicans can't say that this is a sign of the people's rejections of Obama's policies, and Democrats can't say this is validation of their leadership.

This one isn't over and won't be for at least two weeks, but expect updates and analysis of the results of this race to be few and far between until then.

Update: Due to the carelessness of some election officials and some recounting, Scott Murphy's lead has shrunk to 13 votes. The Scorecard reports: "Three counties--Essex, Greene and Delaware--haven't re-canvassed the vote yet, and won't do so until later in the week." That could alter the vote total even more.

A Recap of NY-20

Tuesday's special election in New York's 20th congressional district--for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's (D) old House seat--is all the buzz right now, so I thought I'd spend today recapping everyone on what the outlook is for Team Red and Team Blue going into tomorrow.

The race features Democrat Scott Murphy--a businessman and venture capitalist (i.e., rich guy)--squaring off against Republican Jim Tedisco--the state Assembly Minority Leader.

NY-20 is pretty evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, with the GOP having the slight edge in voter registration. The district has typically leaned slightly to the right, but Barack Obama carried the district 51% to 48% in 2008 and Gillibrand won her reelection bid by an impressive margin--showing that there are a significant number of cross-over Republicans.

But as is the case with all special elections, ground game and getting the base out to vote will be the deciding factors--factors which were originally thought would favor Tedisco.

Last month, Tedisco led by 12% in a Siena poll and was showing no signs of vulnerability. But then as the campaign went on, that all started to change. His biggest mistake was refusing to take a side regarding President Obama's stimulus package--which made him look like he had no backbone and was not willing to make tough decisions. He later came out against it.

Two weeks passed and he significantly dropped in another Siena poll, which showed that he now only led Murphy by 4%. Since then it's been nothing but good press for Murphy and bad press for Tedisco. Obama cut a radio ad for Murphy--getting him some positive media coverage in the district--while the Libertarian candidate was forced out of the race and endorsed Murphy, which was a slap in the face to Tedisco.

The most recent poll from Siena shows Murphy with a 4% lead over Tedisco, just outside the margin of error. Internal polls from both sides yielded similar results and show the race to be a complete toss-up.

So Tedisco's relatively strong advantage at the outset of this campaign has essentially evaporated leading up to election day, so much so that he revamped his entire campaign two weeks ago. And from the recent polling, it appears that undecided voters are breaking for Murphy.

But be wary with all of this poll analysis because it is notoriously difficult to poll accurately for special elections, mainly because of the unpredictable turnout.

Either way this thing turns out--and it really could go either way--the victorious party is going to spin the hell out of it. If Tedisco wins, the GOP will tout it as a rejection of Obama's policies, and how a district represented by a Democrat flipped to a Republican because the people no longer support him and his "big spending." If Murphy wins, the Democrats will trumpet it as support for Obama's presidency thus far.

But in reality, the Republican have much more to lose than the Democrats from this election.

The Republicans were expected to win this race, and it would be a terrible sign for a party who is already in the midst of a civil war and an identity crisis to suffer this big of a moral (and financial) defeat. Republicans would call for RNC chairman Michael Steele's head, and start pointing fingers at each other--further igniting the civil war within the party. Conservatives would blame Tedisco for being too moderate, and the bickering and scapegoating would self-perpetuate.

If Murphy loses, the Democrats lose a House seat--which they can afford to lose with their large majority--and they waste some money and let the Republican base cheer for a day. But since their party is currently stable and united around Obama, they won't go into panic mode, but will just use this race as a lesson for the 2010 midterms.

Electile Dysfunction Can Now Project...

...that Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley will go on to win the Democratic primary in the special election for Illinois' 5th Congressional District. I thought it would be state Rep. Sara Feigenholtz. Oh well.

Here are the numbers with 82% of the precincts reporting:

Quigley--23%
Fritchey--18%
Feigenholtz--16%
O'Connor--13%
Forys--10%

And it looks like Quigley will face off against Republican Rosanna Pulido in the special general election on April 7. Quigley will be heavily favored to win.

Here are the results from the Republican primary:

Pulido--25%
Hanson--20%
Anderson--20%
Bedell--16%

Matt Reichel will be the Green Party's nominee. Click here for minute-to-minute precinct results.

UPDATE (10:15): WBBM Radio reports that Fritchey and Feigenholtz have called Quigley to concede.

UPDATE (11:19): The AP has called the race for Quigley.

IL-05 Primary is Today

I'm going to take a brief hiatus from my usual coverage of the 2010 Senate races for the special primary election taking placing today for the House seat vacated by now-Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in Illinois' 5th congressional district (I will do the same for the special elections in NY-20 and CA-32).

IL-05 is heavily Democratic, and whoever comes out as the Democratic nominee will likely win in the general election, which is taking place on April 7.

There are twelve Democrats vying for their party's nomination (the Chicago Tribune has a good rundown on all of them), while there are nearly two-dozen candidates running overall--combined from the Democratic, Republican, and Green Parties.

Polls close at 8 PM Eastern Time, and I'll report back here with the results later tonight.

For the record, my money is on state Rep. Sara Feigenholtz for the Democratic nomination (whom I'm sure you've all heard of...right?).

She has the backing of EMILY's List, the SEIU, and Rahm Emanuel's front lawn; she's the only major female candidate, which should help her out with women voters; she's the only Jewish candidate, which should help because there are a lot of Jews in the district; she's very liberal, which suits the district well; and she probably has the highest name recognition of all the candidates, as she has represented the area for a while.

But what do I know? Anything can happen when you have eleven candidates and low turnout.

Democrat Picks Up Miss. House Seat

In Mississippi's 1st district, Democrat Travis Childers (see left) picked up a House seat in a special election Tuesday.

MS-01 is a highly conservative district, and it was the third big win for the Democrats in highly conservative districts in the last three months in special House elections.

The seat opened up because the representative of that district, Republican Roger Wicker, was called upon by Mississippi's governor to fill Sen. Trent Lott's position in the Senate.

Childers, a court official in Prentiss county, defeated Republican Greg Davis, the mayor of Southaven (a suburb of Memphis), by a margin of 54% to 46%. Childers put together a coalition of blacks, who were angered by the racial tone of the primary, and conservative "yellow dog" Democrats, who have not voted for a Democrat since Jimmy Carter.

This is a crushing blow to the NRCC, who poured over $1 million into this race, and a combined $3 million in their past three unsuccessful special election races. If the Republicans keep losing these races in their so-called "strongholds", what will happen to the dozen or so open seats in districts with ratings of R+5 or less?

This loss also means that tying these Democrats to Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi doesn't really work, which is a bad sign for the Fall. It didn't work with Don Cazayoux of LA-06, and it didn't work with Childers in MS-01. Even the classic Republican strategy of calling people liberal doesn't work anymore. I guess after Bush, liberal isn't such a dirty word anymore.

The NRCC and the Republican party has to gravitate away from Bush and towards the center if they want to have a fighting chance in November, or we could have a massacre on our hands.

Republican Seat in Jeopardy in Miss.

There is a contest Tuesday that is far more important than the (meaningless) West Virginia primary today. It is the second round of voting in Mississippi's first congressional district.

On April 22nd, Travis Childers (D) defeated Greg Davis (R) in the first round of voting in this highly conservative district. In that round, Childers received 49.6% of the vote, while Davis received 46.3% of the vote. But neither candidate got the required 50% so there is a runoff tonight with no minor candidates.

So why is this important? Well, as I mentioned in a previous entry, the Republicans have been losing almost every special election thus far, including several in traditionally conservative strongholds. Another loss in a conservative deep south stronghold could prove to be a huge psychological loss for the party, who is already expected to lose many seats in Congress.

This deeply worries the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), so they have poured millions of dollars into the state. Even so, their spending has been dwarfed by their Democratic counterpart who has been whooping them in fundraising.

This race is so important that the NRCC has had President George W. Bush and presumptive Republican nominee John McCain send out an automated message to voters of that district. Vice President Dick Cheney and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour stumped for Davis in recent weeks.

The GOP has once again tried to associate their opponent with Barack Obama, and some think that they are invoking the issue of race, which generally plays in the south. In a way, this is a litmus test to see what will work in November, both in the congressional and presidential elections.

Republicans are desperate for a win after being dominated by the Democrats so far in the special elections. If the Democrats pick up yet another conservative seat, it is a very bad sign for the Republicans.

Dems Dominating Special Elections

With all this talk of divisiveness and "grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory" within the Democratic party, they have at least one thing going their way.

In almost each special congressional election--where the current representative either stepped down or retired--the Democratic candidates have consistently won in heavily Republican districts.

For instance, when former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R) stepped down in Illinois' 14th district (IL-14)--which has a PVI (Partisan Voting Index) rating of R+5--the Republicans thought that they would get it back easily.

But Democratic candidate Bill Foster--with the endorsement and active support of Barack Obama--upset Jim Oberweis (R) by a margin of 6 percentage points in March. Both party's national committees poured millions into this race, but Foster took Hastert's place in the House.

Also, on April 22nd, Travis Childers (D) defeated Greg Davis (R) in MS-01, a district with a PVI of R+10. Childers received just under 50% while Davis received 46%. Because neither candidate reached 50%, there will be a runoff election on May 13th, but it looks like the Democrats have it wrapped up.

And yesterday, in LA-06, Don Cazayoux (D) got 49% of the vote to Woody Jenkins' (R) 46%. This district has a PVI of R+7, where President Bush received 59% of the vote here in 2004. And up until yesterday, this district had been held by Republicans for 33 years.

The Republicans referred to him as Don Cazayoux as Don "Tax You" and called him a liberal--which is an insult and voting deterrent in the south.

They tried to tie him to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi, and tried everything in their playbook--one that will be similar to the one the Republicans will be using on Obama or Clinton in November--but to no avail.

Both the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) advertised heavily here, but the end result was the same: a Democrat won in a heavily Republican district.

See a pattern?

Although the presidential race is most likely going to be very close, the Democrats are expected to make major gains in the Congressional election. There are many seats that the Republicans are in danger of losing, but only a few where the Democratic incumbent is in danger.

On top of that, the DCCC has outraised the NRCC $88 million to $65 million so far in 2008. They have raised and spent more money that the Republicans so far, and it will be the same in November.

This shows a general trend of more enthusiasm, energy, and fundraising cash on the Democratic side, which will make a major impact on the congressional and presidential races this fall.