Game changer.
That's what Tuesday's primary day was. Did it change the economy or create jobs? Nope, not a single one, though Specter lost his (reflecting Joe Sestak's powerful campaign ad):
Did it change the animosity most Americans feel for Washington? Nope. How about the idea that Dems would lose seats in November? Nah, they are going to. Midterms are like that.
So, what was the big change? The media narrative was forced to deal with reality, and that's always a game changer. Just check out today's abbreviated pundit round-up... I'll put up some fresh coffee for you, and wait for you to get back.
Gone is the inevitable sense that the House is lost — it's still up for grabs, but then again it was on Monday, too. The difference is the tone.
Before the Dem victory in PA-12:
link
FINEMAN: If you vote against the New Deal in that district...
MATTHEWS: Right.
FINEMAN: ... it`s lights out for the Democrats this year.
MATTHEWS: OK, I`m with you. Gregory...
FINEMAN: Lights out!
MATTHEWS: David, do they see it that way in the White House? If they lose the 13th, Jack Murtha`s district, it`s like losing, to me, Massachusetts with Scott Brown [...]
FINEMAN: If the Dems lose that district, they`re going to lose the House.
Fredericksburg.com:
The [Democratic] party is expected to suffer potentially massive losses, thanks in part to anti-incumbent sentiment perhaps best embodied by the tea party movement.
"If we’re going to lose anyway in 2010 – and I’m not sure we’re going to lose as badly as everyone says – but if we’re going to lose anyway, let’s lose going down fighting for things we believe in," said Rendell, who has emerged as perhaps the tea party’s highest profile critic.
TPM:
The national GOP is already spinning tomorrow's Democratic primaries as a defeat for President Obama -- that even if Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) win against their intra-party challengers, the fact that there have been close races at all show that Obama is in political trouble.
After the Dem victory in PA-12:
The Fix
"Democrats faced a horrible political environment in the 12th district but fielded a better campaign with a sharper message and were able to hang on," said political analyst Charlie Cook. "It gives Democrats justification for their argument that if they field better campaigns, they can overcome a hostile, challenging political environment."
Dave Wasserman (Cook Political Report):
#PA12 turnout: 81,000 Ds to 45,000 Rs. Still sizeable Dem crossover vote for Burns, but huge GOP surge just a myth
Tom Davis (ex-VA Rep.):
If you can’t win a seat that is trending Republican in a year like this, then where is the wave?" asked Mr. Davis, who said Republicans will need to examine what went wrong. "It would be a huge upset not to win this seat."
David Frum:
Not a good night for Republicans.
It’s hard to say which is worse: Republican Tim Burns’ loss to the Democrat in the special election in Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District or Rand Paul’s win in the Kentucky Senate Republican primary.
Marc Ambinder:
To date, TP movement just isn't doing what a political movement needs to do. They are not emulating the liberal Netroots organizing model of 2004 and 2006. GOPers aren't registering too many new voters. The movement is decentralized, and that hinders the type of coordination one needs to harness energies for political action.
It is not storming the gates, as Jim VandeHei claims. It has not defeated the establishment en masse. Rand Paul is Ron's son. That cannot -- CANNOT -- be underestimated as a motive force in propelling his candidacy forward. He was Rand Paul, son of Ron well before he was a Tea Party avatar. He had the Paul revolution money backing up his campaign.
It was by no means the decisive factor in throwing Robert Bennett out of his Utah Senate seat, although it became a convenient alternative self-identification for Republicans. What killed Martha Coakley in Massachusetts? Not just the Tea Party movement. Her own feckless campaign and total lack of enthusiasm by the majority party's faithful adherents. The Tea Party is certainly vocal, and it is capable of attracting attention, but so far as I can tell, it is not driving public opinion.
Politico:
All the evidence pointing to monster Republican House gains this fall—the Scott Brown upset win in Massachusetts, the scary polling numbers in once-safely Democratic districts, the ever-rising number of Democratic seats thought to be in jeopardy—was contradicted Tuesday.
Chris Weigant/Huffington Post:
The most-oft repeated conventional wisdom before last night is likely to seldom be heard again: "Republicans are about to sweep the midterms, and will definitely pick up control of the House." Well, um, no. Of course, they may indeed do so, but the aura of inevitability surrounding Republicans was badly tarnished by the only race last night where a Republican faced a Democrat -- a special House election in John Murtha's district (PA-12).
WaPo:
Critz bested Tim Burns, a businessman and "tea party"-affiliated Republican who pitched himself as a "Washington outsider" whose election would strike a blow to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). That message apparently rang hollow with voters who felt it ignored the work government has done for them.
Now, if we're charitable, we'll concede that the best pundits like Cook and Davis (and they are good) will change their analysis based on the available data. And by interviewing the best pundits, and reading the best blogs, many of the political reporters will get the picture.
People are talking about a wave election, maybe even a tsunami. But if you want to find a more apt disaster for comparison, maybe a deepwater oil spill fits the bill. Whatever you see on the surface is nothing compared to what's going on underneath. And what's underneath is complicated, unclear, unlike anything in memory and liable to manifest itself in unexpected ways.
"I’m still trying to figure out what happened," said Janine Parry, a political scientist at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, after the biggest night so far of the midterm election season. "It was really surprising."
This isn't 1994, and frustration with Washington and the Senate over the economy and steps to handle it isn't rejection of Obama's policies or a desire to send Nancy Pelosi a message. That's tea party babble. As unpopular as Congressional Democrats are, Republicans are even more unpopular and Americans aren't thrilled with the idea of having them back in power. They want jobs, a growing economy, and a sense that their elected officials are trying to help solve problems. And they don't want to reward politicians whose primary motive is to save their own skin while their constituents are hurting. Arlen Specter was just a tad too blatant about it, but it goes for them all.
What was a media coronation for the Republican party in November is meeting some stiff resistance according to PA-12, the best snap poll to date. The events and results on Tuesday (including evidence of decent Dem turnout) are likely to energize Democrats, which given current levels of apathy, would be a wonderful thing and a welcome change. Better candidates will do that for you, and we got a few on Tuesday in Conway, Halter and Sestak.
So, guess what? The voters aren't going along with the old narrative, and so, inevitably, that narrative will have to change. What to? here's the evolving CW, via EJ Dionne:
If Democrats can hang on to some of these McCain districts, they will not only keep control of the House but might be able to hold Republican gains to 25 seats or fewer. After the enormous buildup of Republican expectations, such a result would be a disappointment. That is why, paradoxically, Washington's conventional wisdom of impending Democratic catastrophe is one of the best things Obama's party has going for it.
So saith the pundits.
