Republicans have held the seat in NY-23 since 1871. Perhaps the GOP ought to re-think this "purge the moderates" movement. Or not. Sure, the teabaggers have proven that they can eliminate a moderate in inner-Party combat. But if they then can't win a district as safe as NY-23, what does it really mean?

While the governor races in NJ and VA are disappointing, they're not really all that surprising. Corzine is less popular than Dubya was, and Republicans are no strangers to the governor's mansion in NJ. VA likewise elects Republicans regularly.

But an insignificant little district in NY that hasn't elected a Democrat in more than ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY years has just told arch-conservatives (including Sarah Palin and pretty much the entire conservative noise machine) that they'd rather be represented by a stinkin' pinko librul than a straight-shootin' Murican teabagger.

I'd say that's a pretty sweet silver lining for the libruls.

Hi Lono. Actually I read one report which said 1852. No matter. I am surprised and amazed that the Democratic candidate actually won in this Republican stronghold. See my earlier post. Even though I cautioned against considering it a bellweather, does it mean something?

People are frustrated with the Republicans nationally ,being perceived as pure obstructionists, that is, saying no to everything and not offering a whit of constructive help. Many people are smart, and realize that the Republican strategy is to oppose the current Administration, and hope they fail. Those people realize that if Obama fails, the country fails. People are hurting. They look to the government for solutions when conditions are bad. The Republicans are not helping. I think (hope) people are reacting to that.

It would not have been a surprise, or significant if the Conservative insurgent had carried this heavily Republican district. That the Democrat did is significant. I look forward to the speculation in the media over the near term.

Thank you for your post.

THOTH

The district will most likely be eliminated and divided among the other (Democratic) districts that surround it, in the next gerrymandering frenzy.

so, the fact that it will be eliminated doesn't much matter.

What matters is that the arch-conservative movement worked very hard to get an arch-conservative candidate elected in a historically conservative district and failed miserably.

But then, who ever thought a carpetbagger would be able to influence votes in New York (without tossing her own hat into the ring).

Thanks Fritz, I should have known that.

Hi, Iso. HAve you seen a map of the 23rd. It is pretty much the entire northern part of NY from the Thruway north. Little jiggers out of it from a couple strangely set up counties, It's HUGE. And largely unrelated to anything else.

Last night it was also revealed that the poor electorate has to vote for their congressman all over again next year. I'd be ready to charge the gov't gas money for my trip to the polls.

and that's who stole the seat from the Dems that year. I love it.

that's "reverse carpetbagger" to you in re former Sen. Clinton.

I don't know what one calls an Alaskan carpetbagger.

Apparently, the 1852 reference was to the last time a Democrat represented certain parts of the district. The whigs won in 1854. Here is an interesting article which explains some of it including some of the historical changes. <link>

I found the wikipedia article more confusing than enlightening, but a look at the last several election cycles vote results will give you an idea of how strongly Republican this District is.http://en.wikipedia.org/wik­i/New_York%27s_23rd_congressio­nal_district

<link>

Sorry.