November 4, 2009 12:57 AM

What Doug Hoffman's Loss Means to Conservatives

By
Marc Ambinder
Topics
2009 Elections
(CBS/ AP)
Conservatives overreached, and Tip O'Neill's dictum reins supreme. That special election in New York's 23rd congressional district turned out not to be worth all of the sound and fury.

The fact is that the district IS special. Since the Civil War cannons fell silent, it's never been occupied by a Democrat. It's one of the largest districts east of the Mississippi and one of the whitest. It is about $8,000 poorer, per person, than the American average.

It's been ruled -- some say, by an Iron Fist -- by the local Republican Party establishment for decades. That establishment has fallen into disrepute along with Republican Party bosses in the state capital of Albany.

The fact is that Dede Scozzafava was well-suited to represent the district. She didn't face a primary; she was chosen by a small group of party leaders. That would have been OK, except that an ambitious, slightly disheveled but avuncular accountant named Doug Hoffman got really really angry. Why did party have to anoint Scozzafava, he wondered. He began looking for ballot position at the same time that New York's Conservative Party came looking for an anti-gay marriage candidate to plant roots in the district.

Across the country, conservatives began to take a look at the race. The Club for Growth released a poll that showed a statistical dead heat. The Washington-based anti-tax pressure group endorsed Hoffman four days later. The next week, they ran an expensive television ad campaign on his behalf.

All told, the Club would be responsible for $1 million of the $3 million Hoffman would ultimately spend. The Club's notice attracted the attention of other economic conservative lights, like Steve Forbes and the former house majority leader Dick Armey. Glenn Beck's radio program and Fox News Channel turned Hoffman into a hero of sorts when the party establishment began to fire back: no less a leader than Newt Gingrich warned conservatives to, in essence, close their mouths and support the party's choice.

Doing otherwise, he implied, was disloyal and would help the Democratic Party maintain its majority. Gingrich implied that Hoffman was a bad fit for the district. That implication was a challenge that conservative activists accepted. Suddenly, Hoffman became the talisman for anger at the GOP establishment in Washington, anger at the big spending ways of Democrats in Congress, anger at the media -- a way to clear through a bundle of different resentments that tend to be shouldered by a party that has lost his way.

(CBS/ AP)
And yet, despite all this attention, Hoffman lost. Voters in the 23rd did not embrace his philosophy. They saw Hoffman as a carpetbagger -- he didn't even live in the district -- who was trying to hijack their district for his own ideological ends.

This is a Republican district, but it's not a terribly conservative district. It's genteel, more than activist. The final straw: Hoffman didn't even try to pretend that the election was about the issues of the district. It was all about him -- and what he represented. In a way, NY 23ers took to Hoffman like Iowans took to Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean in 2003. They wanted a representative, not a movement candidate. They didn't take kindly to all these outsiders telling them how to work.

Nevertheless, conservative activists are warming up. Hoffman was never an ideal candidate for them. He's an accident; he may turn out to be a gifted policy maker, but no one has him pegged as a spokesman or leader of the Republican Party or the conservative movement. But Hoffman was a great warm-up for what be a huge prize: a United States Senate Seat from Florida.

Not only is the chosen establishment candidate there, Gov. Charlie Crist, distrusted by conservatives, but his approval rating in the state has begun to crater. And his opponent -- his Doug Hoffman -- is a real talent: Marco Rubio, the former speaker of the Florida House.

Young, Hispanic, bilingual, not yet 40, smart -- he has almost limitless potential. He resists characterization as another ol' conservative knuckle dragger. He's got the de jure endorsement of former governor Jeb Bush, which means that he also has enormous fundraising potential. And Charlie Crist is not so much a liberal Republican as a political neuter.

Where Rubio is neatly positioned, a few other candidates are vying to be Hoffman's heir, including Chuck DeVore, a conservative Senate candidate for California. He's running against a handpicked, not terribly conservative Republican in former Hewlet-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, who has no grassroots support. The Democratic incumbent in California, Barbara Boxer, will be tough to beat, which is one reason why Rubio, who would vie for an open seat in Florida, has an edge.

CBSNews.com Election Night Coverage:

Results
All Election Night 2009 Results
Republicans Sweep N.J., Va. Gov. Races
N.Y. Democrat Owens Wins House Seat
Maine Voters Reject Gay Marriage
Breckenridge, Colo., Votes to Legalize Pot

Analysis
What McDonnell's Win Means for the GOP, Obama
Corzine's Fall Has Been Festering for a While
What Doug Hoffman's Loss Means to Conservatives
Lessons for the White House from '09 Election Results
Why Christie Won in New Jersey
McDonnell Won Due to Turnout, Independents
Exit Polls in Va. and N.J.: The Obama (Non) Factor?



The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder is CBS News' chief political consultant.

Add a Comment See all 31 Comments
by infinity42 November 7, 2009 3:00 AM EST
The civil war ended in 1865 New York's 23rd congressional district had 18 Democrats and 18 Republicans and one Unionist representative. The Democrats held it from 1923 thru 1973 (50 years). That was longer then the Republicans ever held it. Who is listening to propaganda and who listens to and gets the facts? The answer is increasingly obvious. Liberals are afraid to do their own research because it shows that they are wrong more then they are correct. The truth hurts your case. Anyone who thinks that this guy has a modicum of intelligence is nuts.
Reply to this comment
by fjdigioia November 5, 2009 7:44 AM EST
well there is one minor problem people are overlooking in there arguments of the this election, they keep making it a 2 way runoff.
the point that it seems most of the media wants to overlook is the fact that dede dropped out on the last weekend before the election, but still garnered 6% of the vote. that 6% of the vote was absentee ballots, which of course cant be changed once there submitted, unless a liberal does it, then the aclu would be up there demanding that they be allowed to revote so all the votes can count.so if you add the 6% vote that dede got to hoffman, hoffman would have actually won the district being a far right conservative, i know that just has to terrify the liberals reading this, but im sure there already making the excuse for themselves, that since dede backed the liberal candidate surely that 6% would have gone to the liberal candidate. so in 1 years time i guess we will know if that is true or not. and to be honest saying that liberal came out ahead last night is pretty far fetched, not because of the house seat but because of the governors seats, a liberal famously did something once to guarantee power in washington, it was called gerrymandering, which seems to happen every 10 years. oh thats right its kinda happening now, would hate to turn any states the wrong color at this time.
Reply to this comment
by IndieGirl26 November 5, 2009 1:06 PM EST
You are assuming that the 6% that voted for Scozzafava would have voted for Hoffman, but considering that she was a LIBERAL Republican, they might well have voted for Owens instead of Hoffman if she had been removed from the ballot.
If the Republicans want to regain political footing in this country, they need to acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of Americans are moderate, not liberal OR conservative. If GOP keeps pandering to the far-right - and telling moderate and liberal Republicans that they have no place in the party - they will go the way of the Federalists and the Whigs in the 19th century and simply disappear.
by D_Welch November 4, 2009 8:39 PM EST
Marc - This is one of the best analysis I have seen. Most observers and those commenting don't understand the NY-23 district. As you noted it is not particularly conservative. Dede Scozzafava is well within the mainstream of the NY Republican party and has served her constituents well. She is also a whip in the party's leadership. The district is not particularly ideological, and people are more libertarian. Dede is a moderate. In a two person race with Owens she would have won seat yesterday with 60% of the vote. Conservatives have literally snapped defeat from the jaws of victory. Labor support has been part of the winning REPUBLICAN coalition in the district for two decades. When Dede withdrew support that had been split between her and Owen swung behind Owen, and the GOTV was the difference. There was a backlash against outside money and big names, the trashing of Dede, Hoffman's lack of experience, and his bolting the party for the Conservative line after going through the selection process and agreeing to back Scozzafava. The loss fall squarely on his shoulders. Hopefully he will run in his own district next time, but I am not sure he could win a Republican primary.
Reply to this comment
by jarbo5 November 4, 2009 7:13 PM EST
Pelosi said that the Dems won the night because they took a seat that Repubs had held since the Civil War. She is a bald faced liar, too stupid to have a staff member verify this claim. 19 different Dems have held this seat since the Civil war, as recently as 1993.

How embarrassing that the CBS stooge who posted this silly story took Pelosi at her word and repeated the lie.
Reply to this comment
by taxtime November 5, 2009 11:47 PM EST
You're the stupid one. The "NY-23" designation is arbitrary and has been applied to a multitude of different congressional districts in NY state over the last 200+ years, including Manhattan and the Bronx(!). The various geographic regions that have gone by the NY-23 designation have had mixed representation, party-wise for time time period stated for that reason and that's probably what's confusing you. Note, however, that the *geographic region* that currently goes by that designation has not. It has been represented by the Republican party since 1856. There's no need to "take Pelosi at her word" - the only lie here is a product of your own ignorance.
by reformtndotcom November 4, 2009 6:48 PM EST
I live in TN, and frankly it amazes me that both parties are polarizing as much as humanly possible. We've got the conservative radio lynch-mobs vs. the ultra-lib union backed zombies. Neither side represents what 85% of Americans would choose.

We are in a mess.
Reply to this comment
by IndieGirl26 November 5, 2009 12:57 PM EST
Wow! This is exactly what I have been feeling, but I was beginning to think that I was the Last Moderate Standing!

Thanks for letting me know that others think today's political conflict is dragging this country off the rails!
by valwayne November 4, 2009 6:32 PM EST
What happened in NY is a pretty picture perfect example of how to lose a district you are expected to win, but with what result? A Democrat was elected who will make no different to the current makeup of the House, or balance of poer, instead of a Republican who would have voted with the Democrats anyway. In 1 years it will be time to do it all over and this time the Republicans will have a primary and hopefully be united in defeating the Democrat who just won when it might actually make a difference. Unlike NJ and VA the Republicans got a freebie loss in NY, and another chance to get it right!
Reply to this comment
by peisistratustyrannus November 4, 2009 6:31 PM EST
These guys are nuckin' futs.

I live in Arizona (where they are enthusiastically supporting minuteman founder Chris Simcox in his quest to knock off John McCain) and I had one of them tell me that McCain intentionally threw last year's election and that at the end it was Palin out there trying to save it herself against some kind of McCain-Obama-Democratic-Republican conspiracy. And he was dead serious when he said it, too.

However I blame Boehner and McConnell to a degree, by refusing to even try and negotiate on any of Obama's agenda they have sent the message that heretics are to be burned. And the base has taken that to heart.
Reply to this comment
by IndependentByNature November 4, 2009 3:03 PM EST
As a registered independent living out west, I continue to marvel at the ongoing power grab within the Republican party by the wing nut far right. Listen up conservatives, your 'so-called' leaders just snatched defeat from the jaws of victory . . . What's next, eating you own young?? I continue to be amazed by the inability of you guys to see the big picture. Oh, you'll will win a few key battles here and there but you're far right leaders have already sewn the seeds to lose the war, so to speak. Get ready for political oblivion, it's coming fast!

The reason? Most people don't want a far right or left, 'my way or the highway' DICTATOR in office. Most folks want someone who'll govern fairly and moderately while being fiscally responsible and willing to comprimise to get things done. In the past, it's been the left who acted like spoiled rotten children . . . right now its the far right.

You folks who worship at the alter of Limbaugh, Beck and Palin need to turn off the radio, Fox News, simmer down a little, and re-think some things. These 'entertainers' are going ruin your Republican party and they don't give a D%MN about doing it either. This is a hardcore powerplay on their part. They would much rather control a party not in power than the reverse. And it'll be you conservatives who will be the losers in the end. Is this really what you want?? Think about it.

As an independent, I've enjoyed having the choice of 2 solid parties to choose candidates from. I don't think that is going to be the case going forward. Limbaugh, Beck and Palin are marching the Republican party off the edge of a cliff and you guys just keep following along, signing a song, happy, happy, happy. Gee, thanks Rush, Glen, Sarah . . . for the improvement???

Again, it's simply amazing to watch this.
Reply to this comment
by dbeasley488 November 14, 2009 7:57 PM EST
I second the comment. Add that Rush, Glenn, and Ann all want to make money off gullible listeners as well. Obama is like Tiger to golf. All the top tier guys are making three times what they made pre-Tiger. Same with the neo-con bunch.
by dzemog1 November 4, 2009 1:11 PM EST
Those of you on here who say the Hoffman loss was really a win for the GOP because it showed how the party won't support a candidate who isn't a "pure" conservative, I think you're reading it wrong. I agree that it's a lesson for the GOP, but not the one you think. What the GOP should learn is that they either need to figure out how to balance conservatism with pragmatism/reality, or they need to "secede" from their own party and create a new one that is what they want. The truth is that neither the far right or the far left can win a major election with just their base's support. Republicans can't win with just conservative support, and Dems can't win with just liberal support. These are both wings of their parties, but the truth is that MOST of the country hovers somewhere near the middle. Obama understands this, which is why he's not going far enough for the uber-liberals in his own party. No pun intended, but this is not a "black and white" country. We are all shades of gray, many of us with opinions on issues that straddle both parties. As long as the GOP is pursuing candidates who don't and won't compromise, they will lose the big elections. They may win individual states and on the local level, but it's going to be a tough go on the national level.
Reply to this comment
by vpcharan November 4, 2009 12:36 PM EST
Go drown in the frigid Lake Placid. Also, don't forget to take along Dick Army, Palin, Palanty, Thomson, Limbaugh, Bleck, Steel, and the entire elected GOP members in the house and the senate. Fourteen days there after, a new GOP will be born which will be more patriotic and sensitive to the needs of the American People.
Reply to this comment
See all 31 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...