Does anyone really believe the nonsense that any election is a referendum on Obama? Here’s the referendum on Obama: 11/6/2012.

It’s an easy headline, I know, and so tempting on this, the one-year anniversary of Obama’s history-making hope-bringing win in the 2008 presidential election. He stood there in Grant Park before thousands of screaming fans and the nation, and promised to bring CHANGE, and he didn’t. Booooo on Obama, clearly the REPUBLICANS are the answer!

Sorry guys, it’s just not that simple. Or glib. Elections are also about people — the people running and the people voting. Occasionally, they are about the people who come to a state to stump for a highly unpopular billionaire who made all his money on Wall Street and doesn’t wear seatbelts. But there’s more to it than that.

Take New Jersey, since we’re already there. Wow, Republicans haven’t won a statewide election there since 1997. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by a whopping 700,000. Last year, Obama won New Jersey by 16 points. What a stunning rejection! Well, not so fast. Corzine was there too — and his approval rating was under 40%. Actually, it’s been down there pretty comfortably for a while — as in, since mid-2008. Can’t really blame that on Obama; he didn’t even have the nomination ’til June.

Doesn’t matter — Newt Gingrich will — and he’s not gonna let a little thing like facts get in his way:

According to Mike Allen of The Politico, network exit polls showed that 85 percent of Virginia voters and 90 percent of New Jersey voters were worried about the economy. Governor Haley Barbour put it best: “It’s not about the President personally…the President’s policies are unpopular.”

Zing! Except for the actual results from New Jersey exit polls asking if they approved or disapproved of how Obama was doing his job. Results: 57% approved, 42% disapproved. Also: When asked if Obama was a factor in their vote, 55% of voters in Virginia said no. 60% said no in New Jersey. (Mike Allen had those numbers, too.)

This does not mean there wasn’t concern about the economy — there was, and how (Newt got that right: 85/90% worth in VA and NJ). But hmm, who do people like to blame when things go south? The people under whose watch it went there — aka “incumbents” or “the people for whom yesterday was not a good day.”

Meanwhile, can we just look at Virginia for a moment? Be honest: Is Creigh Deeds your ideal candidate? Bleh, not exactly Mr. Charisma, is he? But aside from that, Newsweek‘s Gaggle has a smart and well-reasoned argument for why a statewide election might have been, you know, particular to that state. And those candidates. Yes, it’s easier (and better ratings!) to blame Obama, but at some point it has to make, you know, sense.

Oh and by the way, Bloomberg? An incumbent expected to sail through to the finish, cutting it close enough to freak out an entire nation of watchers. Was that a referendum on Obama? (Yes! He’s almost a democrat!) Actually, no. Phil Bump lays out the voting blocks and patterns behind the Bloomberg almost-loss (when you’re this close in your third term, you can’t call that a win).

And let’s not even go to NY 23. But I think it’s safe to say that if there was a referendum there, it wasn’t about Obama.

Here’s what else was not about Obama: turnout. Even as David Plouffe is selling the Obama magic on his book tour, it was decidedly absent in this election. Where was the ground game? The will.i.am videos? The Great Schleps? The last election was about a great wave of change, and this election is part of its execution. It’s just different. So were voting patterns — a lot of people who came out last time didn’t this time. Howard Fineman on MSNBC called it “a revolution in reverse…it was as much about people who didn’t turn out in Virginia and maybe as much about people who don’t turn out in New Jersey. The Obama supporters didn’t show up in anywhere near the numbers they did.” I’m not sure you can blame that on Obama, exactly — it is pretty hard to get quite that excited about Corzine.

So! Does this mean the White House is safe and sound? Er, no. They’ve got lots to be worried about, starting with that suddenly-unreliable base and going on from there. As much as this election day was not — WAS NOT WAS NOT WAS NOT — about Obama, going forward, they will be. The clear issue on everybody’s mind is the economy, and how the hell we’re all going to move forward. Obama can go on and on about how he’s cleaning up somebody else’s mess, but there’s an expiration date on that line. He is the President, after all. And if people ask themselves, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” and don’t like the answer, well then, he’s got a problem.

But that will be then, and this is now. Last night there was not one election but a whole bunch of them, in different places involving different people with different issues and different intertwined histories. The people who voted cast their vote for or against these different candidates, in the hope that their immediate lives and communities would be made better. They may not like Obama, and they may like his policies, and their patience may be wearing slowly thin. But, last night, it wasn’t about him. 2012 is still years away — plenty of time to blame President Obama, and actually be right.

Related:
Why Creigh Deeds Lost Virginia [Newsweek]
Corzine’s Fall Has Been Festering for a While [CBS News]
What Happened To Bloomberg [Mediaite]
How last night’s election results were bad for Obama [Slate]
Super Tuesday provides ‘unmistakable rebuke of Democrats’ – possible ‘severe near-term consequences’ for Obama agenda – independents flee Dems [Mike Allen's Playbook]
Profile of New Jersey Voters [NYT]
Profile of New York City Voters [NYT]
A Bad Day for the Obama White House A Good Day for the American People [Human Events]

In the age of media overload, how do you decide what’s worth reading? Fortunately, Mediaite has put together a web-focused list of blogs, Twitter feeds, publications, and cable sources to guide you through the day:

Online

Intrade: If you just care about odds, odds, odds, Intrade’s prediction market remains a fast, fairly accurate gauge of who’s expected to win, though it’s sorely lacking in context. As of this morning, New Jersey is neck-and-neck, with Democrat Jon Corzine the very slight favorite to win the governorship, Conservative Doug Hoffman is the clear favorite in NY-23, and Republican Bob McDonnell and who-knows-what-he-is Mike Bloomberg are all but guaranteed to win Virginia and New York, respectively. Stay tuned throughout the day.

FiveThirtyEight: Though he’s faded into the shadows a bit since last year’s election, and though he’s as much as given up on predicting NY-23, Nate Silver remains a go-to election blogger. As one of the few who really knows how to parse statistics and holds off from imposing his own (liberal) views on them, Silver is a vital read as results trickle in; if his thorough pre-election coverage yesterday is any indication, we’re in for a real treat.

Politico: Politico is going wall-to-wall on the election as only a well-staffed political publication can. Their “2009 Election Central” is already packed with a morning’s worth of fascinating articles and analyses, and you can count on them to keep their reserves well-stocked and well-reported throughout the day.

Governing: Governing‘s Josh Goodman and Alan Greenblatt will also be liveblogging the results this evening, and won’t shy away from the obscure stuff.

NPR: NPR’s Mark Memmott and Ken Rudin have written that they will be live-blogging results from “Virginia, New Jersey, New York, Houston, Atlanta, and other voting places today.” They’ve also provided a handy guide of what to watch for, not just in the hot-button races, but in lower-profile ones as well.

National Review: The Corner will be offering election commentary throughout the day, but if you want the nitty-gritty, Jim Geraghty‘s Campaign Spot is the place to go for thoughtful analysis from a conservative stance.


Twitter: There’s a whole lot of noise to parse through, but Twitter remains an incomparable source of second-by-second intelligence. Right now, #VoteNoOn1 and #MarryME are surging, both references to Maine’s Proposition 1, which would wipe out a gay marriage equality bill passed by the legislature earlier this year. The self-explanatory #njgov, #vagov, and #ny23, are worth watching as well; as of this morning, they’re currently dominated by conservative Twitterers.

Print

Guess you’ll just have to wait until tomorrow morning — or, in the case of some magazines, until next week. How about that? When you do, though, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The New Yorker (which will all, in some measure, be scooped by their own websites) will be worth the read.

TV

Mediabistro has a helpful guide to the election coverage plans for CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Fox Business, and CNBC, which includes guests, anchors, correspondents, and programming schedules for the cable networks.

Finally, be sure to tune back into Mediaite: our very own Steve Krakauer will be following the cable news coverage at CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC as results come in tonight.


It should be an exciting evening, and its results will no doubt dominate the news cycle for the next few days. If you think we missed anything, leave a comment below or send a tip to tips@mediaite.com.