Is Doug Hoffman’s Loss A Chink In Glenn Beck’s Armor?
The Conservative candidate in that hotly-contested Upstate New York special congressional election, Doug Hoffman, lost to the Democratic candidate Bill Owens last night.
What does it mean? Well since Hoffman is the first national candidate to come out of the 9/12 Project/Tea Party movement, it’s not insignificant.
Yesterday we asked, “Can Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity get Doug Hoffman elected?” Now we’ve got an answer: no. Not specifically at least, but can they get “a Doug Hoffman”-type candidate elected? The jury is still out – after all, the race was very close.
Hoffman’s victory or defeat is a referendum on the current power of Beck, more so even than Hannity or Sarah Palin, who was one of the most high profile candidates to endorse Hoffman over Dede Scozzafava, the GOP choice who dropped out. Beck has made the mission of his show to drive the tea party express, to spout 9/12isms at every occasion. Although Hannity conducted more interviews with Hoffman, Hoffman identified Beck as a mentor.
As Michelle Malkin notes, Hoffman’s candidacy was just the beginning of this movement. “Hoffman’s candidacy illuminated the stark difference between GOP political opportunists willing to pimp out their endorsements to any old ACORN-embracing, Working Families Party-consorting, Big Labor crony who puts an “R” by her name,” she writes today.
Needless to say, the White House disagreed with this assessment. Robert Gibbs said the loss “proves that anger can get you 45% of the vote.”
The fact remains, the tea party activists couldn’t have picked a less charismatic candidate to kick off their national push toward Judgment Day. It wasn’t about Hoffman – it was about defeating Scozzafava, which the movement was successful in accomplishing. But now they’ve lost a congressional seat, and the result amplifies those voices, specifically Newt Gingrich’s, who said this wouldn’t work.
If Van Jones and ACORN were feathers in Glenn Beck’s cap, this loss plucks one of those feathers out. There will probably be more feathers going in down the road – his power, and ratings, seem to continually be on the incline. But for now, maybe reports (and Time covers) of his megalomaniac stardom are slightly premature.
—–
» Follow Steve Krakauer on Twitter
13 comments
CaptainAmerica says: Wow, should have know Mediaite would be trying to attack Glen Beck instead of having a story “WHERE WAS KEITH OLBERMANN HIDING LAST NIGHT AS THE DEMS GOT THEIR ASSES HANDED TO THEM”???
Or wheres the story about how how Hoffman gained 23 points in the last 3 weeks thanks to Beck, Palin and others and how much money the Democrats poured into this race and the deal they made with the Republican liberal to drop out and endorse the Dem.
ImNotBlue says: The fact that Hoffman was able to rise so quickly, bump off the Republican candidate, and ALMOST win the election suggests that they’ve got a lot of strength. There’s big potential within that movement… and 45% of the population (in how many days?) is nothing to scoff at.
m says: >As Michelle Malkin notes, Hoffman’s candidacy was just the beginning of this movement.
Bowel movement.
Tea Partiers lose the big one!!! Sarah Palin’s endorsement worthless!!! Democrat Bill Owens defeats Conservative Tea Party candidate pushed by Limbaugh.
And this was funny: “REPUBLICAN TAKES VA BY 18%…REPUBLICAN TAKES NJ BY 5%…Dem Wins New York House Race…”Caps for Republican wins — and oh, btw… Drudge is such a hack. Often his headlines don’t even resemble the story.
The headline should have read, “Palin and Tea Partiers rejcted by long time Republican district”
NY 23 was held by Republicans in a overwhelmingly Republican district since the Civil War. Spin this you might, but this was Tea Party Rejection Night in New York.
REPUBLICAN voters REJECTED the Tea Partiers and Rush and Palin. Virginia has always been in play, it was Democrat run throughout the Bush administration. And New Jersey was only 5% apart with a independent playing spoiler. But it was the House Race that was important – it does not bode well for the Republicans in 2010 when they and the Tea Partiers can’t beat a Democrat in a district held by the Republicans since 1865.
Jack Kennedy says: repubs pulled majority, but the 3 week candidacy of hoffman could not overcome the longterm campaign of rnc, newt, acorn, unions
pretty impressive for 3 week campaign
real win for conservative as the conservative dem pulled win while touting as more conservative than repub
if repubs dont get back to principles as conservatives, this will not be the last time the repubs lose.
if rinos want to join the dems and ruin the nation as radicals – the American people will deal with them
2010 will see a hoffman win as he will have more than 3 weeks and the repubs backing
TfT says: Is Doug Hoffman’s Loss A Chink In Glenn Beck’s Armor? In a word: NO
Ridiculous to even suggest it. Hoffman came out of nowhere and had the “republican” not endorsed the dem he would have won. She is done with politics now. In 2010 there will be a primary and the republicans will win back the seat. As I read somewhere, Owens is just “renting” the seat for a year.
Coralchristie says: Beck, Palin, the Tea Partiers and all conservatives were not rejected. Hoffman would probably have won had “Scuzzy woman” not jumped ship into the Democrat Owens’ ship. Even at that…this was a come from behind race that was a long shot. Sure, had he won it would have been terrific. These elections were about too much spending, government take-overs of private business and the stripping away of Constitutional freedom. If our government hadn’t spent us into oblivion and taken away our freedoms because “there’s a crisis over the past ten plus years”, we wouldn’t have to hold our legislators feet to the fire. Two out of three wins “ain’t” bad and will show in 2010 just how right Beck and others have been about how we feel.
There were two Congressional races yesterday, both won by Democrats.
NJ will have had a Republican governor 20 of 32 years by the end of Christie’s term.
The last 8 governors of VA elected after a presidential election were from the opposition party ( I don’t recall all this coverage about Republican warning signs in 2001 when NJ and VA went Democrat).
Enjoy your little gloat fest. It is predictive of nothing. Bottom line is that the teabaggers have done more to lose elections for their party than win them. I hope that your purge continues in earnest. It will ensure ideological purity, and permanent minority status.
ImNotBlue says: Bill Adkins says:
November 4, 2009 at 5:06 pm
NY 23 was held by Republicans in a overwhelmingly Republican district since the Civil War.
Uh-oh… looks like someone’s been believing Nancy Pelosi again. The problem with that is, of course, it’s a lie.
Here’s the Wiki page… see for yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district
OOPS! Nan-nan, making stuff up again… and poor ol’ Bill believes it.
Virginia has always been in play, it was Democrat run throughout the Bush administration.
And now the Republican won.
And New Jersey was only 5% apart with a independent playing spoiler.
And Obama only won the Presidency with 7%… yes the folks on the left called that a “huge” victory.
But it was the House Race that was important…
Which is why Obama made so many trips to NY-23 to make speeches. Oh wait, that was VA and NJ… nevermind.
…it does not bode well for the Republicans in 2010 when they and the Tea Partiers can’t beat a Democrat in a district held by the Republicans since 1865.
They can’t beat the Democrat with a few weeks worth of campaigning… they can only lose by 4%. HEY WAIT A MINUTE… didn’t you say a few moments ago that NJ wasn’t that impressive because Christie beat Corzine by only 5%. Well, Owen won by only 4%… and he had been campaigning since the beginning, while Hoffman was only the THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE!
Oh, Billy… you’re so obviously wrong and hypocritical. Poor poor Billy… grasping at straws.
Ted Silliman says:
November 4, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Enjoy your little gloat fest. It is predictive of nothing. Bottom line is that the teabaggers have done more to lose elections for their party than win them.
And how many elections have they lost there, Teddy? If you count yesterday… IF… that would be One. Can you count to One… let’s try. Here we go. “One.” How’d you do?
But let me ask you a question… why did Obama make so many trips to VA and NJ, if those races weren’t really that important?
m says: >And Obama only won the Presidency with 7%… yes the folks on the left called that a “huge” victory.
Bush got 50.7% over Kerry’s 48.3%
Conservatives declared it a mandate:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200411040009
ImNotBlue says: And they weren’t right either, M. How’s that?
There will be no more “mandates” in the country… it is too divided and IMO, will stay that way for a long while. Anything under 10%, in my book, is a close race.
From your link, ImNotBlue:
“New York’s 23rd congressional district has historically been one of the most Republican districts in the United States. Most of the area in what is NY-23 has not been represented by a Democrat since the 19th century. A large portion — including the largest city, Watertown — has not been represented by a Democrat since the 1850’s. In parts of the district, the last non-Republican Representative was a Whig.”
ImNotBlue says: Vidiot says:
November 5, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Uh-huh… but are you reading what it’s actually saying. The claim is the district hasn’t been represented by a Democrat since the Civil War… that’s false. PARTS of the districts haven’t been represented by a Democrat since then (when, if you remember you history, the Democrats were pro-slavery and very anti-black)… but as a whole, that’s a different story. They’re trying to misrepresent the facts, leave out a key word or two, so that they can claim a bigger victory than the reality of the situation. The list of Representatives proves that.
Job hunting?
Use our proprietary jobs tool to access the largest pool of jobs aggregated from around the country.
Stephen Colbert: ‘Sarah Palin is a F***king Retard’
The usually reliable Keith Olbermann's inability to nail Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin on Limbaugh's use of the term "retard" has been pretty frustrating. Sure, he has posited Palin as a hypocrite, but several times he has repeated Rush's and Palin's dueling assertions that he was "quoting" Rahm Emanuel, or that he was being "satirical," without really challenging it. Luckily, Stephen Colbert actually knows what the word "satire" means, and deployed a pile of it on Palin and Rush last night.
Keith Olbermann, Jon Stewart Fail to Eviscerate Sarah Palin
Hyperbole must be over. How else does one explain the extremely disappointing bits that Jon Stewart and Keith Olbermann did on Sarah Palin last night? Handed (thank you, I'm here all week) 3 days of Palin material that rivaled anything George W. Bush ever gave them, Olbermann could barely manage a molecule of spittle, let alone a lather, and Stewart deployed his seldom-used Nerf™ jokes.
More TV headlines:
»President Obama’s Nobel Prize Money? It’s Still Waiting For Him To Claim »2
»Enraged, Rachel Maddow Explains ‘Racist History’ Tea Party Is Embracing »31
»Superbowl MVP Drew Brees on Letterman (with Baby Brees Backstage!)
»Welcome, @CraigyFerg! Craig Ferguson Joins Twitter »4
»Jay Leno Explains The Letterman Promo: “A Good Joke Is A Good Joke” »6
© 2010 Mediaite, LLC | About Us | Advertise | Newsletter | Privacy | User Agreement | Disclaimer | Power Grid FAQ | Contact | Archives | 
RSS
