This is my first blog post on our site, and I could not think of a more appropriate time to discuss my area of expertise in the WRS world—Pennsylvania Politics—than now. Yesterday, the state of Pennsylvania’s longest-serving Congressman (by two days, no less), John Murtha, passed away unexpectedly at the age of 77. While I am not a huge fan of the late Congressman (and his pork-barrel spending), his death—and the special election that it creates—further cements the Commonwealth’s role as the most exciting place for Republicans in 2010.

One of the reasons why I believe that Pennsylvania is the most exciting place is because we have an exciting (and winnable) race at every level of government all over the Commonwealth. First, former Congressman Pat Toomey is favored to win the U.S. Senate Seat that has belonged to former-RINO Arlen Specter for three decades now. Both the Franklin and Marshall and Rasmussen polls conducted last month have Toomey up by more than 8 points. On the Democratic side, Specter—newly endorsed by the PA Democratic establishment at their conference—holds a 17-point lead over Congressman Joe Sestak in the May primary. In Harrisburg, Jim Gerlach’s decision to leave the Governor’s race and focus instead on keeping his Congressional seat red helps furthers our chances of winning back the Governor’s mansion in November. We can only hope that the Democrats continue to beat themselves up in the primary enough to ensure Corbett’s win this fall.

On a more localized level, every corner of the state now has a competitive Congressional race on their hands. The Southeast houses three of the most competitive races in the nation, with Gerlach’s re-election battle in the 6th, the open seat created by Sestak’s Senate run in the 7th, and now former Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick’s bid for his old seat in the 8th. All of these seats, located squarely in the Philadelphia suburbs, will cost millions of dollars to win and can change on the drop of a hat. While whoever wins the May primaries will have a significant effect on the ultimate course of the race, as of now they are all winnable by Republicans in November. Driving up the Northeast Extension 100 miles, the 10th and 11th Districts—currently represented by Democrats Chris Carney and Paul Kanjorski, respectively—are once again top GOP targets. With Hazelton Mayor (and anti-illegal immigration candidate) Lou Barletta running against Kanjorski, we can only hope that the third time is the charm. The GOP also has several candidates exploring a run in the tenth, a seat in which Republicans held for more than forty years before Carney’s 2006 victory. In the Western part of the state, the GOP is still licking its wounds from its surprise loss in the 3rd District last cycle (Kathy Dahlkemper), and the 4th (Jason Altmire) and 12th (Murtha) are becoming more and more interesting every day with the addition of new candidates and, quite frankly, unexpected deaths.

Obviously, the first race to be decided will be the 12th, which should be filled through a special election sometime this spring. Governor Ed Rendell has hinted that that this election will coincide with the May 18th primaries; however, it remains to be seen who will actually run now that it is an open seat. Before Murtha’s death, there was a full primary on both sides of the aisle, with 2008 nominee William Russell looking to lead the GOP pack. Now everyone under the sun, including former Lieutenant Governor Mark Singel, has been mentioned as a possible candidate in this race. Today, the Cook Political Report moved the seat into the “toss-up� category. I personally believe that depending on who the candidates are, the Republican shift of the voting electorate in the district (as it was the only district nationwide that voted for Kerry in 2004 and McCain in 2008) and the current political climate make this seat one that Republicans have a solid chance of winning.

It is funny—eight years ago, the State Legislature redistricted Pennsylvania to make it more Republican. Today, Democrats hold 12 of the state’s 19 Congressional Districts. Maybe we will learn our lesson before gerrymandering the districts in 2012, but until then, Pennsylvanian Republicans can look forward to 2010 with optimism and excitement.

Our friends at the Prosper Group posted a great piece about their online strategy for Scott Brown.  We’ve re-posted it here with their permission:

Truck owner, Wrentham resident, and State Senator Scott Brown is now the giant-slaying US Senator representing the dark blue state of Massachusetts.  Much of that was accomplished because of a smart online campaign that helped fund his efforts, generate volunteers, and engage supporters.  As a quick overview, here’s what the Brown campaign did right online- from the start.

They understood that big “Mo� doesn’t come automatically.

The curse of Obama’s 2008 campaign (for online strategists) has come in the form of candidates and campaigns who think that a sharp website and a Facebook page should somehow automatically generate online momentum. In contrast, just as it did for Obama, it took Brown months of tireless campaigning with little result (both on and offline) to create the inertia needed to generate $12 million in donations, over 100,000 Facebook supporters, over 10,000 people enrolled in our “Call from Home� program, over 215,000 email subscribers and 7,529 text message subscribers.

The Brown campaign invested early by immediately putting someone in charge of new media. Serious time and money was invested in online efforts even when results seemed few and far between.  Many campaigns would have cut out this expense when it didn’t show immediate results.  The Brown campaign knew better and the rest is history. Consider, on December 1^st, 2.5 months after the campaign started, the campaign website had just 700 visitors.  But by the first of January, that number had begun to grow to over 3,000 and would eventually reach nearly 180,000 unique visitors on Election Day. Massachusetts residents were by far the most likely to visit the website- over 261,000 unique visitors were from Brown’s home state.

They respected the “web guyâ€� and didn’t stick him in the basement.

From the beginning Rob Willington, the campaign’s new media director, was put in a position of leadership.  He wasn’t relegated to a stuffy office in the corner of the campaign headquarters.  Instead, he was consulted on key campaign decisions and allowed to lead campaign initiatives online.

They understood that social media is called SOCIAL media for a reason.

While the campaign of Attorney General Martha Coakley used Twitter (and actually posted more Tweets), they were far less likely to be interactive.  Instead, Twitter was used to promote press releases and media hits.  Brown, on the other hand, used replies and other tools to actually engage voters online. It led to far more Twitter followers and far more voters who felt they were being engaged in conversation vs. being talked at.  The campaign’s Twitter following was also key to spreading the buzz of the campaign nationally.

Content is King, and they created a lot of it.

In order to keep people engaged, the Brown campaign created regular content- specifically making good use of online video.  Over 59 videos were used to supplement the messaging of the campaign.  They were often issued quickly after an event or an embarrassing comment by Coakley, including one where AG Coakley said that the extent of her foreign policy experience was that “she had a sister who lives overseas.�

They understood their audience.

Many candidates want to use up a lot of real estate on their website to explain issue positions or show off press releases.  The Brown campaign, however, understood that a campaign’s website is primarily visited by supporters and other friendly individuals.  This principle was only magnified due to it being a Special Election with a shortened timeline.  Therefore, the website design focused on interaction, highlighting web video front and center and dedicating the bottom half of the home page to a Twitter stream, links to social networking, and a plug to join the Brown Brigade, the campaign’s Ning network. As the campaign progressed, so did the website design. The Brown campaign added a tell-a-friend feature to educate supporters on how to vote absentee, encouraged contributions, created a call from home program, provided information about local Brown offices for phone banking, and even initiated a first-ever Voter Bomb.

Although many factors contributed to the election of Scott Brown, the importance of online strategy and social media cannot be ignored. We are proud to have been a part of the team as both a web and phone vendor, and a part of such a historic election.

One of the things I love about political campaigns is how fast they move. In the case of Scott Brown’s US Senate campaign, things could not have moved faster- or come together so unexpectedly (and so well).

The Prosper Group had been hired to develop the website for Scott Brown in September- back when the campaign was not flush with cash and needed something together quickly. We worked furiously over a single weekend and launched a website for Scott.

We first started recognizing an uptick in both traffic and fundraising soon after Christmas- perhaps connected with the Christmas Eve vote on health care. Online fundraising began to pick up dramatically and crested after we collected about $375,000 the day Scott first appeared on Fox News with Sean Hannity (January 8th).

In the meantime, the campaign had been promoting a microsite (aptly named www.redinvadesblue.com) talking about a “moneybomb� to take place on January 11^th. Originally, the hope was to raise perhaps $80,000 or so to help buy some additional radio advertising in the final days of the campaign. For a few weeks, individuals could visit the site and pledge certain amounts to contribute on that day. On the 8^th, we had just under 1,000 pledges that totaled around $79,000.

But now, with the campaign already raising over $300,000 in one day, we thought we could do better than $80,000. However, it was our contention at The Prosper Group that we couldn’t accomplish that without setting a public goal, which had been left out of the Red Invades Blue campaign to that point. We needed contributors to be able to join in on the excitement of reaching that goal together. The campaign leadership, however, had long felt that by alerting the Democrats to our online fundraising success, we might “wake them up� and encourage a barrage of negative attacks on Scott (which, of course, they eventually did with reckless abandon). This below the radar strategy had served the campaign very well.

On Sunday, January 10^th we had new ammunition to take to the campaign leadership- a Public Policy Polling survey that had Scott Brown up 1 point. Our case was that in essence “the cat was out of the bag� and nothing was going to stop the Coakley campaign from waking up now. Rob Willington, the campaign’s new media director, agreed. The proposal was to set the goal at $500,000, something we felt confident we could reach, but we thought $1,000,000 was within reach. Despite some hesitation from some other advisors, the campaign’s leadership agreed to let us set an audacious public goal and see if Brown’s online supporters would help us meet it.

We worked feverishly the night of the 10^th to build a splash page with a graphic of Massachusetts that donors would turn from blue to red by helping us reach our goal (see website). In addition, a video of Scott talking about the moneybomb was added.

We went live at midnight and started recording contributions at 12:01am on the 11^th. Just after 4:00pm we had already blown past $500,000 and had reset our goal to $750,000. By dinner time we had pushed past $750,000 and were trying to decide if we wanted to upgrade the goal to $1,000,000. Our decision was to see if our online supporters would call for it first. After all, this was their movement and we wanted it to be their goal as well. Several influential Twitter followers called on the campaign to move the goal post, so we announced the decision on Twitter at 6:30pm and reset our graphic for $1,000,000.

From the @scottbrownma Twitter feed:

I see a lot of people are pushing for $1M… I agree, let’s roll!#masen #41stVote #Victory6:29 PM Jan 11th from web

WOW, I see we hit our goal of $750K!!! #masen #41stVote6:27 PM Jan 11th from web

Brigadiers, We Are Going To $750K, let’s roll! http://bit.ly/4ScpOw#masen #tcot #41stVote4:00 PM Jan 11th from web

Senior Citizens are calling our office b/c they heard about “the bomb” but are not online & want their checks to count #masen3:43 PM Jan 11th from web

It appears Cape Cod is next on our map, let’s get to $500,000 before midnight! http://bit.ly/4ScpOw #masen #41stVote #tcot2:35 PM Jan 11th from web

I was just informed that we have raised $403,429.12 TODAY! You are incredible http://bit.ly/4ScpOw #masen #tcot #41stVote2:33 PM Jan 11th from web

Today we are trying to raise $500,000 to finish strong and win#masen please help us reach our goal http://bit.ly/4ScpOw #tcot9:35 AM Jan 11th from web

TODAY: our moneybomb to raise $500,000 today, will you help?http://bit.ly/6bY7bT #masen #41stVote #tcot (please RT&Blog)12:44 AM Jan 11th from web

By 7:00pm we started to see individuals giving multiple times to help reach the goal.  The excitement among our supporters was off the charts, and they were determined to succeed.  Incredibly, just a short three hours after we announced the new goal, the website showed a red Massachusetts once again.  The grassroots had spoken.

But, honestly, that wasn’t the best news to come out of the moneybomb. Due to the success of the moneybomb, the contributions kept coming and put us on par with the millions being dropped into the state by the DSCC and the SEIU. We raised another $1.3 million on the 12^th and had a day at $1.7 million in the same week.

In retrospect it appears to me that the moneybomb could not have come together any better. Any earlier and it may have been less successful or had the negative effect the campaign was worried about. Any later and it would have been too late to spend the money raised. I’m also fully convinced that without the public goal we set, the campaign may have raised just a few hundred thousand dollars and been unable to raise the money we needed in the final days to win. Setting a goal (and surpassing it) opened the floodgates to more support online as the moneybomb went viral.  The campaign’s motivated supporters spread the word and insisted we could win.  This was definitely “the people’s moneybomb.”

The Democrat’s nominee for US Senate started out this campaign with a 31 point lead.  What seemed destined to be a Massachusetts runaway turned into a disaster for national Democrats. 

Make no mistake: Martha Coakley was no slouch of a candidate.  She was elected with a whopping 73% of the vote to be the Commonwealth’s Attorney General and was a consensus favorite to hold “Ted Kennedy’s seat.”  But on the anniversary of President Barack Obama’s swearing in, she was burned by a years worth of policy from the Administration that is clearly out of touch with the American people.  A recent Quinnipiac study outlines the President’s ’approve/disapprove’ rating on key domestic policy initiatives:

While there is no Massachusetts exit poll data available, many public polls had now Senator-elect Scott Brown leading among independent voters by 52-40 margin.  This is a continuation of a trend that started in Virginia and New Jersey of Republican candidates winning among independents, suburban voters and seniors. 

Last night’s election results clearly show Republican candidates can win in the deepest of blue states running on the ECONOMY > JOBS > SPENDING platform.  Scott Brown’s campaign highlighted the importance of framing the debate on these key economic issues and proved for the second time in 10 weeks the success of Republican campaigns identifying with voters on what is quickly becoming the blueprint for winning over independent voters.

Anyone close, or far, from this campaign will have an opinion about what contributed to Scott Brown’s win tonight in Massachusetts.  The fact is that a number of things pushed voters to abandon their Democratic-leaning electoral history to elect the first Republican U.S. Senator from this state in more than 30 years.

First, the environment.  As I have mentioned over the past several months, voters are pissed off (pardon my bluntness).  They are angry at a government that is spending without consequence selling promises of better days ahead.  It has been my observation that voters are not accepting the amount of debt that the Democratic-led Congress is taking on in the name of economic stimulus without any measurable results.

Second, voters are offended at the entitlement argument.  They don’t like being told that something is already predetermined.  This is not “Kennedy’s seat,” nor is it a “Democratic seat.”  They especially hate when they are told that they don’t have a real voice in a decision they deserve to make.  This was the case tonight in Massachusetts.  Advertisements featuring various Kennedy family members were given thousands of gross rating points trying to convince voters that they dare not trade this seat to Republicans because of “temporary” frustrations regarding the country’s economic conditions.  But, these ads deepened the anger and were based on a set of falsehoods.  Kennedy faced several close races - most recently against Mitt Romney.   Senator Kennedy, while a true statesman, still didn’t attract the vote for a randomly nominated Democratic candidate based solely on his post-mortem endorsement.  This points to an electorate that is fatigued with a one-party system.  This also points to the natural ebb and flow of American politics.

Third, Coakley was outworked.  The Democratic machine thought that the only race they faced was the primary.  They didn’t think that a lowly state senator with minimal statewide name recognition would ever be competitive.  The failure of Coakley to campaign strongly until the last three weeks put them woefully behind.

Fourth, Brown was the man of the people.  Scott Brown campaigned in his truck, literally.  Until the last few weeks, the Brown campaign was a long-shot, small budget affair.  But, that didn’t stop them from working hard to push the message that Brown wasn’t the pre-ordained choice for this seat; instead, he was just another guy that, like them, worried about higher taxes, bills and the health and education of his children.  Independent voters ate this message up!  This is exactly what they wanted.

Finally, health care killed Coakley.  Everyone in Massachusetts has insurance coverage.  Scott Brown was able to convince many of these voters that a universal, federal government-run health care system would do nothing more than to tax them to pay for coverage of people in other states.  The recession helped drive home that message.

Brown’s win tonight is proof that voters are fed-up with the status quo.

from the PRIsm Political Report:

AZ-3: Shadegg Retirement Changes Governor’s Race

Two years ago, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ-3) surprised almost everyone in and out of Congress by announcing that he would not seek re-election in 2008.  An outpouring of support and his Republican congressional colleagues’ petition campaign convinced him to change his mind and run for one more term.  Yesterday, Mr. Shadegg announced that, in fact, this is his final term in the House and he will retire at the end of the current Congress. 

 

With a likely Republican congressional seat now wide open in the Valley of the Sun, GOP potential candidates in particular, are sizing up their next move.  A great deal of media speculation pertains to state Treasurer Dean Martin who just recently announced a Republican primary challenge to Gov. Jan Brewer.  Many believe he will now switch out of the gubernatorial race and immediately organize a new campaign for Congress.  Before being elected statewide, Martin represented a state Senate district wholly within Shadegg’s 3^rd CD.

 

The attention being paid to Martin may be misplaced, however.  In fact, the person more likely to swing out of the Governor’s race and into a federal campaign is actually Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker.  According to sources intimately familiar with the Arizona political landscape, Martin is likely to stay in the Governor’s race for several reasons.  First, he has spent his whole career in state politics and has little desire to come to Washington.  Second, the timing of the Shadegg announcement may be somewhat politically driven as it comes directly on the heels of Martin formally declaring for Governor.  The Congressman’s longtime Arizona chief of staff, Sean Noble, is a potential candidate to replace his current boss and would view Martin as his toughest competitor, thus the Treasurer running for Governor benefits Noble and the Shadegg organization.  Third, Martin is in the best position of any Republican to deny Brewer the Republican nomination - remember, she ascended to the office when Janet Napolitano became Homeland Security Secretary so she has yet to be elected in her own right - so he is unlikely to abandon a campaign that he can conceivably win.

 

The crowded Governor’s race is a problem for both current challengers, Martin and Parker, in addition to self-funder with low name ID and several other minor candidates.  Arizona has a late primary (August 31^st) and no run-off, so it behooves both of the major candidates to isolate Brewer as much as possible.  As the sitting Governor, a crowded field requiring only a plurality of the vote favors Brewer despite her woeful job approval ratings.  Therefore, tacking to the congressional race makes the most political sense for Parker, who would clearly be a strong candidate in such a field.

  

The 3^rd district is fully contained within Maricopa County and contains some of the north Phoenix suburbs as well as the cities of Paradise Valley, Carefree, and Cave Creek.  The district is reliably Republican.  Favorite son presidential candidate John McCain scored 57% against President Obama in 2008; George W. Bush captured 58 and 55%, respectively, in his two presidential campaigns.  The seat was drawn to be safely Republican, but demographic changes in the Phoenix area have made the region slightly more competitive.  Shadegg’s 2008 win percentage dropped to 54-42%, and was just below 60% in 2006.  Previously, his elections finished closer to the 65% mark.  He becomes the 25^th current House member, and 14^th Republican, not to seek re-election.  Attorney Jon Hulburd, who claims to have already raised $300,000 for the race, has the inside track to the Democratic nomination.

Excuse the cliche’, but it is all too fitting for the Democrats current situation.  Longtime North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan announced that he will not run for re-election, and hours later breaking news indicated that Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd will not seek re-election to his seat. 

Last week, we examined in this post why incumbent Democrats were not running for re-election or switching to the Republican party.  As tough votes loom over the pending health care bill, many of them realize in swing districts (or states) that they will not be able to face the voters for supporting very unpopular legislation.  Not running for re-election frees them up to vote for unpopular bills with no direct repercussions from the voters. 

How many more ‘retirements’ will we see from House and Senate Democrats in the upcoming weeks?

from the PRIsm political report:

Crist, Rubio Tied at 43%

 

A stunning new Rasmussen Reports (RR) poll (12/14; 413 likely FL Republican voters) propels upstart former state House Speaker Marco Rubio, the darling of the Florida conservative movement, into a dead heat with incumbent Governor Charlie Crist as the two vie to become the Republican nominee for the state’s open US Senate seat. 

 

Last May, the first primary poll pegged the Governor to a huge 53-18% advantage (Ron Sachs Communications; released 5/19/09) among Republicans, but Crist’s lead has been steadily diminishing ever since reaching that apparent apex.  The most recent Rasmussen poll (10/19) showed his 35 point lead decreasing to fourteen.  While the 413 respondent RR sample size is certainly low, there can be no doubt that all of the campaign’s upward momentum is clearly on Rubio’s side.  The former legislator has strategically worked the Republican county caucuses to uplift his campaign and attract activist and media attention, appearing at a series of the local meetings and racking up a dozen huge (63-89%) straw poll victories against the sitting GOP Governor. 

 

Marco Rubio, 38, was born in Miami of Cuban parents who fled the Castro regime and escaped to Florida.  He was elected to the legislature in 2000 and served as Majority Whip, Majority Leader, and Speaker in his eight year legislative career.  Florida election law limits service in the state House to four consecutive two-year terms. 

 

While Majority Leader, Rubio traveled the state soliciting ideas for legislative and societal changes.  He published what he believed were the best such thoughts into a publication entitled “100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future”.  When he became Speaker, all one-hundred suggestions were crafted into legislation and 57 became law.  Some of the subject areas related to energy efficient buildings, striking back against gangs and sexual predators, and helping businesses obtain healthcare coverage for their employees. 

 

In what could be interpreted as a further negative for Crist even while appearing to be potentially positive, the Governor’s own popularity ratings are still relatively decent. Therefore, Rubio tying Crist is of even greater significance because the challenger’s support is not simply a response to ultra-negative feelings about the Governor. In this current Rasmussen poll, Crist’s personal favorability index is 61:38% and his job approval is 56:43%.  These numbers do show weakness because the sampling universe is uniformly Republican, but the data is still considerably more positive than negative, nonetheless.

 

A final point in Rubio’s favor is that he is now tied with the universally-known Crist even though 21% of the Republican electorate doesn’t know enough about him to form an opinion.  His overall personal rating of 64:15% is extremely good.  Additionally, the fact that only 52% of the self-identified conservatives in this cell sample are supporting Rubio is an indication that he possesses room to grow.

 

The Governor’s best asset is his ability to obtain campaign resources.  According to the last public financial disclosure filing, Crist raised just under $7 million compared to Rubio’s $1.6 million.  The challenger’s increased notoriety will undoubtedly allow him to close the money gap, but it is unlikely that he will ever be able to top the Governor’s war chest. 

 

This campaign will continue for quite some time.  The Florida primary is not until August 24, so much is yet to happen.  The winner will likely face Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-FL-17), who has formulated himself into the consensus Democratic candidate.  He had raised almost $4 million at the end of September and will be formidable in the general election.

 

Clearly, this campaign is now turning into one of the most interesting in the country, and it’s only just beginning.

 

In case you missed it, after spending over a million dollars on a month’s television advertising in Nevada (a massive buy, there), Harry Reid actually lost ground in his re-election battle.  During this time Republican Danny Tarkanian actually gained a point to lead Reid 48%-42% among registered voters in the latest Mason-Dixon survey commissioned by the Las Vegas Review Journal.  Among likely voters, well, you can imagine…

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/most-important-number/the-most-important-number-in-p-73.html?wprss=thefix

Much has been discussed among pundits, elected officials and consultants on which issues will drive the national debate leading into 2010.  For starters, there’s the pending health care vote in the US Senate, and while Senate Democrats and their House counterparts will continue to whip the votes necessary for their respective body’s final passage, public opinion isn’t on their side. 

While the health care vote(s) is an immediate snap shot about how the public views the role of government involvement on that specific issue, the major problem the Democrats are dealing with is the ECONOMY - JOBS - SPENDING issues.  A recent piece in The Hill gives a back-and-forth among experts who debate whether jobs or the deficit will be more of a driving issue.

After a post-election analysis of the New Jersey and Virginia victories by the GOP, it’s clear that independents, seniors and suburban voters broke toward the Republican candidates by decisive margins.  The reason: ECONOMY - JOBS - SPENDING.  While public opinion shows Americans can substantiate the different reasons behind each of issue, they equate them as a single issue: “Government is doing a bad job on the economy, thus the county is losing jobs, and we don’t trust the federal government’s continued spending of our hard earned dollars.”

The ECONOMY - JOBS - SPENDING issues will continue to be a force in districts and states with a high concentration of suburban and independent voters, as well as seniors.  The current health care debate will continue to force the Democrat-controlled Congress’ hand on how to deal with these issues.  The longer these issues stay in the forefront of voter’s minds, the better ammo the Republican candidates will have to contrast themselves to the national Democrat’s problems. 

Democrat strategist James Carville made the campaign slogan famous in 1992.  Last night, voters in New Jersey and Virginia (as well as numerous other states) echoed the decade-old catch phrase.  Carville’s response this year: “Well the Republicans were more gassed up tonight.”  Well put James.

The driving issues behind the 2009 election year:  JOBS - ECONOMY - SPENDING. 

For the first time in a long while, the elections of 2009 were truly about the issues.  There were no Mark Foley scandals and no “Macaca moments.”  The Democrats in Virginia attempted to distract voters from the issues by attacking now Gov-elect McDonnell on the college thesis nonsense, but looking at exit poll data tells us that strategy failed miserably and which issues stuck in the minds of voters.

New Jersey:

The Economy     31 percent
Property taxes   26 percent
Corruption         20 percent
Health care       18 percent

In Virginia:

The economy   46 percent
Health care      25 percent
Taxes              14 percent
Transportation    8 percent

Driving the Republican landslide of Virginia and the GOP victory in deep-blue New Jersey was the movement of independent voters into their corner.  Democrats did experience some erosion in their own camp among “soft” Democrats, but the self identified independent voters came through big for the Republican candidates.

New Jersey independent voters:

Chris Christie (R)   58 percent
Jon Corzine (D)      31percent

Virginia independent voters:

Bob McDonnell (R)   60 percent
Creigh Deeds (D)     35 percent

So what does the 2009 election results tell us?  It is a snapshot of the attitude of voters and will guide the political debate the next year.  One thing is clear: The trend of Democrat victories has been broken and independent voters moved heavily toward the GOP’s candidates.  This isn’t to say that these independent voters are now in the Republican column; they can be moved away.  But the JOBS - ECONOMY - SPENDING issues are favorable to Republicans and if the national debate is framed around them, Republicans stand to make major gains across the board in the 2010 midterms.