Is the Conventional Wisdom Really Unwise?
In the special Congressional election in PA-12, the only district in the nation that was won by John Kerry in 2004 and then carried by John McCain in 2008, the conventional wisdom held that it would likely be close but that Republicans expected a win.
Instead, in the race between Republican Tim Burns and Democrat Mark Critz, yesterday the Democrat won. And it wasn't really close: 53 to 45 percent.
Four days before the vote, The Fix's Chris Cillizza wrote:
For months, the conventional wisdom about the coming 2010 midterm elections has been that Republicans are not only poised to make major gains this fall but that they also have a realistic chance of taking the chamber back.
That CW gets put to its first major test on Tuesday when businessman Tim Burns (R) faces off against former congressional aide Mark Critz (D) in the special election to replace the late Rep. John Murtha (D).
Polling suggests the race is extremely close and the financial attention the southwestern Pennsylvania district is receiving from the two national parties as well as a slew of interest groups make clear the import the contest carries.
For Republicans, the race is simply a must-win.
This morning, after the Democratic victory, MSNBC's First Read reported:
Is this really 1994? Here’s another lesson we learned from last night: A good campaign can overcome a tough political environment. In the only contest pitting a Democrat against a Republican, Mark Critz (D) defeated Tim Burns (R) in the special congressional election to replace the late Rep. Jack Murtha (D) in Pennsylvania. As we’ve pointed out, this isn’t a good sign for the GOP in its quest to take back the House in November. Why? Because this was a race that Republicans -- in this kind of political environment -- should have been able to win. Yes, Democrats outnumber Republicans in the district. And, yes, the Dem turnout in the competitive Sestak-vs.-Specter primary helped Critz (though the statewide Dem turnout wasn't overly impressive). But this was the only congressional district in the country that John Kerry won in ’04 but Obama lost in ’08, meaning that it was ripe for the picking. Remember, back in 1994, Republicans were the ones winning House special elections. But can this be ’94 all over again if the Democrats are the ones winning these things -- four straight this cycle (PA-12, NY-23, CA-10, NY-20) and seven since 2008 (IL-14, MS-1, LA-6). By the way, there was a ton of finger-pointing among House Republicans after they lost the NY-23 special late last year; it could be worse internally after last night.
The pre- special election unconventional wisdom may have been best expressed by Paul Krugman who asked on his blog "Will 2010 be 1948?" with this latest Pollster.com composite national Congressional ballot:
Krugman writes:
There are hints in the polling data (see this one, not yet in the Pollster average above) — and, more generally, in the tone and feel of the news — that November may not be quite the Republican blowout everyone is expecting.
This has me thinking about the 1948 election, when Harry Truman shocked the pundits by pulling it out at the last minute. You might have thought that such a narrow victory wouldn’t have changed that much — that people would have dismissed it as not giving Democrats a mandate to do much. In fact, however, it marked the end of Republican attempts to undo the New Deal (that is, until the rise of the hard right several decades later.) In effect, many people came to the conclusion that if the GOP couldn’t pull off a win in such favorable circumstances, it wasn’t ever going to be able to win until it changed its positions.
Of course, one special election does not a trend make, as they say. But thus far the conventional wisdom appears not so wise after all.
