Posted on 05/19/2010 9:17:44 AM PDT by DB9
The old media has been furiously spinning last night's loss by Tim Burns in PA-12 as proof that the Democrat Party is really in great shape going into the fall mid-terms and that ObamaCare is actually going to help the Democrats. However, a sober analysis of Tim Burn's loss should give the Democrat Party no such solace. Burns loss can be chalked up primarily to Ed Rendell's shrewd move to schedule the special election on the same day as the primary.
I had been worrying about this since Rendell made that announcement and as I watched the election returns online last night, my concerns were confirmed. It became clear very early that there was no way Tim Burns could win a special election run concurrently with a primary election for the same race. This was evident to me despite the point made by Rick Santorum and others early in the evening that the initial numbers were coming from Democrat strongholds and Burns could come back to win when the more conservative precincts were counted. This wishful thinking was unrealistic. There was never going to be sufficient Republican votes to overcome the 2-1 Democrat to Republican advantage in the district given that voters had to declare their party affiliation to vote in the primary on the same night.
The data I paid particular attention to in the PA-12 race were the results coming in from the primary election. From the very beginning, the number of votes being cast in the Democrat Primary for the 2012 general election in PA-12 was nearly twice the amount being cast in the Republican Primary. You would expect this since, as Santorum noted, mainly Democrat precincts were being counted. But as numbers began coming in from more conservative areas, the trend continued. Indeed when all the votes were tallied, 80, 736 were cast in the Democrat primary and only 45, 852 in the GOP Primary. The results from the primary and general election for PA-12 appears below via Fox News:
U.S. House - District 12 - Democrat Primary: Critz, Mark: 57,704 Bucchianeri, Ryan: 16,618 Mackell, Ronald: 6,414 Total Votes Cast: 80,736
U.S. House - District 12 - Republican Primary
Burns , Tim GOP: 26,120 Russell , William GOP: 19,732 Total Votes Cast: 45,852
U.S. House - District 12 - Special General Critz, Mark: 70,662 Burns, Tim: 60,500 Agoris, Demo: 3142 Total Votes Cast: 134,304
In primary elections, voters go to the polls and are asked their party affiliation. They are then given a ballot which corresponds to that affiliation. Independents are given a separate ballot. Nearly 35,000 more voters filled out Democrat ballots than Republican ballots. For Burns to have won, he would have had to overcome those 35,000 votes by a combination of Independents and ticket splitters. Independents, of course, are not known for their high levels of participation in primary elections...quite the opposite in fact.
Ticket splitting is fairly common in general elections but not in primaries as Rendell, a product of the Philadelphia Democrat machine, undoubtedly knows. It's difficult to imagine significant numbers of Democrat voters asking for a Democrat ballot upon arrival at the polls, then voting simultaneously for Critz in the primary and Burns in the special. Partisans, by definition, show up on primary day, not squishy ticket-splitters. Undoubtedly there were a few ticket-splitters, but to expect a sufficient number to swing the election to Burns was pure fantasy. That Burns was able to close that huge gap from 35,000 to 10,000 with independents and ticket splitters on a primary election day is actually quite impressive. (About 7700 more votes were cast in the special election than in the two primaries combined.)
To be sure, there were other factors in Burns' loss. The fact that the Pennsylvania Democrat Primary for Senate between Sestak and Specter was of national interest only added to Burns' problems. This undoubtedly further increased the number of voters who turned out in the Democrat Primary. Add to that a somewhat lackluster campaign by Burns and a machine Democrat candidate who ran as far away from Obama as possible while claiming (falsely) he was really a conservative and last night's result should have surprised nobody.
The fact that McCain carried the district in 2008 is irrelevant. That was a general election, not a primary. Any attempt by the Democrats to suggest Burns loss is an endorsement of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda going into the fall mid-terms is fantasy on their part. Credit Critz's victory to some good old-fashioned politicking by consummate Democrat insider Ed Rendell, something our side could learn from. Rendell, naturally, claimed the move was to save money:
“At a time when all governments are trying to meet their challenges with reduced revenues,” Rendell said in a statement, “it would be unconscionable to force counties to spend money to hold an additional election which, by law, could be held little more than 30 days earlier.”
Unconsionable for a Democrat to spend money? Right.
Update: (H/T Rob Harrison) Michael Barone notes that a further complication for Tim Burns was the fact that his opponent in the primary election, William Russell, pointedly did not endorse Burns' candidacy in the special election.
Good read.
Goofy. It will shake out in November. The Crats are crowing about this???
Burns still has a shot in November, when the Indies come out to vote
If I read this article correctly, the Governor set things up so that the special election was, in effect, being run like a primary. Democrats had no choice but to vote for a Democrat.
You may remember the trick of providing a pencil attached to a string in each voting booth. The powers-that-be could then note which way the string was angled to tell who voted for whom. Since, in this case, the polling records indicate who asked for a given ballot, the “secret ballot” principle was eliminated, for all intents and purposes.
Voter intimidation without the New Black Panther clubs.
Perhaps the constituency loves their pork more than their liberty?
Independents don't vote in PA unless, PA is a closed primary. I agree at a high level with his premise but there is no crossover voting in PA for a primary unless you change parties before the election with that purpose in mind.
If these factors adjust the Republican candidate should do better in November, but the history of the district still makes it a considerable long shot. The ability of the Republicans to take back the House does not depend on this one-off district.
November may end up being a little different - by this time, Critz will have a record that may be used against him, if he's toed the Obama/Pelosi line, or he may lose Demecrat Party enthusiasm and support if he hasn't. There will also be no Sestak/Specter race heading up the ballot to get Dems enthusiastic. Toomey may have some coattails. Burns won't be hurt by a concurrent primary battle within his own Party.
Who knows.
It'll still be a trick to win it in November, and I'm personally doubtful, since PA-12 is NOT, despite the efforts of some to cast it as such, a swing district by any means.
So only about 8000 Independents ended up voting.
I knew burns was finished when I saw the first commercial saying that Burns advocated a 23% national sales tax on everything. Showed what people would pay for food and medicine. They kept running ‘em and it was all over. People must have thought he was nuts.
This was a special election held on the SAME DAY as the regular primary.
The problem here is voter HABITS, and Rendell understood those habits, and worked it to the Dems advantage.
The Democrat Primary voters COULD have voted for the Republican, but that was never likely -—
You read it wrong. People could vote for anybody they wanted in the special election regardless of their party affiliation. I spent the past five days in PA-12 working GOTV for Burns and confusion like yours is endemic among the voters.
He didn’t advocate any such thing, he discussed the concept of a 23% sales tax REPLACING ALL OTHER TAXES, purely as a concept, without even supporting it. Mark Critz is a liar and had to retract and apologize for 2-3 different ads. The rednecks in PA-12 (who have now proven John Murtha was correct in his characterization of them twice over) voted for him anyway.
Good analysis. Another reason Tim lost is that organizations like the GOP, ALG, and others that brag about their “grassroots organizing” are too busy playing games to get down to the business of registering voters, counting heads, and turning out the vote. What we really need is some “Tea Roots” organizing. The Tea Party folks will definitely do it right!
Russell does, too.
Not being there and seeing comercials and ads — did he run campaign ads that tried to promote a National Sales Tax as part of his campaign?
One important lesson here...if you support the Fair Tax, the Dems will use it to beat you into the ground with brazen demagoguery. (the truth on this issue cannot be explained in 30 second ads) Sad that we’ve entered an age where constructive ideas can’t be sold to voters if they don’t fit into a 30-second jingle.
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.