A Good Surname, A Yellow Dog Dem District And A Pro-Life Endorsement
Posted on October 13, 2009 at 8:24 pmPat Marsh has won election to the 62nd District House seat by a comfortable margin and the combination of the above was not enough to put Ty Cobb over the top. While the last weeks and months have certainly exaggerated the importance of the election, you can’t really dismiss the result as part of a greater narrative either.
Kent Williams will still be speaker. And, no, swapping one conservative Democrat for a moderate to conservative Republican is not really going to change the dynamic all that much next session. But it does give you a taste of what’s coming.
They say special elections are “all about turnout” — as if regular elections are about something other than getting people to the polls. The Democrats really did have every advantage in this district. Ty Cobb had a good family name for this district and he ceded no ground to his right. If the Democrats were gonna stop the red wave sweeping Tennessee, it was gonna be in District 62. But they couldn’t. Neither the money nor the ground troops were enough.
I think what we are seeing is not necessarily an “Obama effect,” although I’m sure some will try and call it that. This is a local race in a special election. Obama didn’t have anything to do with this.
This result is just a symptom of a larger process happening in Tennessee. What is happening in Tennessee is what happened in the Deep South in the ’90s — it just took us a little longer.
Because Tennessee has always had a vibrant Republican Party, at least in the Eastern part of the state, I think it has just taken conservative Democrats a little longer to get used to the idea of voting Republican across the board.
In other states in the South, once the dam started breaking after the civil rights era, one-party Democratic states slowly became one-party Republican states. While it was slightly more complex than that, that is essentially what happened.
But as complex as the process was in other states it was a lot more complex in Tennessee. While Democrats certainly controlled most of the state for a long time, Republicans were not unheard of. And more importantly, Republicans started winning statewide in Tennessee earlier than they did in other states — and with different politics.
While some of the first Republicans elected in states like South Carolina and Mississippi were conservatives like Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott, Tennessee had Bill Brock, Howard Baker and Lamar Alexander. Not exactly the kind of politicians Dixiecrats were gonna be crazy about. So I think because of our unique grand divisional two-party politics, what happened across the South just took a tad longer here.
What is clear now is that it is happening. Tennessee is becoming a one-party Republican state. I’m not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing. It’s just something that’s happening.
What was once a Yellow Dog Democrat district has fallen to a Republican. In 2010, unless something very, very unique occurs we will likely have a Republican House, Senate and governor. The Republican Party of Tennessee, an increasingly ideologically conservative party, will then redraw both legislative and congressional districts.
Of course, this process was going to go forward even if Ty Cobb had managed to squeak by Pat Marsh tonight. This race wasn’t going to change that. Those who chalk up the results of this race are not necessarily wrong to weave this victory into a greater Republican takeover narrative, but the truth is, it was going to happen either way.
Politics in this state will never become uninteresting, but as the Republican Party of Tennessee becomes more ideologically conservative our politics will slowly lose its uniqueness. Maybe if Bill Haslam is triumphant in the governor’s race that he will infuse a bit of of Bakerism into the party and change all this. Maybe a Democrat will emerge who can reinvigorate his party in a way Phil Bredesen never really did. Who knows.
All I see tonight is the slow death of the conservative Democrats in Tennessee. For both Republicans and progressives this is, in different ways, something to celebrate. I, however, won’t be.
Comments
42 Responses to “A Good Surname, A Yellow Dog Dem District And A Pro-Life Endorsement”
The dynamics of this race are not as simple as you portray it. Pat Marsh is simply a well known, well connected nice guy. Anyone who knows him personally likes him. His family has deep roots in the district, and had been Democrats. Even Democrats voted for him because they liked him, not for the party he was running on. It is unfortunate that he ran as a Republican as he will now be controlled by Mumpower, Ramsey and the lot. Hopefully, he will have the good sense to do what is right rather than what they tell him to do. He is a much better Democrat than Republican, he just doesn’t recognize it.
Some of us yellow dogs, who couldn’t vote in District 62, were not impressed with a Pro-life, Anti-choice endorsement for Ty Cobb, plus the ridiculous and insulting antics of the TNDP. Of course, I don’t know either candidate personally but it seemed that Mr. Marsh was the smarter and more mature of the two or maybe his advisors were. Probably an independent thinker too. The TN Republicans seem to have a problem with independent thinkers like the Speaker of the House not marching in step
Speak the truth, Outsider. It’s better to have a down-the-middle moderate than to have someone bounded to one wing or the other, though they both have their problems.
Democrats should take a page from the Republican play book and recruit solid candidates, even from the other party, to win races in rurual areas. Many times there isn’t a lot of difference. Both candidates had good family names but Pat Marsh should have been running as a D and the Democrats missed out on that opportunity trying to let the brother of the former rep step into the seat.
Going by name fixation was their first mistake. And apparently, they didn’t think anyone would be thinking, “Wait, isn’t there already a Ty Cobb in the State House?”
Oops!!
Ace job Chipinistas….Now will someone please move to oust Forrester ASAP?
I agree with Outsider’s sentiment about the Pro-life endorsement for Cobb. It was hard to take for Dem’s. When will will our Democratic candidates ever learn that they can’t win running like a Republican? If people want a Republican, they can vote for one. We don’t need Dem’s who are Repblican lite. The negative stuff put out under the name of the TNDP was also too harsh. Some fault must also lie with Curt Cobb, who was way too conservative. It reflected badly on his brother so say many in Bedford County.
I really like people of the land, agrarians, which is true for Bedford County. Maybe Pat Marsh is an independent really. I don’t know. His photo album portrayed him as a working guy who has been successful and supplied jobs in area that needed them. Some of the Republicans he’s pictured with don’t probably have a clue about what it means to live in Bedford County but, at least, he has the wisdom of being from the land. I just don’t like one issue candidates and that’s what an endorsement by TN Right To Life makes you.
Stop with the blaming on Chip Forrester. To hear some of you tell it, he is responsible for all the evil in the world. It is getting old. If he were as powerful as you all imply, he could take over the world. He has done a good job since his election even in the face of tremendous odds against him from within our own party. And the term “Chipinistas” is really getting old. Think up a new one and find another person to hate.
ACK,
I beg to differ. The Marsh victory was more of a tribute to the importance of having a candidate with excellent qualifications, particularly as a businessman and manager, than meeting some ideological (and atrificial) litmus test.
The results suggest that the lack of an endorsement by TN RtL had little or no effect while Cobb’s effort to capitalize on that same endorsement actually hurt him.
As the Democrats on the Hard Left prepare to hunt for Blue Dogs, we can only hope that the Republicans will look for more candidates like Marsh and fewer who bow to singlt issue special interests.
I’m not celebrating the loss of a conservative Dem. The hallowed Right to Life endorsement blowing up in everyone’s face, right and left? Yes. Ty Cobb’s loss? No.
Mr. Kleinheider-
If what you say is true, Tennessee becoming more of a solid red, what about one of the key special interests influencing Republicans, winding up on the losing side?
Was Marsh more of a Democrat in everything but party affiliation only?
Did the right-to-lifers willingly abandon the issue they claim is their priority-protecting the unborn-to simply vote for what looks like from E. TN. a RINO? How will this affect the Republican coalition?
Right to Life endorsements seem to be like a “poison pill” for anyone who receives them. As much as I favor some values of the religious right, there are some things that just shouldn’t be placed in the same conversation as politics.
I’m surprised your analysis omits the name of our esteemed governor and all of his supposed popularity. You might argue that it was a confluence of events that happened around Unka Phil, and he only inherited the mess — but he was also supposed to be the hallmark of the Democratic brand (he won 95 counties!!1!). He put his name up on this one, and much like the targeted races that were “must-wins” for the party in 2008? FAIL. (That was Gray Sasser’s TNDP, by the way. Not Forrester.)
It tells me one thing about the Bredesen political legacy: Don’t count on winning with it if your last name isn’t Bredesen.
Hell, despite its very public flaws, the Ford family has longer coat-tails.
Davy,
The likely answer is that the majority of voters for whom ‘right to life’ is an important issue looked at both candidates and decided that Marsh was sufficiently good on that issue. Having reached that reasonable conclusion, they opted for the candidate with the skills and values they wanted.
If this election is a bellweather that voters are tired of single issue groups who try to exert their power by presuming to be the defining authorities, Tennessee will be all the better for it.
The AP wire say that, “The result means Republicans have expanded their narrow lead in the House to two seats.” Doesn’t a 51-48 margin add up to a 3 seat lead?
I’m confused Mark–for you to suggest that most voters do not care about some artificial litmus test around abortion makes you independent and principled. But for me to say the same thing makes me a crazy lib’rul. I’m not celebrating Ty Cobb’s loss but it’s plain to see that there is not some huge mythical bloc of voters in this state who will automatically vote for the more anti-abortion candidate regardless of party.
Bredesen’s a lame duck, and quite honestly, has lost credibility with the people who voted for him. He’s better off just counting down the days until his time as Governor is over.
And why again did he add an underground bunker to the Governor’s mansion (using taxpayer money)?
Bob,
For it to be a three-member majority in a 99-seat house, it would have to be 52-47. The AP wire is correct.
Bredesen’s a lame duck, and quite honestly, has lost credibility with the people who voted for him. He’s better off just counting down the days until his time as Governor is over.
Ah, but as part of his power-sharing arrangement with Forrester, Bredesen is supposed to be manning the big picture political maneuvers with Forrester doing the scut work.
But I agree. His Al Haig act (I’m in charge here!) is wearing increasingly thin, especially since he has yet to deliver when it matters.
GoldnI,
I have never considered you a crazy liberal. I have never thought of you as particularly Leftist, which is where the crazy liberals hang out.
My point was only that it seems most voters who consider themselves ‘pro-life’ did not buy TN RtL’s argument that Marsh was some combination of King Herod and Dr. Frankenstein (or Dr. Frankenfurter?). They seem to have found Marsh sufficiently pro-life.
If the Republicans can continue to choose candidates based on ability and not on the increasingly intolerant standards of such groups, we will win more elections and produce more leaders who can effectively govern.
I hope that the Kos crowd is successful in their jihad against Blue Dogs and the like so that they will purify their party into impotence. My only concern is that good liberals like you and Sean will be obvious targets of these discount Jacobins since you display too much reason to follow them.
I hope that the Kos crowd is successful in their jihad against Blue Dogs and the like so that they will purify their party into impotence.
ROFL. Especially since the Democratic Party is doing such a yeoman job of maintaining their own relevance without Kos being an influence. Right.
I mean, was Kos pulling strings in this Cobb thing? C’mon.
HEY HEY HO HO MIKE TURNER GOT TO GO! THIS IS ON YOU TURNER!
AA,
I didn’t say that. But Kos and the loony left are targeting ‘conservatives’ like Cooper, suggesting that they do want a purge of the party.
Good win Mr Rodgers! What a ass kicking for your party.
I didn’t say that. But Kos and the loony left are targeting ‘conservatives’ like Cooper, suggesting that they do want a purge of the party.
No, you only suggested that Kos is bent on styling himself as Maximilien Robespierre and that Sean and Ilissa might be the first up against the wall. Nice.
Looking at candidates like Webb and Tester and Kaine and McCaskill and some of the other candidates that they’ve successfully backed, I hardly think that this amounts to a reign of terror.
Vote for the man and not the party and you may get your country back.
It is horrible to agree with idgaf on this particular race ;(
AA,
I happily stand behind that metaphor. Kos is that sort of ‘there ain’t no end to doin’ good’ idealist who inevitbly turns on anyone who dares to challenge his vision.
It is clear who wears the culottes in the party.
Dang, who the hell is Chip Forrester anyway? Has anyone seen him in big Shelby anyway? Not that we matter….
Seriously. Mempho and Davidson are only, what, a third of the vote in the state? If it makes you feel any better, Nashville - the top Democratic vote deliver-er in terms of percentages - doesn’t matter either.
Frankly, I’m not going to bother jumping up and down over TNDP’s embrace of TNRL resulting in yet another failure for ‘em. They’ll just conclude they didn’t run conservatively enough, although I’m at a bit of a loss as to exactly how they can credibly abandon even yet still another core Democratic value, since there are none left they haven’t already thrown under the bus. [Bredesen hosed labor back in '03 with workman's comp "reform"; gays took the hit in '06 and again in '09, effectively ending any ability to talk the talk on civil rights, in a state that might conceivably have a claim to same; the anti-gun lobby and pro-choicers were convenient targets this year, etc.]
It’s just another link in the chain. They lost this one, they’ll likely lose the Governorship, they’ll lose a few more races, before some folks will finally start asking the hard questions, like: what can we do to salvage something, anything, and maybe get somebody elected statewide once in a while?
Come on, now. Is anybody really surprised? The 2000 election should have been the massive wake-up call. TN Democrats Lost. The Presidency. For the National Democratic Party. Major changes should have been made back then, and weren’t.
I’m not sure I’m prepared to argue Kleinheider’s point: I think Dems could have staved off the Republican tide more easily had they not utterly and unequivocally abandoned their core values, and had they been more willing to listen to voices outside a small group of folks whose sole message is, was, and will be “we’ve always done things this way.” Can you really blame voters for abandoning a Party whose only articulated message is “re-elect us because we like power”?
I’ll agree Bredesen deserves a goodly amount of the blame for demonizing other Democrats and the Party itself 95% of the time, and then distancing himself when elections blow up in his face. Come on, now - we’re not supposed to remember the three Senate candidates he personally went door to door for, back in ‘04? The Ford race, where again, he did too little, too late? How is it again Ford lost, the Senate went GOP, and Bredesen himself scored stellar numbers? Could it be he embraces Republican voters, values, and let’s not forget money, fervently? [Play 'Count the Developers, Big Health Care Interests & Frist Family Contributors' to either his '02 or '06 elections and pretty soon you'll run out of fingers and toes - three times over.]
Guy isn’t the worst Governor ever elected, but his political sensibilities are, in a word, dismal. He hasn’t done anything to bring anybody up behind him - what happens to TNDP once he leaves office? His looking out for #1 at the expense of other Democrats has occurred a tad too frequently for my tastes.
Eventually Democrats are going to realize they have to give the voters something of substance. They’ll get serious about articulating some positions that are differentiated from Republicans. They might actually win statewide again someday. But it’ll be a few more years - the only question left in my mind is how many. I figure seven or so at a minimum, unless more fossils and blatant self-promoters retire from the state Executive Committee more quickly than I anticipate.
I expect to see more shades of red in Tennessee’s future. The shift to the R’s will free up some/more Republicans to stake out some independence. The group as a whole will still have to please the independents upon whom its fortune turns — something the Democrats forgot; the Dems don’t know what they’re about anymore and simply do not inspire trust. We’ll see more intense rivalry within the R’s, eventually. I’ve been watching some of this play out in Georgia.
” The group as a whole will still have to please the independents upon whom its fortune turns — something the Democrats forgot; the Dems don’t know what they’re about anymore and simply do not inspire trust. We’ll see more intense rivalry within the R’s, eventually. ”
I’ve heard two things on this board recently, and many GOPers are exemplifying it on this post.
One line of argument has been: “McCain lost (and the GOP will continue to lose) because he wasn’t CONSERVATIVE enough.”
Now on this post is the line: “If the Republicans can continue to choose candidates based on ability and not on the increasingly intolerant standards of such groups, we will win more elections and produce more leaders who can effectively govern.”
So which is it, ideology or competency?
Granted, it’s not a zero sum game, but if the GOP argues that voters put competency over a strict adherence to ideology, aren’t they arguing against the very concept of judging a candidate based on how strongly they support the things that have been, and are, considered the pillars of the their party’s belief system?
While some scream he/she is a RINO, other’s scream all that matters is he/she’s a GOPer, and some say both things on the same day.
pandabear argues that whatever Kleinheider has to
say isn’t worth spit…ever.
It turned my stomach that the Democrats left me no choice but to root for the Republican, but thankfully the lesser evil won.
I don’t believe a pro-choice Republican (and maybe not even a Democrat) can win in rural Tennessee and parts of suburban Tennessee. But the trick is going to be whether the most pro-life Republican HAS to win every primary. That is what pleased me the most about this Marsh election. Apparently (and I haven’t seen his questionaire) his answers to the Right to Life group did not score 100%. But, I have no doubt that Rep. Marsh will be a “pro-life legislator”. The issue is there is a hell of alot more legislation more important to his district and every district that is not abortion related. Too many GOP primaries have turned on the Right to Life endorsement because one scored a 100% and the other scored a 98%; both candidates are clearly “pro life” but the idiot with the 100% wins the endorsement and subsequently the primary. As a result we have quite a few Republican legislators who froth at the mouth at the abortion issue and have no clue on any other issues. There is no better case in point than the old Wilder seat in West Tennessee, Gresham is a complete fool (but by God she got the Right to Life endorsement!), while the former Mayor of Savannah was pro-life (just not as much as Gresham) and was very competent on other issues.
Of couse, President Obama is not popular in TN. If you are not a white man in TN, you do not count. I have seen and heard some of the nastiest things written and said about our President. The best man does not always win in TN because of the hatred that comes out of my state. The GOP needs to get sometning beside abortion, gays, taxes and guns. The only place that this matters is in the deep red south. In time, TN is going to be the big loser. We are going to be left behind and by then there will not be any hope of catching up. When the next GOP Govenor leaves office, the state will be in a complete meltdown, just like when the last GOP Governor left office. I am just thankful that our Governor is a smart man or we would be worse off that we are. But, I do not agree with him on the health-care reform. I feel that we need it badly.
Blue,
I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss Don Sundquist as being a bad GOP governor (although the state income tax issue killed his credibility). He has done some good things for the state during his tenure. Bredesen has done good things for the state as well, but some things (like spending millions in state taxpayer dollars on an underground addition to the Governor’s mansion and calling it “a necessary expense”) kinda turned people away from him as well.
Bottom line: controversy and bad policies happen on both sides of the aisle, regardless of political affiliation.
FYI: The 62nd District is far from yellow-dog. Those days are long gone. It has become increasingly Republican, along with the rest of the state.
Many transplants in Bedford, Lincoln, Rutherford.
trent lott is a conservative?