[jogiba]

Democrat Kathy Hochul won a vacant U.S. House seat in a heavily Republican district in upstate New York in a special election that became a referendum on the GOP plan to transform Medicare.

Democrat wins House seat on Medicare issue - Politics - Capitol Hill - msnbc.com

[wildman]

The Dems did not so much win as the Right lost.

Ordinary people are beginning to wake up and understand what would be the actual practical results of a country dominated by right wing ideology and they don't like it.

[GeneV]

The Dems did not so much win as the Right lost.

Ordinary people are beginning to wake up and understand what would be the actual practical results of a country dominated by right wing ideology and they don't like it.

That first sentence seems to be a description of most recent elections, regardless of who wins. The right did not win the 2010 midterms. Government, as it was functioning, lost. People are just now starting to understand the alternative proposed by those candidates.

[wildman]

People are just now starting to understand the alternative proposed by those candidates

Yes.
The Right keeps on talking about how "serious" they are about their agenda - essentially to emasculate the functions of government to point where they can "drown it in a bathtub".

Folks are starting understand just how serious the Right really is and what this means in the concrete and not just as abstract ideology and it is scaring the hell out of them.

[newarts]

...
Folks are starting understand just how serious the Right really is and what this means in the concrete and not just as abstact ideology and it is scaring the hell out of them.

I hope so.

Perhaps progressives would benefit from helping people understand the widespread public consequences of the conservative agenda.

[GeneV]

I hope so.

Perhaps progressives would benefit from helping people understand the widespread public consequences of the conservative agenda.

Don't you think that is what they already try to do?

[newarts]

Don't you think that is what they already try to do?

No. I think there is relatively little discussion of the consequences of the right's fiscal proposals; certainly not to the extent of the fear-mongering employed by the right.

[Nesster]

No. I think there is relatively little discussion of the consequences of the right's fiscal proposals; certainly not to the extent of the fear-mongering employed by the right.

Well, they try, but the dems seem to have a real difficult time expressing themselves in ways that comes across well. It's either alarmist - feel bad - blather (that doesn't sell when compared to the feel good blather from the right); or overly sophisticated and complex (ie. more than 3 steps and 2 variables) logic. And they tend to assume people 'share' the underlying values and thus don't bother expressing these well, if at all. "Morning in America" ain't the usual Dem fare, despite Clinton's and Obama's managing to get some of that magic.

[Parallax]

The Dems did not so much win as the Right lost.

They can thank, in part for the loss, the Tea Party candidate that siphoned 9% of the vote.
I think we just got a preview of the 2012 general election.

[deadwolfbones]

They can thank, in part for the loss, the Tea Party candidate that siphoned 9% of the vote.
I think we just got a preview of the 2012 general election.

They can thank Ryan's super-retarded budget proposal first and foremost, though.

[GeneV]

They can thank, in part for the loss, the Tea Party candidate that siphoned 9% of the vote.
I think we just got a preview of the 2012 general election.

At 47%, the Dem. was near a majority without the Tea Party candidate, and at 43% the Republican was several points behind her. It would be speculating quite a bit to assume that the Tea Party voters would have shown up at all, much less throwing all their support to the Republican.

[Parallax]

It would be speculating quite a bit to assume that the Tea Party voters would have shown up at all, much less throwing all their support to the Republican.

Well, that's what I get for listening to the news reports.

[NaClH2O]

Well, that's what I get for listening to the news reports.

Unfortunately news reports tend to 'dumb down' the results of any election to the most easily understood factors. Reality tends to be more nuanced. If you listened (and read) all the brouhaha over the MA special election last year, you would have thoutht the the Dems were dead dead dead. Now they are trumpeting exactly the opposite.
Nate Silver, over at fivethirtyeight, has a much better thought out and nuanced position. Basically he says that special elections are...well...special, and can turn on lots of things that are basically local and unique to that one election. The results of one don't mean much. If however several of them point in the same direction, than that is important.
BTW Nate Silver and his political analysis and polling savvy are a refreshing breath of reality in the usual spin und drom of the general political press.
some good analysis here

NaCl(he's damn good at analyzing baseball stats too)H2O

[GeneV]

Well, that's what I get for listening to the news reports.

News reports love to speculate.

[wildman]

I think in the long run Dems have to be careful about how they interpret
this.

It's possible that in such a conservative district most of these voters
are expressing the same conservative values they have always held - that
is narrow self-interest.

Many of them may depend critically on Medicare or have someone in their
family who does. Medicare may be the only thing that is keeping them
out of the poorhouse. With a huge unfunded (unpaid for) budget deficit
for Medicare, in the short run at least, Medicare is a good deal for
them and they don't want to lose it. So, in this case, voting
Democratic is consistent with their values.

I'd be careful to not read too much into the motives behind this vote. It does not
necessarily indicate support by these voters for a broader progressive
social and economic agenda.

This vote may have been more a tactical than a strategic change.