As several commenters have noted, Brown’s once-unimaginable triumph suggests the GOP could wage competitive races this November in fellow sapphire state New York.  Not only could Republicans pull off notable surprises and win senatorial, gubernatorial, or House races: a conservative could, too, in a place where the terms aren’t necessarily synonyms.

Notably, Brown’s party affiliation doesn’t have to be followed by the phrase “in name only.”  The Massachusetts Miracle perpetrator might not be a Jim DeMint clone, but he’s more to the right than, say, John McCain despite his supportive robocall on the Arizonan’s behalf. While he’s occasionally wavered from the right, most notably on Mitt Romney’s state health plan and abortion, he still didn’t run as a Scozzafava-style Republican.

In addition to offering the deciding health care vote, Brown established that he’s a prototypical conservative on security while being big on smaller government. If Brown, who’s ultimately replacing Ted Kennedy, working alongside John Kerry, and driving to Washington in his pickup truck with Barney Frank riding shotgun (possibly in theory), can win, a similar candidate could pull off the same feat in New York without divine intervention.

Unfortunately, residents of the state where Rockefeller Republicans were born may not get that choice.  If the past offers any indication, conservatives could instead end up supporting by default a Patakiesque candidate in many races or, even worse, George Pataki. In New York, the Republican is frustratingly often the one who wants government to grow at a slightly more sluggish pace above inflation than the opponent.

Even someone like Pataki himself, who ended his governorship more identifiable with Albany than his party, would make conservatives happy in some regards.  Any GOP senator would likely oppose Democraticare while supporting judges with restrained tendencies.  But those on the right would obviously prefer casting votes for a Republican they agree with more than intermittently.

Conservative Republican officeholders have been as rare in the Empire State as a sales tax decrease.  But those of a center-right/sympathetic independent mindset should make it known what kind of Republicans they want to support.  Any Tea Party sympathizer who has ever had the urge to represent his or her fellow New Yorkers on either the state or federal level should elbow into the arena posthaste.   Brown has proved that victory is possible anywhere if one offers a genuine alternative to the progressive syllabus.

Martha Coakley may have been a bad candidate.  But even a slick campaigner would have trouble overcoming being aligned with Obama: as a result of seeing his policies on the table or in action, many are cheering for the exact opposite course.

That’s true even in states the president won with ease.  In other words, New York could be the next Massachusetts, which was itself the next New Jersey. Conservatives running at any level could run strong here even without having Kirsten Gillibrand, Andrew Cuomo, or your local Democratic congresspersonsurmise that Jim Kelly is a Patriots fan.

With that in mind, Senator John McCain should have his way with the Woodstock Film Festival, which might be the only event more pretentious than a regular film festival.  The New York State happening drains funds from the national pile, which, according to Washington Times writer Amanda Carpenter, angers a quite straight-laced elected official:

The Woodstock Film Festival wasn’t very happy that Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, used an earmark to help fund its operations as an example of government waste in a speech on the Senate floor.

After Senate Democrats broke a Republican filibuster last Saturday over an omnibus spending bill with $446.8 billion in discretionary money, Mr. McCain blasted the thousands of earmarks contained in it. One of them was the money for the Woodstock Film Festival.

“In order to really do a lot more research on that great cultural moment, we’re going to spend $30,000 for the Woodstock Film Festival youth initiative,” he said sarcastically.

The Arizonian merely opposes using federal money on a wholly superfluous program with parochial appeal.  For that, he gets grief from someone apparently terrified of self-sufficiency:

“The Woodstock Film Festival is a small, fiscally responsible non-profit organization that provides an enormous amount of economic development through tourism, the film commission and many of our other efforts,” (Woodstock Film Festival Co-Founder and Director Laurent) Rejto said in an e-mail to The Times. “We’re saddened and demoralized by the fact that Sen. McCain did not have the wherewithal to do a little research before misleading the public about our worthy program.”

“A little research” would have let McCain know that they are getting public funding to run an entirely superfluous event.  If the movie marathon foundation is “fiscally responsible,” why do they need to beg to Washington for assistance?  They also amusingly brag on the banner that tops their site’s front page that they’re “Fiercely Independent,” which is only true if followed by the phrase, “Of paying bills.”

This state continues to suffer negative vibes inflicted by a three-day plague four decades ago.  The people involved never changed.  It’s literally true: the advisory board includes Woodstock producer and promoter Michael Lang. Those staging the event are the same tie-dye adherents who wallowed in their own filth during the most infamous of rock gatherings.  McCain couldn’t attend and act self-righteously indulgent due to a scheduling conflict.

It goes without saying that everyone respects McCain’s service, including people who didn’t vote for him last year or did because he was marginally the better default candidate.  Additionally, voters who have qualms with his positions or style can nonetheless admire him opposition to ladling bacon fat on everything that passes through Congress.  He’s further trying to stop Democraticare, so even those on the right who thought McCain’s campaign felt like a sequel to Bob Dole’s can feel grateful he’s still in the Senate.  Ultimately, he’s defending the interests of people who own at least one suit.

Stimulus junkies will whine that the movie bash only gets 30 grand, which is an easy statement to make about other people’s money.  It’s especially so since Woodstock fans are the sort who enjoy sharing everyone else’s things.

But festival enthusiasts can promote their collective values on their own dime.  As with every other motion picture event, this one doesn’t deserve 30 bucks of collective funding, much less a couple extra zeroes.  Aren’t they worried that taking money from The Man will generate unwanted karma?

Besides, if the amount is so little, the Ben & Jerry’s brigade should cover it themselves.  Most obviously, organizers can raise funds by soliciting checks from a handful of participating celebrities. Failing that, they can just run a co-op for 20 years or so.

But New Jersey’s demonstrated willingness to vote counter to their reputation should inspire conservative hope in an adjacent state.  Specifically, one winner from Election Day 2009 isn’t running until 2010.  Rick Lazio has to feel optimistic about his chances to become New York’s next executive now that Chris Christie is the new New Jersey Governor.  Can Lazio reproduce Christie’s success next November?

Based solely upon the state’s last major election, a Republican winning New York’s governorship in 2010 would be as shocking as Chuck Schumer switching parties or Chuck Rangel resigning with quiet dignity.  This state was even more in the tank for Obama than its next-door buddy: the Hoper and Changer won New York’s electoral votes thanks to receiving 62 percent of the tally, compared to the meager 37 percent obtained by John McCain.

New Jersey looked practically moderate with its 57-42 Obama victory, although that was still a considerably higher percentage than the rest of the nation.  Still, Christie’s triumph may provide the first indication that even the ramparts guarding Democratic strongholds are buckling.

Importantly, both are obviously renowned as immensely blue states.  Perhaps not coincidentally, both are also similarly rotten when it comes to economic and personal freedoms.  Consequently, liberal states’ residents may finally be tiring of liberal policies’ results.  New Yorkers might find themselves in the same situation; all they need now is a genuine conservative alternative.

Will they get one?  Most notably, Lazio was antagonistic toward gun rights while in Congress; Christie is likewise soft on the traditional conservative issue.  Analysts can debate whether Christie’s stance cost him votes or actually helped him win in a liberal-heavy state.  Either way, Lazio should only indulge in so many exceptions: he ought to generally act like an elephant and not a RINO.

Instead of running as a feckless moderate, Lazio should seize upon rightward momentum and campaign to reverse the state government’s eternally creeping domination.  It’s more than simply being a principled candidate who actually takes stances: it’s pragmatic, too.  He should wager that, as in other states, voters here would be sympathetic to a new course that involves less of their money being taken and used to buy whatever junk Albany wants.

Lazio would further have to prove he’s not like most other politicians who are changed by the capital.  Again, he can use New Jersey’s winner as a model: Christie’s anti-corruption stance and reputation undoubtedly aided his efforts to topple a greasy weasel like Jon Corzine.

Fortuitously, opposing huge budgets while fighting smoky room shenanigans are tasks that complement each other like Guinness layered over Harp.  Lazio just has to stand up and then hold his ground.

There’s at least one issue where New York’s GOP candidate is in the clear: the relatively svelte Lazio won’t have to deal with cheap, lame weight jokes.  Still, Republicans can hope Andrew Cuomo brings on Corzine as a consultant.  Creigh Deeds is looking for work, too.

Talk radio lost this federal election in two big ways. Its candidate, Republican John McCain, got creamed. And its most dedicated enemies, who want to trim talk radio’s sails, were massively empowered.

Elements of the team of Presidentelect Barack “Hussein” Obama, as they were fond of calling him, and the expanded Democratic majority will move to remind broadcasters of a fundamental tenet of broadcast law.

That is, that the airwaves do not belong to the station “owners,” as they call themselves, but to the people of the United States of America.

First, John McCain wasn’t really talk radio’s candidate. McCain was long seen as not conservative enough, and I can’t think of a single conservative on-air pundit who vas a McCainiac prior to his apparent victory in the GOP primary. So, their support of McCain was lukewarm at best on ideological grounds.
Second, his full name is Barack Hussein Obama.

The basic service that a broadcast licensee owes a community is truth. As the election neared, that commodity was in short supply.

And the very reason why talk radio has thrived is that the mainstream media, specifically print and television, have utterly failed to provide the honesty so many are seeking. Media coverage this campaign season marked a new low for journalism. Barack Obama hardly needed the millions of dollars he raised with the media carrying the water for him for two years. Talk radio was ahead of the curve on the Jeremiah Wright story by several months. The Los Angeles Times violated the public trust by not releasing a video of Obama from 2003 which would have shed light on his relationship with PLO activist Rashid Khalidi, but also allegedly showed Obama saying that Israel was a terrorist state.

The mainstream media gave vitrually no coverage to the story that Obama’s original birth certificate was sealed by the governor Hawaii, preventing anyone from confirming whether or not Obama was a natural born citizen and even constitutionally eligble to be president.

Douglas Turner, the author of the column, cited what he sees as a few “wrongs” of talk radio, but is apparently unbothered by the mainstream media’s protection of Obama’s candidacy by so-called journalists who falsely claim to be objective.

The fact is that talk radio’s popularity is a result of the mainstream media’s inability to tell the whole truth or be objective. What Turner fails to recognize is that while talk radio hosts do openly express their opinion, they also talk about stories that aren’t given the light of day by print and television media. And atleast talk radio hosts are honest about their partiality… their equivalents in the mainstream media still claim to be impartial.

What would I ask Barack Obama at the final debate? I would ask a question challenging him on his judgement. Barack Obama has suggested that judgment is more important than experience for the job of president. How does he answer questions about his judgment in associating with domestic terrorist William Ayers, convicted slumlord Tony Rezko, and radical groups like ACORN? Is that what you call good judgment?

How do I think Obama would answer this question? Okay, I don’t expect him to get this question, but if he did, he would just give some longwinded explanation about why his associations aren’t as deep as some have suggested. But, his explanations contrast with a lot of the facts have come out.  I think it’s important for McCain to raise this issue because it does call into question Obama’s judgement.

What would I ask of John McCain? I would like to know more about his economic proposals. This is an issue he needs address because with the economic situation the way it is, people tend to blame the incumbent president and his party, and McCain needs to sell those proposals to the American people.

UPDATE: Just pre-recorded my thoughts on the debate. It’s been a while since my last radio interview, so I hope I communicated my thoughts effectively. I’ll give a brief synopsis of my thoughts on the debate.

As for who won, I said McCain won on points, and Obama won on style. 

I thought McCain focused on three points, 1) his record of bipartisanship, 2) his experience and 3) comparing his record with Obama’s. I think these points will be brought up constantly for the remainder of the campaign.

Even though Obama won on style, it was clear this was not his best format for a debate. He’s obviously more comfortable with a big crowd, a teleprompter and a script. He won on style by sticking to his talking points and stump speech.

I think McCain missed an opportunity to hit Obama harder. 

I think Obama missed an opportunity by failing to present himself as someone who can be bipartisan. 

I think McCain used his experience and judgement to advantage. He spoke about the uncertainty of tomorrow, and I think he was talking to those voters who may be leaning towards Obama, but are wary of his inexperience. 

Still, in the end, despite the opportunities of a townhall style debate, the structure of the debate was horrible, and Tom Brokaw picked a lot of lousy questions that didn’t give the candidate an opportunity to give unique answers. 

The previous Siena Poll had the race in New York State a statistical tie. The new poll has Barack up 22 points.

Now the narrative behind this new poll is that Obama has “surged” in New York. But, truthfully, it was not a surge, the new poll mirrors Obama’s standing in the state as virtually every other poll of the state has shown.

UPDATE: Scott Leffler says I “finally admitted” that New York is not in play. Of course, I never said I really believed it was. After the previous Siena poll I specifically said, “I’d like to see a couple other new polls reflect the same competitiveness in the state before I start looking at New York as a battleground state,” and “still there’s plenty of reason to doubt the race in New York is really within the margin of error.”

… I just found this web page that lists congressmen based on how well they stick up for the middle class. It says he’s at 50 percent for the year. And he’s gotten F’s on the previous four years they graded.     

Yup, that’s the Tom Reynolds I remember … stickin’ it to the middle class.

And he’s endorsed Chris Lee. I wonder if Lee thought about declining that endorsement? Doubt it. From what I can tell, Lee aspires to be just like Reynolds. He’s got the same campaign staff. And he doesn’t return my calls. Just. Like. Reynolds.

If I were advising the Dems, I’d tell them to make sure to link Lee to Reynolds just like Obama is linking McCain to Bush. After all, no one really believes that Reynolds isn’t running so he can spend time with his family. It’s cause he was afraid of getting his ass kicked.

And no one really believes Barack Obama is qualified to be President of the United States, but that’s not stopping millions from for him… But I digress.

What I don’t understand is why Scott was so quick to accept the assessment of the website TheMiddleClass.org as legitimate and objective. It’s easy for a blogger or even a member of the media to give credence to a poll, or a study, or an organization that tells them what they want to hear, while dismissing those that don’t.

The other day, Buffalo Pundit criticized Chris Lee’s latest ad for citing data from a conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation. It’s fair argument to make, just as I have similarly questioned the sources Democrats use to support their claims, be it from liberal think tanks, research groups, etc. 

What Scott failed to do (or just chose not to do) was question the source. It would have taken all of 10 seconds to find out that TheMiddleClass.org is run by the Drum Major Institute, and that the Drum Major Institute is a liberal research group. Not bipartisan. Not nonpartisan. Liberal. 

Do I really need to say anything else?

A Brilliant Corners Research & Strategies poll of 400 likely voters shows that Alice Kryzan holds a 10-point lead over Republican candidate for Congress Chris Lee with 39 percent to 29 percent and 32 percent undecided. The poll, which was commissioned by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and EMILY’s List, was conducted September 15-17 with a 4.9 percent margin of error. Attached is a polling memo from pollster Cornell Belcher.

“This poll shows that just 42 days before Election Day, Alice Kryzan is in good position to win,” said Carrie James, regional press secretary at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “With a weakened economy, Chris Lee’s record of moving jobs to China just doesn’t sell in Western New York. Alice Kryzan has the independence and integrity to represent Western New York in Congress and this poll shows a clear path to victory.”

Now, there are so many things wrong with the poll it’s hard to know where to begin.

Well, let’s start with the obvious: The poll was conducted by Brilliant Corners Research & Strategies which is a liberal group. Based on their own memo, they must know their methods are suspect, because they did not release the poll’s crosstabs and methodology. So, there are two key thing we do not know:

• The sample size of Republicans, Democrats and Independents.
• The wording and order of the exact questions asked.

The reason the sample size for each party affiliation is important is because in the 26th district, the Republican Party has an undeniable advantage. The district went 51-44 for Bush in 200, and 55-43 for Bush in 2004. The Republican Party has more registered voters than the Democratic Party in the district as well. I am willing to bet that the poll under-sampled Republicans significantly.

Some might argue that the political climate for Republicans is not considered to be great. That’s only partially true. I would argue the Democrats had a greater advantage in 2006, and Tom Reynolds still managed to win reelection.

Yes, this year Republicans did have a significant deficit on the generic congressional ballot… but that was only until recently:

A potential shift in fortunes for the Republicans in Congress is seen in the latestUSA Today/Gallup survey, with the Democrats now leading the Republicans by just 3 percentage points, 48% to 45%, in voters’ “generic ballot” preferences for Congress. This is down from consistent double-digit Democratic leads seen on this measure over the past year.

If that’s the case in voters’ “generic ballot” then one could easily conclude that Chris Lee, already enjoying an advantage with party registration, would have an even bigger advantage as a result of that shift. That shift, of course, is largely attributed to a surge in enthusiasm amongst Republicans following John McCain’s selection of Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Months prior to the Palin Effect, two nonpartisan groups had already seen a pro-Republican shift in the district.

And then we have to wonder why the memo did not release the exact wording and order of the questions asked in the poll. The idiolect of the memo from Brilliant Corners Research & Strategies is by no means objective. Which leads me to believe that the wording of the questions were not objective and crafted in such a way for the poll to achieve a desired result. In other words, this was likely a push poll.

Now it’s not surprising that several liberal bloggers in WNY are eating this poll up. Robert Harding at The Albany Project calls the poll exciting even though he usually takes such polls with a grain of salt.

Rochester Turning is not nearly as pumped by the poll, but believes it shows the race should be competitive.

But, neither asked the same questions about the poll as I have. Why not? Because the poll tells them what they want to hear, and that’s good enough to motivate them into thinking Kryzan can pull it off.

Considering all the money that was donated to Jon Powers’ failed campaign by the netroots, a poll like this is more useful as a fundraising tool for Alice Kryzan than as a legitimate snapshot of the state of the congressional race.

UPDATE: I have to say that I’m disappointed that friend Scott Leffler seems to take the poll at face value:

A 10 point lead has got to be nice for Kryzan. But 32 percent undecided in a Republican district has got to be a concern for her. Of course, she would only need slightly more than a third of the undecideds to win.

UPDATE: Roll Call has a story that backs up my assessment of the poll:

Republicans are sure to cry foul when they see the poll results. The Western New York district has more enrolled Republicans than Democrats — as of March 1, there were 178,000 Republicans and 141,000 Democrats, while 121,000 voters were registered with minor parties or unaffiliated.

Yet the pollsters, while acknowledging that the district has more enrolled Republicans than Democrats, said 33 percent of the voters surveyed identified themselves as Democrats, compared with 32 percent Republicans and 25 percent independents.

I also said that the poll was more likely a fundraising tool for Kryzan… this part seems to support that to:

Despite the district’s leanings, Democrats have been bullish about their chances of winning Reynolds’ seat. But the DCCC backed a candidate other than Kryzan — Iraq War veteran Jon Powers, who remains on the general election ballot as the nominee of the Working Families Party — and Democrats have been scrambling to shore her up since her primary win. Through Aug. 20, Lee, who is personally wealthy, was sitting on $751,000 in his campaign account, while Kryzan had just $95,000.

And one can’t help laughing at the irony of the last paragraph of the story:

The DCCC began airing an ad in the district over the weekend accusing Lee of sending some of his company’s business to China. Ironically, in a clerical error in its Federal Election Commission filing for the independent expenditure, the DCCC said it was placing the ad on behalf of Powers.

The “Palin effect” has given the McCain campaign a lift in [New York State], putting it within reach, according to Edward Cox, McCain’s state campaign chief. 

“We are doing much better among women and Democrats,” Cox said during a visit to Republican headquarters downtown. “These are Reagan Democrats and Hillary Democrats.”

Cox pointed to a Siena College poll, released Monday, that found McCain trailed Obama by 5 percentage points, compared with an 8-point gap last month and 13 points in July.

Sarah Palin, McCain’s running mate, has electrified many undecided voters, including local “hockey moms,” campaign officials said.

But other polls report a wider gap, and Obama campaign spokesman Blake Zeff dismissed the prediction of a close race as wishful thinking.

The last Republican presidential candidate to win New York was Ronald Reagan in 1984.

Cox’s prediction may help boost Republican turnout and energize campaign volunteers, who were disappointed at McCain’s lack of a public appearance when he visited Buffalo for a fundraiser in July.

But Cox fell short of pledging a serious campaign for the state. He wouldn’t predict that McCain will visit the area, and said the McCain campaign has no plans for a television advertising blitz in New York unless the poll gap narrows further.

Even voters from Democratic strongholds, however, are calling with support, drawn by the energy that Palin has brought to the ticket, local Republicans said.

“They don’t want McCain signs; they want McCain/Palin signs,” said Russ Gugino, regional campaign coordinator.

“There are an awful lot of hockey moms in Western New York who can relate to Gov. Palin,” said James Domagalski, chairman of the Erie County Republican Party.

This story reinforces my earlier point that it will have to take a number of other polls showing a tight race in New York to merit either John McCain investing money here to score an upset, or for Barack Obama doing the same in order to hold his ground.

Still, the local Republican committees in New York state have a huge opportunity with this surge of enthusiasm. They should be signing people up for massive Get Out The Vote efforts in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Recent polls show McCain is ahead in Ohio, but not comfortably ahead. We’ll undoubtedly need a good ground game there. While I’m not worried about Ohio, it is vital to McCain’s chances of victory.

But, what could really help McCain is a surge of his supporters getting out the vote in Pennsylvania, where polls are very close. If McCain wins in Pennsylvania, he wins the election.

New York, as far as the presidential election is concerned, isn’t important. The Real Clear Politics Average for the state shows there’s no justifiable reason for McCain to waste any resources here.

If the Republican committees in New York don’t take advantage of the surge of enthusiasm by building up a massive Election Day GOTV army to send to Ohio and Pennsylvania, than they are only helping Obama.

For the sake of the county, I hope they aren’t squandering that opportunity.