Byron York at Powerline analyzes the data and concludes that as an issue, health care was a loser in yesterday’s elections. Most voters didn’t rate it highly as a concern, and those who did were swamped by the vastly greater number who were worried about the economy. I think we could actually go farther than that: independents deserted the Democrats yesterday, and I think a big part of the reason was widespread alarm over the health care takeover that few voters really want.

The hypothesis that health care reform, as an issue, is not just irrelevant but poisonous is supported by these Fabrizio McLaughlin poll data. Admittedly, the questions were phrased to make a point, but the point is one that has rapidly been sinking into voters’ consciousness. For example:

Would you favor or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans if you knew you could be forced off your current health insurance and onto the government-run plan?

Total Favor 17%
Total Oppose 75%

Would you favor or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans if you knew that there was no guarantee that you could keep your current doctor?

Total Favor 20%
Total Oppose 75%

Would you favor or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans if you knew that it could limit the treatments and medications you could have access to?

Total Favor 16%
Total Oppose 80%

You get the picture. Let’s hope Congressional Democrats get the picture, too. Yesterday’s results can only help stimulate misgivings among Dems who worry that supporting the administration’s health care takeover could be political suicide.

At the Examiner, Michael Barone notes that “affluent suburban voters moved sharply toward Republicans in 2009.” We always wondered what high-income voters who went for Obama in 2008 were thinking. Now, apparently, they’re wondering too. Just wait until they’re face to face with a massive tax increase in 2010.

Glenn Reynolds writes in the New York Post that “The Obama magic has faded.”

Republicans, who were prepared to give Obama the benefit of the doubt a year ago, now can’t stand him. Independents who voted for him are deserting in droves. And Democrats don’t seem that happy either.

The good news for Obama is that he doesn’t have to run for re-election for three more years, so he still has a chance to get his feet under him. But for Congress members facing elections in a year — including but not limited to the famous “blue-dog” Democrats — the lesson of this week is that Obama can’t save their seats if the public is unhappy (and, equally, that Obama probably can’t hurt them much, either). So what Obama wants is nice, but it’s what the voters in their districts want that will control.

That makes Obama’s health-care “reform” package look iffy and his other big plans for remaking America look even iffier. With the hope having faded, enthusiasm for change seems much diminished. From a mythic figure, Obama has shrunk to an ordinary politician — and, so far, not an obviously deft one. It’ll be politics as usual from now on, and we can thank Obama, at least, for making politics-as-usual seem not so bad after all …

Finally, a few thoughts on NY 23.

It’s sad that the seat will be filled by a Democrat rather than a Republican. But let’s place the blame where it belongs: on the handful of local GOP functionaries who nominated a bad candidate, and a ridiculously bad Republican, Dede Scozzafava. And, of course, on Ms. Scozzafava herself, who may have swung the election to the Democrat with her last-minute endorsement. Doug Hoffman did more than a creditable job, considering that he was in single digits just a few weeks ago.

Let’s also note the fact that getting rid of “RINOs,” contrary to what seems to be the fervent belief of some conservative activists, does not guarantee victory. Was Hoffman too conservative for the district? Clearly not; if he had been the nominee in the first place and we had not gone through the Scozzafava fiasco, I assume he would have won handily. But it remains a fact that there are districts where the strongest Republican candidate will not necessarily be the most conservative one. There are reasons why the party has become almost extinct in the northeast, and the problem won’t be cured by a steady diet of red-meat conservatives. The Republican Party needs to be a big tent. Just not quite big enough to include Dede Scozzafava. Here are his top five lessons all of which, I think, are probably valid to one degree or another:

1. The “independents” or “moderates” get it. That is, they seem to understand that the Obama agenda and those allied with it are bad news for the economy. Whether they understand HOW bad Obama is for the economy, and how much of a danger he poses to other things like, say, freedom, cannot be determined from last night’s results. But the independents are no longer nearly as taken in by the smooth talk as they were a year ago.

2. The era of succeeding by running against George Bush is over.

3. Intensity counts.

4. Far from being a post-racial figure, Obama is the most racially polarizing politician since George Wallace. The white vote shifted dramatically against the Dems. On the other hand, what did they expect after Van Jones, ACORN, and the rest of Dear Leader’s fellow “community organizers”?

5. Goldwater 2.0 is underway. That is, the Republican Party, which, in domestic policy, had been all but emasculated by Bush’s playing kissy-face with welfare state and corporate liberalism (No Child Left Behind, prescription drug benefit, cheap and easy money, bank bailouts, and more), is into the process of discovering that conservatism is its heart and its salvation.

Flopping Aces notes that this did not keep Obama from trying to spin the results:

Just as many of us predicted the Democrat leadership is frantically spinning yesterdays election saying that Virginia and New Jersey are no big deal while NY-23 should….get this….actually reassure bluedog Dem’s:

Centrist, Blue Dog Democrats should be reassured on their healthcare vote by last night’s election, White House senior advisor David Axelrod said Wednesday.

Axelrod said that Democrats’ victory in New York’s 23rd congressional district should reassure Democrats who are concerned about the political ramifications of any vote for the House’s health reform bill.

Which is hilarity in the extreme. Owens is, as KOS described him in less then glowing terms, a “Lieberdem.”

If the Democrat loses the race, we lose nothing — it was previously held by a Republican. If he wins the seat, we gain another obnoxious Blue Dog, undermining our caucus from within while adding just a single vote to our already dominant House majorities.

Owens won because he was a moderate…end of story. And no moderate bluedog is going to feel a-ok with voting to spend a trillion dollars on healthcare especially when people are very anxious about it.

More proof that the Bluedog’s are worried?

Vulnerable House and Senate Democrats want their leaders to skip the party’s controversial legislative agenda for next year to help save their seats in Congress.

In the run-up to the 2010 midterm elections, they don’t want to be forced to vote on climate change, immigration reform and gays in the military, which they say should be set aside so Congress can focus on jobs and the economy…

Lincoln said that lawmakers should focus on passing healthcare reform and wait until next year to effect financial regulatory reform and reduce unemployment.

“That’s an awful lot to bite off and chew for right now,” said Lincoln, who described herself as “not in a hurry” to tackle climate change, an issue she has some jurisdiction over as chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

Sen. Evan Bayh (D), who is running for reelection in conservative-leaning Indiana, said “jobs should be our top priority and we shouldn’t do anything that detracts from that,” echoing a sentiment of many colleagues in similar positions.

And:

Jim Costa’s path to reelection isn’t the toughest among House Democrats, but that doesn’t mean the California Democrat feels safe voting for a House health care overhaul bill that he says is too costly and does too little to help rural districts like his own.

“I think we’re all vulnerable next year,” said Costa, who won with nearly three-quarters of the vote last year in a district that President Barack Obama carried with 60 percent.

Costa is one of a handful of moderate House Democrats from relatively stable districts who aren’t yet on board with the health care bill and whose “no” votes could force colleagues in more marginal districts to cast offsetting — and potentially perilous — “yes” votes.

But hey….it’s all good because the Dem’s won NY-23. Virginia and NJ are no big deal right?

Blast from the past in 2005: (h/t Hot Air)

[L]ooking back at First Read’s coverage the day after the 2005 New Jersey and Virginia contests, we had forgotten that Rahm Emanuel — then chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and now White House chief of staff — had called us to argue the very point Republicans are now making: that the two gubernatorial contests say something about the upcoming midterms.

Here’s what we wrote then:

Democratic House campaign committee chair Rahm Emanuel, calling First Read immediately after Kaine’s and Corzine’s victories were announced, argued that it’s clear Democratic voters were already energized earlier in the year when Democrat Paul Hackett nearly won a traditionally GOP-leaning Ohio House district. “I think that’s even more true today.” He also pointed out that the mayors of Detroit, Cleveland, and St. Paul, MN were all losing. “A lot of incumbents are losing to change,” he said (although he neglected to mention that these three mayors are Democrats, though the one from St. Paul endorsed Bush last year).

Either way you look at it….there is change in the air, and for once it’s a good change. Glenn Reynolds:

Republicans, who were prepared to give Obama the benefit of the doubt a year ago, now can’t stand him. Independents who voted for him are deserting in droves. And Democrats don’t seem that happy either.

The good news for Obama is that he doesn’t have to run for re-election for three more years, so he still has a chance to get his feet under him. But for Congress members facing elections in a year — including but not limited to the famous “blue-dog” Democrats — the lesson of this week is that Obama can’t save their seats if the public is unhappy (and, equally, that Obama probably can’t hurt them much, either). So what Obama wants is nice, but it’s what the voters in their districts want that will control.

That makes Obama’s health-care “reform” package look iffy and his other big plans for remaking America look even iffier. With the hope having faded, enthusiasm for change seems much diminished. From a mythic figure, Obama has shrunk to an ordinary politician — and, so far, not an obviously deft one. It’ll be politics as usual from now on, and we can thank Obama, at least, for making politics-as-usual seem not so bad after all