Three Republican Winners (in no particular order):
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME): Democrats elsewhere in the country would've killed for a candidate with the credentials, money, and record of Congressman Tom Allen. And as Congressman Shays' defeat shows, it's hard to be a Republican in New England right now. But Susan Collins crushed her opponent without much trouble. Allen didn't come closer than nine points in any of the polls that year. Susan Collins provides a good example for Republicans in Blue Areas, including Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads: pragmatism. Instead of sticking to an ideology blindly, you must sometimes compromise your core beliefs at times in order to adequately serve. Susan Collins showed that being a pragmatic, centrist leader can appeal to people in the bluest of states. Play to your region, Republicans: the center is your friend sometimes. You have to admit yourselves that sometimes, people just don't like the right's point of view. Sometimes, they want the center-left philosophy. And unless you want to get yet ANOTHER thumping in two year, you better come to terms with that. Going further to the right isn't the answer. Adaption is.
Mitt Romney: Mitt Romney was lucky not to get aboard this awful campaign. And because of his "economic expertise", he's the heavy favorite to be the leader de-facto of the GOP. This should be a good example of what Republicans should focus retooling their message on: the economy. The "scare 'em into supporting us" thing didn't work this time. The scare 'em thing didn't work at all, on any level. But Romney now knows this, and has the necessary background to make a solid run in 2012. Lesson: scare politics are done, and adapt your economic message like Romney did in the Michigan primary.
Ted Stevens: Like it or not, it seems very likely that Sen. Stevens will get re-elected. The man's a freakin CONVICTED FELON. How the hell did he survive? Longevity. He's been a champion for Alaskans for four decades. And because of that, Alaskans (right or wrong) gave him a pass on his crimes. Republicans seem to be on a quest in the Commonwealth to purge anybody who doesn't follow the hardcore line. This should teach them a lesson: longevity helps. People that have been around forever end up being able to get away with more. Now, Ted may not be welcomed into the Senate. But his re-election will likely keep the seat in GOP hands. That's the lesson folks: people who have served for a long time have a chance to develop loyalty that newbies may not be able to. Look at Arizona; the demographics were perfect for an Obama win. BUT, because of McCain's longterm service as Senator, McCain won comfortably. Republicans, STOP EATING YOUR OWN.
Three Democratic Winners
Judy Feder: Maybe it's because the only information I get about the Tenth District is directly from the blogs and a few politically involved friends from the Tenth at school, but it seems people were REALLY drinking the Feder Kool-Aid around here. Let me add a disclaimer, I publicly stated I thought Mike Turner would be a better choice in the primary. Now, I'm not gonna turn this into a "I told you so" thing, because I don't know if Turner would've done any better. But I do know that this idea of Feder ever having a legitimate chance in the Tenth district is a myth. Why is this? Hell if I know. I can't be positive on that cause I wasn't there. That's not the point. My point is that she went from losing by 16 points to 20 points in a year where the top of the ticket did even better than two years before. Here's the lesson for Dems: when the milk is sour, you don't keep it in the fridge and hope it'll get better. Feder didn't do very good in 2006, and I argued that she probably wouldn't do much better in 2008, due to the fact that she had spent a lot of money in 2006 to get her name out. It's the same reason Gilmore didn't gain ANYTHING throughout the entire campaign against Warner; they were both known entities, with little room for movement. Democrats, we can't get hooked up on candidates that aren't going to win because we like them. Now, I understand allowing somebody to try again if they lose by 2-3 points. But we can't let our good fortune as of recent blind us to this basic truth: before you can be a good Congressman, delegate, senator, etc., first you have to be ELECTED. If somebody gets crushed one time, chances are, they'll ge crushed again. Don't be afraid to try new angles.
The P.U.M.A. Movement: I've wanted to do this for a while... so here it goes. In the words of Nelson Muntz, "HA HAH!" That being said, we should try to welcome back into the party, because we're gonna need them in other races. I know they're angry that Obama actually won, and their little movement didn't turn into anything that had any real impact, but maybe they'll eventually come around. However, some are now rushing to the aid of SARAH PALIN (WTF?), so maybe not.
Democratic Partisan Anger: Hope inspires so much better than anger, change is so much more effective than experience. Democrats that threw big angry partisan bombs? Not so lucky. Democrats that spoke about bipartisan agreement and working together? Warner, Nye, Periello, and Obama in Virginia alone. And Webb in 06, for that matter. Unity, Hope, and Peace (not just in our Foreign Policy, but in our politics) are good things. I know we like to feed red meat to the base, but if we are going to continue Democratic expansion, we need to get into post-partisan politics, where party labels are just that: labels. That's how we win, and that's how we continue our success.
Takes these with a grain of salt, but I think they provide some pretty good examples of what Republicans and Democrats both can work on, and these examples are some that Democrats may not want to talk about right now. But we must learn from our mistakes if we are to continue to expand, both nationally and in the Commonwealth.