Alumni lose major races nationally

The number of Princetonians in Congress is slated to increase by one, with another alumnus still waiting to learn his fate, as alumni won five of 12 races in last week's midterm elections. But in a year in which Republicans took control of the House of Representatives, gained a majority of the nation's governorships and picked up positions in the Senate, some high-profile alumni failed to catch the Republican tidal wave in several major races nationwide.

Going into the 2010 election cycle, Princeton alumni were seen as favorites in four races and long shots in two others. The races met expectations. In the other races, which were projected to be tossups or potentially competitive, only one Princetonian has secured a victory.

In the most expensive statewide campaign ever, Republican Meg Whitman ’77 lost her bid for California's governorship to Democrat Jerry Brown, the state's attorney general and former governor. Despite spending nearly $142 million of her own money on her campaign, Whitman lost by double-digits, garnering 41 percent of the vote to Brown's 54 percent.

"I think a lot of people were put off by the amount of money Meg Whitman put into her campaign," said Micah Joselow ’12, co-president of College Democrats. After leading in some polls, Whitman's campaign slipped in the final months.

College Republicans president Tiernan Kane ’11 noted the formidable challenge Whitman had undertaken.

"Ms. Whitman was unable to prevail against a 13-point disadvantage in party identification in California and a very effective campaign by an experienced opponent," he said in an e-mail. "No wave reaches all shores."

In a second close race out West, Republican Kenneth Buck ’81 lost to incumbent Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet after leading in the final projections of major polls before Election Day. He lost by fewer than 16,000 votes, falling short of the roughly 6,000 votes that would have triggered an automatic recount.

Buck, who aligned himself with the Tea Party movement, may have lost the election by alienating moderate voters.

Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince.’ Donate now »

"[The Tea Party movement] ran a number of bad candidates who lost races the Republicans might have otherwise won," politics professor Paul Frymer said in an e-mail.

Several other Tea Party-backed candidates, including Senate hopefuls Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, also lost races to vulnerable Democrats.

In two other competitive races, featuring alumni in Southern states, candidates faltered in their campaigns' waning days.

In a rematch of Maryland's 2006 gubernatorial contest, former Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich ’79 lost to Democratic incumbent Martin O'Malley. Ehrlich received 42 percent of the vote while O'Malley received 56 percent.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

In Georgia's 8th District, Democrat Jim Marshall ’72 lost his bid for a fifth term in Congress to Republican challenger Austin Scott. Marshall won 47 percent of the vote, to Scott's 53 percent. Though Marshall voted against his party on its signature health care reform and climate change legislation, he was criticized by Scott for voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House, a decision Marshall had said he would not repeat if given the chance next term.

At least one candidate, however, bucked the trend of alumni losses in competitive races by scoring an upset victory. In New York's 19th Congressional District, Republican Nan Hayworth ’81 defeated two-term incumbent Democrat John Hall. Hayworth took 53 percent of the vote, while Hall took 47 percent in a race considered a dead heat heading into Election Day.

Republican Randy Altschuler ’93 may join Hayworth if he pulls out a win against Democratic Rep. Timothy Bishop in New York's 1st District. Though initial returns had Altschuler trailing by more than 3,400 votes, recent reports following the discovery of an electronic voting machine glitch in Suffolk County show that Altschuler leads by 392 votes, with roughly 9,000 absentee ballots not yet counted.

Political scientists nationwide have noted that Republicans had important advantages going into the election. Parties routinely pick up seats in midterm Congressional races following losses in presidential elections, while governing parties also tend to face losses in weak economies.

Politics professor Markus Prior said in an e-mail that the results were not the fault of President Barack Obama, but rather were a consequence of a midterm election during an economic recession.

"Historically, the president's party loses seats at the first midterm election," Prior noted, since voters prefer to "restore some balance."

Yet in the days after the election, Republicans and some Democrats have called Tuesday's results a rebuke of Obama's policies specifically.

"The remarkable success of Republicans in this election was the product of a nationwide rejection of President Obama's overly liberal policies, policies which have mostly been ineffective or downright destructive," Kane said.

In campaigns that were not predicted to be competitive, alumni did as expected, winning four congressional races and losing two others.

Democrats John Sarbanes ’84 of Maryland and Jared Polis ’96 of Colorado, along with their Republican colleague Leonard Lance GS ’82 of New Jersey's 7th District, comfortably won reelection to the House. Lance defeated Ed Potosnak, a candidate whom College Democrats endorsed and actively campaigned for.

In Alabama, Democrat Terri Sewell ’86 won the race for the state's 7th District with 73 percent of the vote, the largest margin for any Princetonian, to become the state's first black woman elected to Congress.

Democrat Ravi Sangisetty ’03 only won 36 percent of the vote in Louisiana's 3rd District, while Independent Timothy vanBlommesteyn ’75 collected a meager 2 percent of the vote in New Hampshire's 2nd District.

The results of the midterm elections will alter the political landscape in Washington as Obama now faces a large coalition of Republicans wary of the recent growth of government. With Republican control of the House, there will perhaps be more disagreement unfolding in the Capitol.

"[Democrats and Republicans] will likely get some important things done because they have to. But further partisanship and rancor seems like the norm these days, and I don't see that changing," Frymer said.

Joselow, on the other hand, expressed more optimism about compromise in Washington over the next two years. "This will be an opportunity to show what [Obama] can do as a bipartisan legislator. Both Republicans and Democrats are in this for the American people. The common goals of both parties are to help mend the economy," he said.