For months, the "mainstream" media and the Democrats have been stating that the 2003 gubernatorial elections would be a referendum on President Bush. I wonder if they will keep saying that after Tuesday's elections. In a span of weeks, the Democrats have lost three governships the year before a presidential election. First Californians recalled their Democratic governor and over 60% of Californian voters supported Republican candidates. Tuesday night, Republicans were elected governors in Kentucky and Mississippi.

The Miami Herald stated that the Democratic candidate, Attorney General Ben Chandler tried to blame Fletcher, as a congressman, for the weak national economy, frequently talking about 67,000 Kentucky jobs lost to "Fletcher-Bush" economic policies. However, last week brought reports of economic growth, noted EKU's Gershtenson. "The good news came at just the wrong time for Chandler," Gershtenson said. "He spends all this time tying Fletcher to the economy, and suddenly the economy starts to improve." Yet another reason the Democratic strategy of depending upon bad news is a bad idea (providing Scott Ott with easy targets is still another reason). Of course, the Democratic party is currently infamous in Kentucky for corruption and this bad reputation hurt Chandler.

However, the Mississippi election was another story. It was expected to be a very tight race between former Republican National Committee Chair Barbour and Democratic incumbent Governor Musgrove. Musgrove is a conservative Democrat (along the lines of Sam Nunn and Zell Miller). He had the advantage of incumbency in a state that has only elected one Republican governor since Reconstruction. How could he lose?

One factor in Barbour’s victory was money, the Republicans made a real effort to win Mississippi and invested some of their national warchest in Barbour’s campaign. However, I believe a very large factor was Mississippian outrage at the Democratic party. Among the many judicial nominees that the Democrats are filibustering in the US Senate is Mississippian Judge Charles W. Pickering Senior. Pickering, who currently serves in the U.S. District Court, has been nominated for to a seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. In an obviously choreographed move, Senate Republicans tried to bring Pickering’s nomination to a vote last week, but the Senate Democrats filibustered once again. Big mistake. When President Bush went to Mississippi to campaign for Barbour, he made Pickering a key issue.

I want to thank Senator Cochran and Senator Lott and, of course, Haley, for standing strong with a nominee I named from Mississippi, Charles Pickering. I stand strong with Judge Pickering, and it's time for some members of the United States Senate to stop playing politics with American justice.

OK, Dems, keep filibustering my very qualified candidates. It just cost you one of your popular moderate politicians, making your party both less powerful and more tilted to the Left. I’m going to win Florida in 2004 because of what you did to Michael Estrada, and now that Crazy Bob is retiring, I’ll probably gain my party his seat in 2004 as well. Now are you going to vote on my candidates, or do I need to personally campaign for all the open Senate seats next year and see if I can get us a 60 seat majority?

And there is one more governor’s race coming up this year. The Louisiana race between Democrat Kathleen Blanco and Republican Bobby Jindal should be determined on November 15. Since the Republicans already hold the state governorship (Governor Foster is finishing up his second term and cannot run again), a Republican victory here will not hurt the Democrats as much as their losses in California, Kentucky, and Mississippi. However, it will put a very diverse face on the GOP. If he wins, Jindal will be the youngest governor ever to hold office in Louisiana and the first Indian-American governor for any US State. His story is remarkable and I would not be surprised to see him run for President at some point in his career. If he wins, I predict he will be a keynote speaker at the Republican convention next year.

I would also say the Democrats and the media were correct. The elections were partly a referendum on President Bush and the people have spoken. I wonder if the pundits will now say President Bush has a mandate and that the Democratic obstructionists in the Senate should allow Bush’s nominees to voted upon in accordance with the Constitution. Somehow I doubt it. But I fully expect the People of the United States will continue to make the Democrats pay for their folly.