Today marks the last of my daily politics columns, created as a response to the race for the 23rd.

Thanks to all who read and/or wrote in.

Thanks especially to my colleagues, and in particular Jude Seymour, for kind words and links.

(Unfortunately for Jude, almost as soon as he mentioned my attempts at 'humor,' I became a distinctly humorless scold and remained so for the duration of the campaign. Sorry 'bout that.)

If things get interesting next year, I may write again.

In the meantime, reach me at satkinsn@wwnytv.net. I can also be found loitering at the Jefferson County Web Board, where the good folks of the board and I kick around a variety of topics.

***

Nate Silver, stats geek god and clear thinker about politics, takes apart the media's notion that independents are on the move. This is a great example of what journalism should be - pushing past the obvious, contrarian, a hunt for the best explanation.

Read it here: www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/independent-voters-and-empty.html

***

I insisted a few weeks back that Dede Scozzafava's championing of gay marriage was a key event in the race for the 23rd, that it pushed conservatives from indifference to outright hostility.

I still think so, but there's a second factor in play. During the race, 'card check' was just part of the list of things Scozzafava supports that don't fit with conservative orthodoxy.

('Card check' is union-backed legislation that makes it easier for employees to organize.)

On reflection, I think it was more important than that.

By supporting card check, Scozzafava cut off any chance of getting campaign money from business or center right groups who don't care about lifestyle issues, but care very much about issues that could affect their bottom lines.

This election was, more so than most, all about tv advertising. Dede Scozzafava's oxygen - money for advertising - was choked off.

Which brings us to...

***

It is now conventional wisdom, repeated endlessly on right wing blogs and cable tv shows, that Scozzafava was inherently weak as a candidate, that she was just 'too liberal' for most Republicans.

That switches cause and effect, and what happened was a bit more complicated.

Going into the race, Scozzafava was simply John McHugh's successor, someone whose views were very close to McHugh's.

At that point, she led the race.

Peoples' perception of Scozzafava changed because of massive levels of advertising, particularly tv advertising from both the Democrats and the far right, followed by the shock troops of the far right - blogs, talk radio and opinion shows on Fox News Channel.

And absent any meaningful public debate, (which both eventual winner Bill Owens and Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman ran away from), and absent an effective counter from Scozzafava, she was defined as 'too liberal.'

***

Owens, incidentally, refused to commit to doing debates next year when we questioned him Thursday. We'll keep trying.

***

It looks like he'll be sworn in today, in time to vote on health care reform.