Not to mention that their performance in a midterm of this scenario is slightly lower than the average performance of the non-POTUS party in midterms.
Yep. My sense is that this seat shift is more complicated than “Orange Man Bad”, which is the way it will be spun. Other factors:
- About 2X the # of retirements than is common at a midterm.
- In some cases, the race was aging GOP dinosaur vs younger Dem centrist; the Dem candidate looked more like the voters in their district than did the GOP candidate
- Dated messaging targeting an aging demographic
- Massive turnout (which is far more likely to be repeated by the GOP than the Dems, historically.
All of this is fixable. The Dems will without out a doubt have more retirements than the GOP in 2020. Tables will be turned on that issue, as well as the “aging dinosaur) matter. Liz Cheney will be elected to leadership, and wants to have at the dated messaging; plus, the younger GOP know how to talk to a diverse voter base better than the older GOP does. And, turnout, which may not favor the GOP in 2020, but certainly will in 2022.
Despite the self-serving press hype, this election cycle was pretty bog standard in the outcome — except for the Dems not doing near as well as they should have. I heard an argument the other day that this cycle was really a regression to the mean. Obama and Trump were the outliers, yet people took them as the new normal.
I think that’s a fair argument. 2010 and 2016 happened, in part, because the Dems started to believe that their Obama turnout was not an anomaly. It was.
I suspect they will claim this as yet another “mandate” for more progressivism.
They will. Read my post from yesterday, if you haven’t, where Kim Stassel outlines how the progressives got CRUSHED this cycle, and did not expand their influence.
(My opinion, looking at broader statistics, is that we’ve reached “peak progressive”; the millennials are starting to get mugged by reality. Progressives may not become Republicans, but they’ll become far more centrist.)
Despite the propaganda, Republicans are increasing their share of the “non-white” vote — an Achilles heel for the Democrats. Hmm, I might need to explain that one.
You can. but I agree. We’ll see how the demographics work out this election.
I think this cycle is the peak Democrat favorable effect for it. Another year or so of continued frenzy will wear out those who turned out in fear this cycle.
The best thing for the Democrats to do strategically is precisely what they will refuse to do. If they were to give Mueller a month or two more, then say “well we’ve been at this for years now and nothing that implicates trump has come of it, time to put it t bed for the sake of the country” they would find their chances of a victory in 2020 much higher. If they ceased demonizing Republicans and Trump, they’d see another boost. But they won’t.
I’ve been saying for some time that if the Dems want to break down multiple red firewalls, and win upwards of 40 states, run Joe Manchin against Trump.
But, they won’t. :-)
Another thing they aren’t seeing, being stuck in their demographics charts, is the change going on in the heartland and conservative areas. I’ll just summarize that with this result that is going unnoticed from this week’s election coverage, lets talk Utah.
When they talk demographics, they only mean RACE demographics. The demographic that really will harass them over time is that the % of the electorate which is of retirement age will continue to grow until the millenials themselves are starting to retire.
Put another way, they’re our bitch. :-)
While it would not erase the problems overnight, it would be a major shift in how we talk about these issues and give us a better path forward.
Yep. Although I don’t believe we need another intoxicating substance in the mix, I DO agree in general terms that the GOP has a tendency, on social issues and issues such as this, to let the perfect become the enemy of the practical. The GOP in the 90’s was full-throated against gay civil unions; well, if they had supported gay civil unions, it would have taken a ton of wind out of the sails of the gay marriage movement.
Same goes for universal health care. If we had passed a well-funded version of HSA’s back when we could during the Bush Admin, instead of taxcutting the money we could have used to pay for it…..well, no ACA, and our health care inflation problem would today be solved rather than exacerbated.
But, alas, just as the Democrats are unlikely to realize that dropping their vendetta on Trump would benefit them electorally, the powers that be in the Republican Party are unlikely to recognize the political value in turning the mainstream talking points on their heads — in a way that doesn’t involve demonizing anyone or calling them names. But man, what a world if they both made those realizations, or even one of them did.