The 2018 midterms, continuing to evolve some three weeks after election day, drew varied reactions from members of the University community.
It became clear on election night that the Republican Party would hold and expand their majority in the Senate while losing control of the House, the result most political pundits predicted in the months leading up to the election.
An estimated 113 million people voted in the 2018 midterms, making this election the first midterm in history to exceed 100 million votes. Forty-nine percent of eligible voters participated in this election.
The historic numbers coincided with increased efforts made by campus organizations to expand student turnout. One such group was Vote100, which according to its website, is “an intentional campus campaign aspiring for 100% of the undergraduate student body to engage civically in the 2018 midterms.”
Though it wasn’t able to meet its full campus participation goal, Vote100 did manage to get 30% of the student body to take a pledge to participate in this and all future elections.
University Professor of Neuroscience Sam Wang, founder of the Princeton Election Consortium, explained that in popular-vote terms, Democrats had a wave election. “Their popular-vote margin in the House races is heading for 8 points,” he said.
Wang echoed an Associated Press report which held that Democrats received 8.6 million votes more than their Republican opponents, a margin north of 7.9 percent.
Wang also noted that Democrats “didn’t win as many seats as Republicans with a smaller margin in 2010…because of partisan gerrymandering.” However, Wang continued, “this does not change the fact that it was the largest margin for either party since 2008, another Democratic wave.”
The margin in 2008 was about 10.6 percent in favor of Democrats, which continues to be the largest since the early eighties.
As it currently stands, with Republicans leading in two House races yet to be called and Democrats leading in one other, the Democratic gain stands at 39 seats. This gives the future Democratic speaker a narrow but secure margin of 16 seats.
College Democrats president Sebastian Quiroz ’20 explained that the 2018 midterms showed that the Democratic Party has what it takes to win.
“We won in places that were considered Republican strongholds, like Orange County, California,” said Quiroz. “We were also close to winning in places we were told we had no business trying to compete in, like Texas and Georgia.”
Commentators have noted endlessly that the new Democratic majority is built upon suburban districts of a Republican tilt swinging to the Democrats in 2018. The gold standard is Orange County, California, which President Ronald Reagan famously referred to as the place “where good Republicans go to die.” The county notably swung to the Democrats this cycle, with Republicans losing four Orange County districts. Other notable suburban losses included seats in deep red districts in Oklahoma and New York.
Acknowledging the problems Republicans are now facing in suburbia, College Republicans president Will Crawford ‘20 looked to the future, explaining that “Republicans need to focus suburban messaging on GOP winners there, most obviously the good economy.”
“They also need to run more viable and attractive candidates such as veterans, which I think was a strong point in many Democratic congressional candidates this year,” Crawford added.
Elizabeth Wahlstedt ’20 had another take, concurring that these suburban voters can be won back but arguing that “there needs to be a fundamental transformation within the Republican Party itself.”
“Many Republican voters placed an enormous effort in getting President Trump elected as well as many other Republican candidates. However, candidates did not hold to their platforms and utilized their new found positions to become members of the so-called Washington elite,” Wahlstedt explained, advocating that Republicans return to fundamental principles and distance themselves from the Washington swamp.
Democratic gains were heightened by their ability to capture seven governorships from Republicans, who have certainly created a “red wall” in many state governments. Examples included key 2020 states like Michigan and Wisconsin, which were crucial to Trump’s 2016 election win.
Republicans did, however, manage to hold on to governorships in other key states like Florida and Ohio, and even gained a governorship in Alaska, putting a hamper on Democratic enthusiasm regarding state-level gains.
When it came to state legislatures, Democrats made up ground lost during the Obama presidency by re-taking both chambers in New Hampshire and one chamber in Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota, and Maine. Minnesota’s legislature constitutes the only example of divided government in the U.S.
When governorships are taken into account, states with Republican trifectas (governorship plus legislature control) number 25, down from 31, while states with Democratic trifectas number 14, up from 8. Thirteen states now have divided trifectas, down from 16.
The ability to keep and expand their majority in the Senate has been a major consolation prize for Republicans. If the runoff in Mississippi is won by Republicans, the party will be heading for a 53 to 47 seat majority. The situation looked even better on election night but it soon became clear that Republicans would lose the seat vacated by Sen. Jeff Flake in Arizona and fail to unseat Sen. Jon Tester in Montana.
Republicans scored major victories in Florida, Indiana, Missouri, and North Dakota, where they were able to unseat Democratic incumbents.
Both Wang and Quiroz acknowledged that it would always be difficult for Democrats to win the upper chamber, given an unfavorable map.
“The results in states like Arizona are fantastic…but there was always going to be a higher likelihood the Senate was going to stay in GOP hands,” Quiroz said.
Quiroz also did not give up hope for the Senate seat in Mississippi, where both candidates have been dogged with missteps.
“The Democratic Party knows how to craft a winning message and I am sure Mike Espy has what it takes to bring it home,” Quiroz explained. Nevertheless, incumbent Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith remains the frontrunner in a state Trump won by 18 points.
The biggest news to emerge from election night was that divided government was returning to Washington.
Crawford echoed the view that Trump’s public approval rating had to do with the American people sending a mixed message, saying that “Trump’s favorability in different areas of the country is complicated.”
“I think the Republican Party needs to reckon with him as a messenger in some areas,” Crawford added.
Wahlstedt explained that “the divided nature of the country means that there is a fundamental base of support for Republicans. This is why they held the Senate. But [midterm losses] indicate a certain…very present disdain for politics felt by moderate Republican voters.”
Wahlstedt also noted that this was heightened by the fact that Congress “struggled to accomplish some key goals…even under [unified Republican] government.”
The disparity between Republican and Democratic visions for America portends serious governing challenges.
Both Crawford and Quiroz acknowledged that the most consequential task the Senate would pursue is that of confirming Trump’s judicial nominations, respectively expressing approval and disapproval.
Regarding the House, Quiroz expressed hope that “the Democrats [there] will push for the progressive change this country needs,” adding that he would like to see “automatic voter registration, a repairing of the Voting Rights Act, and an infrastructure bill.”
“The possibility of bipartisanship is always available,” he added.
Crawford concurred on the bipartisanship point but laid out a very different path Democrats could take.
“I see two strains coming from the House Democrats in the aftermath of the election: Pelosi’s putative position, which is to cooperate in the divided government where there is common ground such as infrastructure and criminal justice reform and what you might call the Maxine Waters position, which is to begin a deluge of gratuitous subpoenas and hearings to attack the president and his administration,” Crawford said.
“I am cautiously optimistic that the chambers of Congress can work with each other and with the president,” Crawford continued, adding that he “doubts the better angels in the Democratic Party will prevail.”
A final important consequence to come out of the midterm elections is an increase in Democratic rhetoric charging that there are serious structural and electoral problems with how Americans elect their representatives.
The increase in this rhetoric coincides with the backdrop of voting and redistricting reforms at the state level. Earlier this year, courts declared congressional districts in Pennsylvania and North Carolina to be unconstitutional. However, Pennsylvania had to redraw its lines, consequently experiencing a major shift in its congressional delegation, moving from solid Republican control to an even split. North Carolina did not see much of a shift.
Voting reforms also appeared on the ballot in many states. An example is Michigan’s Proposal 2, which passed and will amend Michigan’s constitution to create a 13-member independent citizens’ redistricting commission.
However, many on the right have pointed out that Democrats have gone much further than this, charging that elections were stolen and the system is inherently unfair. RNC chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel cited Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown’s comments on the Georgia gubernatorial race as an extreme example of this rhetoric.
“If Stacey Abrams doesn’t win in Georgia, [the Republicans] stole it,” Brown said. “It’s clear. I say it publicly.”
While he explained that he agrees with Democratic complaints that there are structural disadvantages affecting the party, Quiroz noted that the most important takeaway from this election is that “the Democratic party has a winning message, focused on helping all Americans.”
“Of all the divisive rhetoric in this country,” added Quiroz, “ talking about the structures of how our elections are run is among the least harmful.”
Wahlstedt disagreed with Quiroz, explaining that Brown’s comments and other similar complaints “can be seen as deliberate attempts to disrupt the voting process.”
Crawford agreed, first taking issue with the specifics of Brown’s comments, saying that Stacey Abrams refusing to concede for as long as she did is “political smoke being blown to score points for the party or, in Abrams’ case, for her 2020 Senate campaign.”
He asserted that any actions Governor-elect Brian Kemp took while Secretary of State to supervise Georgia elections were actions required of him by state and federal law.
“The other issue is that of so-called representation,” Crawford said. “The most obvious case of Democrats bloviating about this is Hillary Clinton’s 2016 defeat despite the fact that she won the popular vote.”
Crawford added that “cosmopolitan Democrats complain ad nauseam about the outsize power the Senate gives to states with much smaller populations. [They] seem to forget that this is a feature, not a bug, of our republic. It was the result of compromise among the Framers to prevent exactly the sort of majoritarian tyranny the modern left now advocates.”
Crawford concluded that this “rhetoric isn’t dangerous so much as it is misguided and a reflection of the general contempt Democrats have for American traditions.”
This story will be updated once more information is available.
UPDATE: On Tuesday, November 27, Mississippi voters chose to send Republican incumbent Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith back to Washington, cementing a 53-47 Republican majority in the Senate. The race proved closer than usual for Mississippi but Democratic challenger Mike Espy was ultimately unable to overcome the state’s deep Republican lean.
Three weeks after election night, the number of seats Democrats have gained in the House still remains uncertain. However, with results having solidified in two New York races, all attention has turned to California’s 21 District, where Democratic challenger TJ Cox took a 436 vote lead over Republican incumbent David Valadao. According to Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight, various plausible scenarios all augur well for Cox. If Cox does manage to unseat Valadao, the Democratic gain will stand at 40 seats instead of 39, further solidifying the Democratic majority.
Copyright © 2024 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.