Echidne points out that while Democrats got their butts kicked and Republicans now dominate Congress, left-wing issues did well: Personhood amendments were struck down (though we’ll undoubtedly see lots of anti-abortion efforts out of Congress), and several states approved living wage proposals. Echidne finds it a head-scratcher but suggests it may be because the desire to vote for Your Party trumps really inept performances (Sam Brownback narrowly retaining governorship of Kansas, for instance)
Scott Lemieux suggests the federal damage was inevitable—the party in the White House invariably gets trounced. At the state level, though, he concludes it’s more dependent on local issues and the quality of the candidates (apparently the Dems were overall very weak). Slacktivist discusses the oddity of Pennsylvania kicking out its Repub governor while voting for several legislators of the same ilk and concludes people may not really know what their state legislators do.
Charles Pierce thinks a lot of Dems made the mistake of trying to divorce themselves from the president, the ACA and anything that might cost them votes, and as a result lost (Lemieux made the same point in his piece). And that possibly Republicans have convinced voters that government can’t do anything for them, so voting for someone who might do a better job than Brownback in Kansas seems pointless (because things won’t improve).
Pierce also complains that some pundits are embracing the idea the Republicans are going to get serious about running the country instead of being psychotic Tea Party attack dogs—and that to the contrary, the Tea Party wing has enhanced its presence. This Atlantic piece looks at the conspiracy theories of Joni Ernst (secret UN plot to take away all property rights!) and Tom Cotton (Islamic terrorists are working with Mexican drug cartels to come over the border and kill us all!) and how the media glossed over them—because, the article concludes, it didn’t fit the idea that Republicans have booted out the extremists and moved back to the center.
Salon argues that it’s about race: A large chunk of the Republican base believes black people are responsible for their own poverty and problems. A large enough percentage of Democrats believes it that it makes it hard for Dems to push against racism.
And for the future? Jonathan Chait concludes that it will be years before Dems bounce back from this. The only options are gridlock (as Republicans will refuse to do anything but gum up the works and make things worse) and annihilation if the Republicans take the White House too. I’m not so sure about this. Chait points out the Republicans have huge advantages (a fanatically committed base, and dominance in rural states, each of which gets two senators just like California, Oregon and New York). However I’ve heard these predictions multiple times the past few years—just a decade ago, Republican activist Grover Norquist was discussing how the Democrats would adjust to being a permanent minority, then the Dems won. Conversely, predictions of utter Republican defeat (or utter defeat of the Republican right) have been around at least since Goldwater lost in ’64. So no despair (though as a freelancer, I shudder at the thought of the economy going further into the crapper, which is where Republicans have been pushing it in this century).
