Democrats are offering Republicans an opportunity that they probably don’t deserve at this point, but as we all know, deserve has nothing to do with it.
While there are clear historical trends favoring Democrats in the midterms and it’s no secret that President Donald Trump has chosen to launch a largely unpopular war that has almost completely unraveled his efforts to reduce inflation, the November elections might well be much wilder and unpredictable than any we have seen in recent history. First, the trends. Since 1900, the party out of power has gained an average of 26-28 seats, but if the President’s approval rating is below 50% (and it is, more on that below), the number jumps to 30. The reasons behind the trend are unclear, but generally attributed to some combination of the “Surge and Decline” theory that holds a President sweeping into office in a national election year carries candidates on their “coattails,” the midterm election as a referendum on the performance of the President, and changes in voter turn out, where the opposition is generally far more enthused. Whatever the case, there have been only three exceptions to this rule and one sort of exception. In 1934, Franklin Delano Roosevelt gained nine seats, in 1998, Bill Clinton gained five, and in 2002, George W. Bush gained eight. The sort of exception occurred in 2022, when many, myself included, were expecting a red wave based on previous trends, but ended up with a trickle. Despite being led by a President with an approval rating mired in the low 40s and the Republicans winning the national popular vote by 2.7%, their best showing in years, Democrats managed to keep their losses to only nine seats, resulting in a narrow majority in the Republicans’ favor that persists to this day. As we look ahead to November, the question is which outcome is more instructive and by instructive, we hope to determine which is more probable.
Like President Biden before him, President Trump’s popularity with the American public is generally low and his numbers on certain key issues might be even lower. According to the Real Clear Politics average as of yesterday, he stands at 40.2%, a drop of almost three points since the beginning of the Iran War on February 28. The issues, if anything, tell an even worse story. The Economist recently reported that only 30% approve of his handling of foreign policy including Iran, 35% approve of his handling of the economy and jobs, 36% taxes and spending, and 38% immigration. Not surprisingly, only 34% believe the country is heading in the right direction. Clearly, if the election were held today and the “referendum” theory described above reigned supreme, Republicans would be looking at some truly stunning losses, akin to or perhaps even worse than President Barack Obama’s infamous “shellacking” in 2010 when Democrats lost an incredible 62 seats. To be sure, there is an argument to be made that some of the items impacting the President’s poll numbers might be temporary and there is the potential for a rapid turnaround. The Iran War is currently unpopular for what I would suggest are legitimate reasons to large extent, if only because it was truly a conflict of choice and gas prices have spiked as a result, but a reasonably successful conclusion followed by a rapid decline in prices, could flip those numbers entirely. On a more general level, the jobs numbers that even I have been suggesting are piss poor, appear to be turning around with recent reports outstripping expectations. Similarly, economic growth has been choppy, but solid numbers between now and the midterms could improve perceptions in a way beneficial to Republicans, as could reduction in interest rates that make mortgages, car loans, and everything else we finance more affordable. Of course, these and other things – including bad things – might or might not happen, and as a partisan Republican I certainly wouldn’t bet on what at least some would describe as a miraculous improvement perfectly timed for maximum midterm advantage.
At the same time, there are other trends unfolding as we speak that might well benefit Republicans, enabling them to perform much better than history would suggest. Despite President Trump’s poor performance in recent polling, the American public has not extended those perceptions to the Republican Party generally, at least not yet, and polls that attempt to measure trust on key issues show a much closer balance of power. According to recent findings from YouGov, “Americans are more likely to trust the Democratic Party more than the Republican Party to handle health care (47% say they trust the Democratic Party more and 26% say the Republican Party), the economy (40% vs. 34%), and taxes (37% vs. 33%). They’re more likely to trust the Republican Party more than the Democratic Party on national defense (39% say the Republican Party and 34% say the Democratic Party) and crime (39% vs. 31%). Americans are evenly divided about which party they trust more to handle immigration (38% say the Democratic Party and 39% say the Republican Party)…Americans as a whole favor Republicans by 8 points to handle crime, and Democrats by 21 points to handle health care. That gap reflects differences among moderates — who favor Democrats by 7 points on crime but by 43 points on health care — but also differences in intensity among liberals and conservatives. While the vast majority (87%) of conservatives trust the Republican Party more on handling crime, only 66% of conservatives give the edge to the GOP on health care. Likewise, 90% of liberals favor the Democratic Party on handling health care, but only 70% give the edge to Democrats on crime.” Beneath the individual numbers, both parties remain deeply unpopular with the American public. “31% of Americans have a very or somewhat favorable view of Republicans in Congress, while 59% have an unfavorable view — a net favorability of -28. 34% have a favorable view of Democrats in Congress and 55% have an unfavorable view, a net favorability of -21.”
As a result, the generic ballot polls that question respondents whether they plan to vote for either the Democrat or the Republican in November tend to show a closer race than we might expect. YouGov, for example, gave the Democrats a plus five advantage, while CNN had it at only three over roughly the same time period. Real Clear Politics, meanwhile, has it at plus 6.6, but their average includes some serious outliers (Atlas, Democrats plus 15 and RMG Research Democrats plus nine) that do not seem to be accurate unless subsequent polls reach the same finding. Compared to previous periods, Democrats are running .4 higher than in 2018 when they netted 41 seats, but Republican leaning years have generally shown much closer races. The 2010 shellacking had the Republicans up only .2% and while the 2022 midterms had them up 2.8%, suggesting that there is broad variability in these numbers and making predictions based upon them is fraught with the potential for error. If anything, that could prove doubly true this year because of the so-called gerrymander wars, where Republicans are likely to gain 10-11 seats compared to their only five seat majority right and the reality, for better or worse, that seats in general have become consistently less competitive over time. According to the Government Affairs Institute, over 100 races were considered competitive in the 1970s and 1980s compared with 40 to 80 in the 2000s, and barely 30 today. In other words, unless something truly unexpected happens, an outcome like 2010 or even 2018 might not even be possible in this more polarized, partisan, gerrymandered era, and it is possible that even with a generic ballot along the lines of the RCP average, the Republicans maintain a tiny majority, potentially even maintaining the same or a larger majority if the final outcome is closer to CNN or other polls that show a tighter generic ballot.
Ultimately, the old expression about something being “clear as mud” seems to apply. If I had to guess what will happen in six months, I would give the Democrats a narrow majority in the House, but my confidence level would be lower than it likely should be. This is at least partially because there remains time for President Trump to shift perceptions enough and because the Democrats at least in principle should be doing better. Though some have preferred to ignore it, President Trump’s coalition remains both divided on his handling of the Iran War and foreign policy in general, as well as including a large number of low propensity voters. Neither bodes well for the midterms, but the Democrats seem hellbent on being their own worst enemy. In addition to pushing for a gerrymander war they appear to have lost, they are more obsessed with “getting” President Trump than with the issues that matter to voters, substituting the outrage of the week for legitimate criticisms combined with potential policy proposals. Rather than focus on the big picture and American pocketbooks, they’re busy complaining about a ballroom they know we need especially after a third assassination attempt, proclaiming the failure of anything and everything before it even launches, proudly declaring that they must completely destroy American democracy to save it, and planning another impeachment proceeding before they’ve even taken power. In short, they are offering Republicans an opportunity that they probably don’t deserve at this point, but as we all know, deserve has nothing to do with it and I at least, would not be surprised if the political dynamic shifts just enough for the Republicans to maintain control of the House.
Confessions of a Conservative Atheist 