Posted on 12/12/2014 7:06:39 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The defeat of Democratic senator Mary Landrieu by Republican representative Bill Cassidy in last weekend’s Louisiana runoff ends an election year that has been very successful for Republicans — and has implications for 2016. Some observations:
(1) Democrats relied heavily on legacy candidates — and lost nevertheless. Mary Landrieu’s father, Moon Landrieu, was elected to the Louisiana legislature in 1960 and as mayor of New Orleans in 1970 and 1974. Her father’s anti-segregationist legacy helped Mary Landrieu appeal to black voters and win narrow victories in 1996, 2002, and 2008. It wasn’t enough in 2014.
Other defeated Democratic candidates this year — Mark Pryor in Arkansas, Michele Nunn and Jason Carter in Georgia, Mark Begich in Alaska, Mark Udall in Colorado — had forebears first elected to Congress or as governor between 1961 and 1972. But that wasn’t enough to overcome opposition to the Obama Democratic party’s liberal policies. Exception to the rule: Gwen Graham, daughter of a former governor and senator first elected statewide in 1978, beat a Republican House member 50.4 to 49.6 percent in a Florida district, which President Obama narrowly lost (52–47) in 2012.
The obvious implication for 2016 is that the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton, is something of a legacy candidate, too. Her own record as senator and secretary of state is perhaps less of an asset than the record of her husband, who first ran for office in 1974 and won his last election in 1996. That’s starting to seem like a long time ago.
(2) Voters today increasingly vote straight party tickets. Begich ran 5 points ahead of Obama’s 2012 percentage in his state, Landrieu 3.5 points ahead in hers. In the 1970s and 1980s, personal appeal, local issues, and pork-barrel projects enabled similar candidates to run far ahead of their party’s national leaders. Not so any more.
In 2012, only 26 of 435 congressional districts voted for a House member of one party and the presidential nominee of the other, the lowest number since 1920. In 2014, the number of “split districts” rose, but only to 31, mostly because Republicans picked up seats where Obama approval fell below 50 percent.
This makes for more rational politics: Voters can choose between reasonably coherent sets of public policies. The corollary: It produces Congresses — and state governments — that will push against the policies of an unpopular president, as in 2006, 2010, and 2014.
The implication for 2016 is that Democrats will be at a serious disadvantage if Obama’s job approval stays at current levels or falls. Republicans will be at a disadvantage if it rises to 50 percent or above.
(3) Old political species — Blue Dog Democrats, Rockefeller Republicans — are pretty much extinct. Their constituencies have migrated into the other party. Affluent Californians are left-wing Democrats; the Jacksonian belt from Western Pennsylvania along the Appalachian chain and toward east Texas is increasingly conservative Republican.
Political scientist V. O. Key, author of the 1949 classic Southern Politics, hoped that economic common interest would produce a liberal block of blacks and poor whites in the South. Instead, voters are divided by their views on cultural, moral, and even religious views, inside and outside the South.
(4) Today’s political map looks static, but may be a little more fluid than many think. The South is not quite solidly Republican. Obama carried Florida, Virginia, and North Carolina, states which now have 57 electoral votes, in 2008 and the first two in 2012, and statewide Democrats were still competitive there in 2014. This, even though George W. Bush won between 52 and 56 percent in those states in 2004.
Similarly, Republicans may be competitive in 2016 in seven states with 71 electoral votes — Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin — where Obama got between 51 and 54 percent in 2012. This year Republicans won statewide races and/or the House popular vote in each.
(5) Republican strength is at historic highs. The party holds more House and state legislative seats than it has since the 1920s and only one less Senate seat than its post-1920s high. The 2008 Obama coalition, which some argued would dominate politics for decades, has been fraying: Blacks and gentry liberals remain faithful, but Hispanics and millennials are falling away, while Jacksonians grow increasingly opposed.
The 2014 results don’t guarantee Republicans victory in 2016. But they show it’s certainly possible.
— Michael Barone is senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner
As I explained before, not every Republican is 100% on every issue, but every Republican candidate I ever voted for was much closer to my views than the Democrat alternative.
Here in CA, while we have been blessed with large number of conservative Republicans that I have enthusiastically supported over the years including RR, Bruce Herschensohn, Tom McClintock, John Rousselot, Bill Dannemeyer, B-1 Bob Dornan, Duncan Hunter, H.L. Richardson, Bay Buchanan etc.
We have also had some establishment types like Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian too but they were always VASTLY preferable to the Dem alternatives.
That isn't about perfection, that is about Republicans being liberals.
You are for your party, regardless of how liberal it is.
I am a conservative, not a Republican.
Your support of liberalism is noted.
/johnny
Things have come to the point that when you vote Republican you are voting Democrat.
I am for conservative Republicans.
Third party is not a viable option.
You are a republican, not a conservative.
/johnny
And I shared your view. For the reasons you give and then some.
I still feel bleak about it. Every presidential election the low information voters come out and vote for the democrat because the media and pop culture told them too. Luckily adults came out and voted in 2014.
I provided you earlier with the list of all my votes for POTUS. And I have no regrets in each and every case. Ditto with all of my votes for governor and US Senate. And congress. Or state legislature for that matter.
I am not perfect. And neither is every candidate I have ever voted for. But I am realist. I don’t sit out elections. Voting third party is not an option in CA. And the Democrats are far worse than any Republican on the ballot.
You have to work with what you have. Politics ain’t bean bag. It is a dirty messy disgusting business. As RR once said, it is the world’s second oldest profession. There is no such thing as utopia or perfection. You have to work with the choices presented to you. My only realistic opportunity to advance the conservative cause is within the GOP primary.
I am a conservative Republican.
I always vote for the most conservative candidate in the primary.
I have no issues with the Republican Party platform. The challenge is getting everyone to abide it.
I am also a Catholic. I have no issues with the Cathechism of the Catholic Church. The problem, as always, is to get everyone to follow it.
There you are. I wondered when the Grubered republicans would come out of the woodwork. I couldn’t find too many of those cowards last night.
Were you posting while your dems with R’s next to their name republican traitors were raping this country? Now they are out here telling us to put some ice on it, snickering while they pretend what they did was the best thing for us.
So you don’t like dems, but you love voting for dems with R next to their names. When you’re voting for your dems with R next to their names, what do you like best about them, the fact that they love to lie about what they’re doing or the fact that they like to hide what it is they do? I know, perhaps it’s the fact that they intentionally do things in the dark so they can say they didn’t know and were “fooled” later on.
I will never vote for another liberal, dem or republican. I used to be one of a few like me, but you dems with R next to your name are making a lot more voters like me every day.
No substitutes. CRUZ 2016.
No. You call yourself that because you may vote conservative in the primary, but in the general election, you vote Republican. Not conservative.
You are a republican. Not a conservative.
A conservative wouldn't be voting for a liberal republican with the same policy goals as the Dems.
/johnny
I reserve the right to define myself.
There isn’t a liberal bone in my body.
I don’t define you. You should not define me.
I deal with the choices I’m presented with and try to make the best choice available. I’m not perfect. And neither is every candidate I have ever voted for.
I’m tired of people saying it’s my way or the highway.
That only works if you live on a deserted island.
The problem is letting people 'define' themselves as conservative when they are really liberals.
And it is get conservative or lose. I don't care whether you like it or not. That's not my rule. That's nature. You won't get conservatives to vote for your liberal republicans in the general election. That's just reality.
/johnny
Well you don’t make the rules, fortunately.
That is nature.
As far as being 'nice' and letting you define yourself, yes, I do make those rules for me. I will point you out as a liberal republican. Nice went out the window in politics a while back.
/johnny
Fine.
I’ll let you handle the Great Purges which you would be excellent at.
I always thought I was a conservative. My two favorite presidents were Coolidge and RR. My all time favorite US Senators were Joe McCarthy and Jesse Helms. My favorite congressman was John Ashbrook.
Love being defined as a liberal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
/johnny
You’re not debating with conservatives on this thread. You’re debating with nihilists who have given up on the two party system and pretty much just want to shut the government down. Not only that all news is bad news to these guy’s. Bunch of crybabies.
I didn’t vote for any liberals this year. Period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.