Axios: "Democrats' tattered coattails"

[ThatRobGuy]

Democrats quietly point fingers at blue-state governors for dragging down ticket

With a week to go before the midterm elections, some Democratic operatives working on House races are already beginning to assign blame in the event their party loses winnable seats: The culprit, they say, is blue-state governors dragging down the rest of the ballot.

Driving the news: Cook Political Report shifted its ratings in favor of Republicans today in ten House districts — all in states President Biden won by 15 points or more in 2020.


I think this article delves into an aspect that I've harped on quite a bit, which is the regional component to politics and the "R vs D" dynamics in each locale being quite different.

For instance: The things that can make a Democratic governor popular in California, may not be the thing that wins favor with Democrats in states like West Virginia or Tennessee. Likewise with regards to various pocket of Republicans throughout the country. What may make a republican extremely popular in South Carolina isn't guaranteed to be popular with Republicans in Massachusetts.

I think the difference in this day in age, is that certain governors have been elevated to the level of "national fame"/"household names" vs. just being well-known in their own states...which has the effect of making them and their party synonymous with one another... And if their policies (while possibly quite popular in their home state) don't gel with other people of the same party in enough other states, it can end up "hurting the entire team".

 

[Ana the Ist]

Democrats quietly point fingers at blue-state governors for dragging down ticket

With a week to go before the midterm elections, some Democratic operatives working on House races are already beginning to assign blame in the event their party loses winnable seats: The culprit, they say, is blue-state governors dragging down the rest of the ballot.

Driving the news: Cook Political Report shifted its ratings in favor of Republicans today in ten House districts — all in states President Biden won by 15 points or more in 2020.


I think this article delves into an aspect that I've harped on quite a bit, which is the regional component to politics and the "R vs D" dynamics in each locale being quite different.

For instance: The things that can make a Democratic governor popular in California, may not be the thing that wins favor with Democrats in states like West Virginia or Tennessee. Likewise with regards to various pocket of Republicans throughout the country. What may make a republican extremely popular in South Carolina isn't guaranteed to be popular with Republicans in Massachusetts.

I think the difference in this day in age, is that certain governors have been elevated to the level of "national fame"/"household names" vs. just being well-known in their own states...which has the effect of making them and their party synonymous with one another... And if their policies (while possibly quite popular in their home state) don't gel with other people of the same party in enough other states, it can end up "hurting the entire team".

I think it's a combination of things....the economic mess, the crime rate, and the unwanted agenda.

Biden really ran on a couple of things and he's failed to deliver on both. He hasn't bridged the political division....if anything, he's exacerbated it. He also hasn't succeeded or even seemed to focus on economic recovery apart from printing too much money, spending too much money, and driving up inflation. This should have been a slam dunk....if he had good advice and focused on it, maybe the Dems would be in a better position.

Then there's the unwanted agenda. Nobody ran on this tmk, so it's no surprise it's wildly unpopular. The attempts to racialize and sexualize education were arguably the biggest headaches for Democrats since 2020. They had school districts receiving hundreds of millions in covid relief funds that they spent on training teachers how to teach children to be racist at the earliest possible age. Then they decided "hey, since this educational direction is already super unpopular, why not try to push gender theory on kids as well?" Bravo.

At a time when most kids are supposed to be learning basic educational building blocks....Dems decided to teach about white privilege and the meaning of "genderqueer". This was painted as a non-issue invented by bigoted Republicans but a significant number of Dems also hated this, and can read their children's homework. The Democratic strategy on these issues was bad. First they would lie and say it isn't happening. Then lie and say it's something other than what it is. Then finally admit to what it is...but explain that it's all going to save lives or make society more equal or something. That's a bad strategy. If you continually lie....even if you finally tell the truth, no one believes you. This just kept happening the entire term so far.

There's other issues of course....like the failure in Afghanistan, at the border, and the dismal lack of leadership combined with the assorted far left extremists who kept getting appointed. You got black supremacists trying to explain they don't really hate white people. You got race essentialists trying to explain what they meant when they said everyone is racist or this is a racist nation. You got gender theorists and trans activists refusing to explain what a woman is and then accusing people of being transphobic.

Things are so bad right now that even popular figures like AOC and Omar are getting booed by their own constituents. They tried to adopt the same strategy as the last election and find a common enemy to over exaggerate the dangers of....but unfortunately, mass murder has gotten rather diverse the last couple of years. Cops are struggling so badly that they dare not chase off the few that remain....and despite giving it a real try, no one really believes a cabal of powerful Christians threaten to undermine democracy. Everything else failed to capture the minds of voters on the left quite like Trump....so they went after Trump hoping to find some new dirt. He doesn't look worried.

When Obama gets trotted out to the podium and Biden is still struggling to find stage left....the worst thing they could have done was find someone more impaired than Biden. Surprise! Here comes Fetterman to do the impossible....get Dr Oz elected.

I have to wonder exactly whose idea all this was. It's not the sort of person I would describe as "politically savvy" or even just "smart". I don't see Democrats succeeding in dropping their current agenda entirely and starting from scratch so....this election will probably serve as a preview for the next.

 

[DaisyDay]

Democrats quietly point fingers at blue-state governors for dragging down ticket

With a week to go before the midterm elections, some Democratic operatives working on House races are already beginning to assign blame in the event their party loses winnable seats: The culprit, they say, is blue-state governors dragging down the rest of the ballot.

Driving the news: Cook Political Report shifted its ratings in favor of Republicans today in ten House districts — all in states President Biden won by 15 points or more in 2020.


I think this article delves into an aspect that I've harped on quite a bit, which is the regional component to politics and the "R vs D" dynamics in each locale being quite different.

For instance: The things that can make a Democratic governor popular in California, may not be the thing that wins favor with Democrats in states like West Virginia or Tennessee. Likewise with regards to various pocket of Republicans throughout the country. What may make a republican extremely popular in South Carolina isn't guaranteed to be popular with Republicans in Massachusetts.

I think the difference in this day in age, is that certain governors have been elevated to the level of "national fame"/"household names" vs. just being well-known in their own states...which has the effect of making them and their party synonymous with one another... And if their policies (while possibly quite popular in their home state) don't gel with other people of the same party in enough other states, it can end up "hurting the entire team".

That didn't age well. Go Dems!

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That didn't age well. Go Dems!

Not sure what you mean by that...unless you're being a tad facetious.

While obviously the GOP was hopeful that they'd take over both chambers (which didn't happen, their "red wave" was reduced to a "red trickle"), I don't know if Democrats can necessarily call their performance a "win".

They lost control of the House and the GOP flipped 18 seats (several of which were in blue states, or in districts that - on paper - should've been a lock for the blue team) so they did lose win-able seats.


Going from "we control all 3 components of the legislative process" to "now we only control 2, but hey, at least Hershel and Oz didn't win" isn't exactly a "Go Team!"-worthy performance.

...and the sums they had to spend in order to grab the hotly contested senate seats they did isn't what I would call a sustainable business model. For instance, in Arizona, for them to have to outspend their opponent by 9:1 in order to barely squeak out a victory over Blake Masters (who was already having a good chuck of his votes siphoned off by the libertarian party)? That can't give the Democratic strategists the warm fuzzies.

What would they have done had the GOP put up someone who wasn't a goofy election denier, and who had received the same level of funding as their guy?

 

[NxNW]

For instance, in Arizona, for them to have to outspend their opponent by 9:1 in order to barely squeak out a victory over Blake Masters (who was already having a good chuck of his votes siphoned off by the libertarian party)? That can't give the Democratic strategists the warm fuzzies.

What would they have done had the GOP put up someone who wasn't a goofy election denier, and who had received the same level of funding as their guy?

Arizona has been drifting blue for years now. Don't forget it went for Clinton in '96, and was leaning Hillary before she caught pneumonia. It will be interesting to see what happens with Sinema when her term is up.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Not sure what you mean by that...unless you're being a tad facetious.

While obviously the GOP was hopeful that they'd take over both chambers (which didn't happen, their "red wave" was reduced to a "red trickle"), I don't know if Democrats can necessarily call their performance a "win".

They lost control of the House and the GOP flipped 18 seats (several of which were in blue states, or in districts that - on paper - should've been a lock for the blue team) so they did lose win-able seats.


Going from "we control all 3 components of the legislative process" to "now we only control 2, but hey, at least Hershel and Oz didn't win" isn't exactly a "Go Team!"-worthy performance.

...and the sums they had to spend in order to grab the hotly contested senate seats they did isn't what I would call a sustainable business model. For instance, in Arizona, for them to have to outspend their opponent by 9:1 in order to barely squeak out a victory over Blake Masters (who was already having a good chuck of his votes siphoned off by the libertarian party)? That can't give the Democratic strategists the warm fuzzies.

What would they have done had the GOP put up someone who wasn't a goofy election denier, and who had received the same level of funding as their guy?

I stopped paying attention....did you say they lost the House?

 

[Say it aint so]

I think it's a combination of things....the economic mess, the crime rate, and the unwanted agenda.

Biden really ran on a couple of things and he's failed to deliver on both. He hasn't bridged the political division....if anything, he's exacerbated it. He also hasn't succeeded or even seemed to focus on economic recovery apart from printing too much money, spending too much money, and driving up inflation. This should have been a slam dunk....if he had good advice and focused on it, maybe the Dems would be in a better position.

Then there's the unwanted agenda. Nobody ran on this tmk, so it's no surprise it's wildly unpopular. The attempts to racialize and sexualize education were arguably the biggest headaches for Democrats since 2020. They had school districts receiving hundreds of millions in covid relief funds that they spent on training teachers how to teach children to be racist at the earliest possible age. Then they decided "hey, since this educational direction is already super unpopular, why not try to push gender theory on kids as well?" Bravo.

At a time when most kids are supposed to be learning basic educational building blocks....Dems decided to teach about white privilege and the meaning of "genderqueer". This was painted as a non-issue invented by bigoted Republicans but a significant number of Dems also hated this, and can read their children's homework. The Democratic strategy on these issues was bad. First they would lie and say it isn't happening. Then lie and say it's something other than what it is. Then finally admit to what it is...but explain that it's all going to save lives or make society more equal or something. That's a bad strategy. If you continually lie....even if you finally tell the truth, no one believes you. This just kept happening the entire term so far.

There's other issues of course....like the failure in Afghanistan, at the border, and the dismal lack of leadership combined with the assorted far left extremists who kept getting appointed. You got black supremacists trying to explain they don't really hate white people. You got race essentialists trying to explain what they meant when they said everyone is racist or this is a racist nation. You got gender theorists and trans activists refusing to explain what a woman is and then accusing people of being transphobic.

Things are so bad right now that even popular figures like AOC and Omar are getting booed by their own constituents. They tried to adopt the same strategy as the last election and find a common enemy to over exaggerate the dangers of....but unfortunately, mass murder has gotten rather diverse the last couple of years. Cops are struggling so badly that they dare not chase off the few that remain....and despite giving it a real try, no one really believes a cabal of powerful Christians threaten to undermine democracy. Everything else failed to capture the minds of voters on the left quite like Trump....so they went after Trump hoping to find some new dirt. He doesn't look worried.

When Obama gets trotted out to the podium and Biden is still struggling to find stage left....the worst thing they could have done was find someone more impaired than Biden. Surprise! Here comes Fetterman to do the impossible....get Dr Oz elected.

I have to wonder exactly whose idea all this was. It's not the sort of person I would describe as "politically savvy" or even just "smart". I don't see Democrats succeeding in dropping their current agenda entirely and starting from scratch so....this election will probably serve as a preview for the next.

That is every reason, real or not, that most people who weren't going to vote for anyone Democrat holds.
The question becomes, why did the GOP under preform given the norms of midterm power shift, and all the things you mention are wrong with Dems? The OP sources a move from some districts going from +D to a tossup in CA and NY, but I do know in CA and NY, a lot those districts were redrawn. Yet....I think some whatever leaning districts are going to move the opposite direction, and in some cases flip. That is pretty normal in an election cycle. What was not normal is what just occured this past midterm.