Election post-mortem
In the wake of Republicans losing both the House and Senate, and 6 governorships, here’s my two cents of political analysis:
1. THE FUTURE OF THE CONGRESS. The Democrats will likely control both houses for at least the next six years. They picked up enough seats in the House where, even if the GOP chips away with a series of successful elections, the Democrats have a buffer before they would lose control. Not only that, but with the Dems now controlling a majority of governorships (28), including 6 new ones, they will have power to redistrict states to increase their advantage even further. In the Senate, the Democrats gains this year, while only giving them a 51 seat majority, are truly remarkable because they won 24 out of 33 seats, (including Lieberman and Sanders who are Democrat voting and caucusing independents). The next two Senate cycles will feature 40 GOP seats up for challenge and only 27 Dem seats up for challenge, which means for the GOP to regain control, they would need to win 60% of the Senate races after only winning 27%.
2. THE REASONS THE DEMS WON. In short, a perfect storm. The top reason has to be the war in Iraq which has become incredibly unpopular. Not only does a substantial majority now “oppose the war” but they are far more likely to vote on the war in Iraq than those who are not upset about the fact we are in Iraq. The war has also dominated news coverage so consistently that what might have been winning GOP issues, including recent record highs in the stock market, the lowest unemployment levels since 9/11 and lower than the average in the Clinton years, a much stronger job creation record, etc. went virtually unmentioned. Regarding gay marriage, while huge majorities continue to ban gay marriage in one state after another, including liberal states, (except Massachussetts), the issue is a loser for the younger generation. The Dems have done a better job of palying up the gay marriage issue to younger voters than the GOP has done in playing it to the older voters. Bush’s low poll numbers, after the war in Iraq, is next best explained by his efforts to tackle Social Security reform, a political black hole from which his approval numbers never really recovered. The Democratic base was primarily driven by the labor movement, where union members and union households, despite being at an all time low in terms of percentage of the workforce, continue to constitute a majority of the votes going for the Democratic party and the ground efforts for get out the vote and campaign volunteers.
In several states, embryonic stem cell research was an issue, but despite disproportionate media coverage, individuals whose top one or two reasons for voting was the embryonic stem cell research issue broke overwhelmingly for the GOP. The Dems keep it on the agenda because they receive so much funding from the abortionist movement and what popularity the measure has had is due nearly entirely to misinformation campaigns about the false hope of promise in embryonic stem cells. It is worth repeating again, that ZERO cures and effective treatments have ever been developed from embryonic stem cell research, the funding is taking away from proven, non-embryonic stem cell research that actually has helped the people with the diseases the embryonic stem-cell proponents pretend to care about, and the Dems are planning to spend HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars on the research. The real end game behind this research, I believe, is to marginalize Pro-Lifers who they know will oppose this research on the ground that it very clearly, scientifically involves the destruction of human life.
The third most influential issue after Iraq and Social Security was the series of scandals rocking the GOP. The Abramoff scandal is nearly single-handedly responsible for the victory of now Senator Tester over GOP Senator Burns, and the downfall of Mike DeWine in Ohio. While many Democrats took money from Abramoff as well, the Dems effectively convinced the public that this was a GOP corruption. The Foley scandal in Florida cost the GOP what had been a safe House seat and drew national attention.
3. THE IMPACT ON 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. In short, it is too early to tell, but the Dems control of the governorships, and the prevailing political winds favor the Democrats. If the war in Iraq is still on the political horizon it will continue to devastate the GOP at the polls. It is also politically suicidal at this point for the GOP to address Social Security again. I believe a Clinton-Obama ticket will shape up for the Dems and a McCain-?? ticket for the GOP where national security, health care, fiscal responsibility, and value issues will dominate the election.
4. THE IMPACT ON ABORTION. As voters went to the polls, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the partial birth abortion ban. The ban will likely be held Constitutional, crystallizing the victories of Pro-Lifers in ‘04, ‘02, and ‘00, as well as the Alito and Roberts confirmation votes. This will save thousands of lives, at least, every year. At the same time, rumors of Justice Stevens’ failing health and possible retirement opens the question of whether a 49 vote minority GOP can put a Pro-Life, 5th, Roe-overturning vote on the Court. Bush will likely put up another Pro-Life vote, but the Dems will control the judiciary committee and will likely try to defeat every nominee there who has a hint of a Pro-Life track record.
It is worth noting though, that the House, where the Dems have a larger majority, has zero impact on the Supreme Court selection or confirmation. Also of the 6 seats the GOP lost to the Dems in the Senate, one was a Pro-Life vote to another Pro-Life vote, (Santorum to Casey in PA), and another was a Pro-Choice vote to a Pro-Choice vote (Chafee to Whitehouse in RI). It wil be an uphill but necessary battle for the Pro-Life movement to win. It is likely Bush will nominate Janice Rogers Brown to be the 1st black female on the Supreme Court, and much will depend on her confirmation process. If, by a long shot, Allen somehow manages to win through a recount in VA, the GOP will regain control of the Senate, and with Cheney’s tie-breaking vote, the GOP would be able to push through a Bush nominee. The dark and tragic reality of the situation, however, is this: that by a margin of a fraction of a percent, the GOP lost a race in VA they needed to win, and the probable result, without a heroic Pro-Life effort, is that tens of millions of more lives will be lost through abortion before we get another chance to put a 5th vote on the court. Assuming the Dems win the White House in 08, the oldest votes on the court, including Stevens, Ginsburg, and Souter, can retire and be replaced by younger pro-abortion justices who can empower the tragedy of abortion decades into the future.
Regarding the defeat of the abortion ban in South Dakota, two things are worth mentioning. One, is that until a few weeks before the election, the ban had a huge margin of support that was eroded by intentionally misleading ad campaigns by the abortionists, who were far more well-funded. Second, though Pro-Lifers were outfunded, they drew more funding contributions from within the state than the abortionists, and South Dakota, by all polls remains a Pro-Life state. It does highlight though the long road of defeating abortion in the states after we get the constitutional Supreme Court majority. Every state victory though will save thousands to millions of lives, depending on the state.
