Four More Takeaways from The 2022 Midterms
Dems will likely hold the Senate ... but not for long. Donald Trump is a loser, but only up to a point. Also, we know nothing and should acknowledge it!
I’m Michael A. Cohen, and this is Truth and Consequences: A no-holds-barred look at the absurdities, hypocrisies, and surreality of American politics. If you were sent this email - or you are a free subscriber - and you’d like to subscribe: you can sign up here.
Today’s post is free for all subscribers, so if you’re still not a paid subscriber and want access to all Truth and Consequences content … click the button below.
A housekeeping note: I will be Zoom Chatting tomorrow with my old friend Tom Schaller. We’re gonna talk midterms, and he’s going to tell us a bit about his recent pre-election reporting trip to the great Southwest! Here’s the link. See ya tomorrow.
I’ve got a few more takeaways!
Humility Wins
In the entire run-up to Election Day, I had a nagging suspicion in the back of my mind that Democrats would do very well on Election Day. The early voting numbers pointed in that direction, and so did polling results from high-quality pollsters. But I was afraid to put the idea down in my newsletter because a) I wasn’t sure, b) there were plenty of data points that suggested my hunch was wrong, and c) I didn’t want to embarrass myself. Even though I was likely on the right track, I’m glad I didn’t write it up … because, frankly, I should have been afraid of embarrassing myself.
I’ve made the point repeatedly that our knowledge of American politics is ultimately a bit limited. The United States is a big, messy, complicated country, and our politics is no different. None of us can fully understand the unique characteristics of 50 states and 435 congressional districts. We’re grasping disparate pieces of information and usually giving greater credence to the ones that match our ideological and partisan preferences. Confirmation and selection biases are a helluva drug! Many political pundits are unafraid to make bold predictions because if they’re proven wrong, they rarely have to admit it — or even acknowledge their mistake. Maybe I’d have more newsletter subscribers and a bigger profile if I leaned into the prediction game or was unfazed when I got things wrong, but I just don’t know how to do that.
I don’t think I’ve ever written this publicly, but on Election Night in 2016, I offered my resignation to my editor at the Boston Globe. I didn’t see how I could continue as a political columnist, having been so grievously wrong about the presidential election. Thankfully, she talked me out of it! But after that election, I decided that no matter my biases and preferences, I would always draw conclusions based on where the evidence took me — and that empiricism would underpin everything I write. Above all, I would approach the opinion/punditry business with extreme humility — and focus more on what I didn’t know and less on what I thought I knew. I tried like hell to do that this midterm cycle — and give you my honest, objective opinion, as influenced as little as possible by my ideological priors. I hope I did a good job and that when I review my work, I didn’t embarrass myself too badly! And my pledge to you is that going forward, I will continue only to go where the data and evidence take me.
The Dems likely have a majority in the Senate … but not for long.
It looks increasingly likely that Democrats will win Senate races in Nevada and Arizona and thus guarantee they keep control of the Senate. If that happens, it will make the Georgia Senate runoff superfluous. I think that’s likely good news for Raphael Warnock. The reason is that Herschel Walker is a highly flawed candidate, but if you’re a Republican, a vote for Walker on Election Day was also a vote to flip the Senate red. If that option is off the table in the runoff (because Democrats are already guaranteed to win the body), then I’d imagine it probably keeps more than a few GOP voters at home or crossing the aisle to vote for Warnock. You could argue that the same could happen to Warnock and Democratic voters, but Walker is a much more flawed candidate.
If Dems win the Senate, it may be a relatively short reign. The 2024 Senate map is absolutely brutal for Democrats. The party holds three seats in solidly red states — Jon Tester in Montana, Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and Joe Manchin in West Virginia. Brown has already said he’s likely to run, but considering Ohio’s increasingly Republican shift, it will not be an easy race. Tester has won three elections in a very red state, and I wouldn’t bet against him winning again. But Trump did win Montana in 2020 by 16 points — and popular governor Steve Bullock got smoked in his bid for the US Senate. Who knows what Manchin will do, but remember, in 2018, he only won by 3.6 points — and that was an excellent year for Democrats.
Then there are the purple staters like Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona (who could get a primary challenge), Jacky Rosen in Nevada, Tim Kaine in Virginia, and Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin. New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez could be under federal indictment … again. On the GOP side, no Republican is running in a state won by Joe Biden in 2024, and it’s hard to find a single Senator who looks vulnerable. Maybe Ted Cruz, if Texas finally becomes a purple state, but I wouldn’t wager on that one. Democrats will get a boost from Joe Biden at the top of the ticket (congressional Dems usually do better in presidential years), but they’ll have to run the table to hold the Senate, and that doesn’t seem very likely.
Trump Is A Loser … But Only Up To A Point
You could make a persuasive argument that Democrats have won the last three US elections. In 2018, they took control of the House of Representatives. In 2020, they won the White House and the Senate. In 2022, they are likely to hold the Senate, and even if they lose the House, they historically overperformed. Also, they are +2 in governorships and could be +3 if Katie Hobbs wins in Arizona. I believe there’s a simple reason for this — Donald Trump. In fact, I’m not sure there’s any other way to interpret the data. The 2018 midterm was a backlash to Trump. In 2020, he lost reelection. In 2022, his hand-picked nominees badly unperformed.
However, there is a flip side to this argument. In 2018 and 2020, Trump helped ensure that red-state Republicans won reelection. Even though Democrats won 40 House seats in 2018, Republicans kept their Senate majority by knocking off red-state Democrats in North Dakota, Indiana, Florida, and Missouri. In 2020, he dragged a host of Republican Senators across the finish line in purple states like North Carolina and Iowa and redder states like Texas and South Carolina. In addition, Trump’s ability to mobilize his supporters probably helped Republicans pick up seats in the House. Indeed, this is why Republicans continue to genuflect to Trump. For most of them, it’s good politics.
The problem is that while it creates a high floor for the GOP, it limits the ceiling. Republicans can continue to decisively win races in red states (and red-leaning ones) but lose races in blue and purple states. It’s not necessarily surprising that two of the few purple-state Republicans to win were Ron Johnson and Brian Kemp. Both had well-established political brands and, in the case of Johnson, predated Trump in office. But in places where political newcomers ran on the Republican ticket — like Pennsylvania, Georgia, New Hampshire, Arizona, and Nevada — they fared worse. Even in Ohio, JD Vance did 9.5 points worse than incumbent Mike DeWine. On the House side, the Trumpier a candidate, the worse they did (generally speaking). We saw this play out in Michigan, North Carolina, and Ohio. So while Trump giveth to the GOP, he also taketh — and this election, there was far more of the latter than the former.
The New Democratic Coalition
These are exit polls from the Michigan Governor’s race (incumbent Democrat Gretchen Whitmer defeated Republican Tudor Dixon)
This is the Pennsylvania Senate race.
This is the Pennsylvania Governor’s race.
This is the Georgia Senate.
This is North Carolina Senate.
Notice a pattern here? The gap between white and non-white college graduates is huge — 18 points in Michigan and Pennsylvania (Senate), 19 points in Pennsylvania Governor, and 21 points in Georgia Senate. In North Carolina, the gap is 28 points. If you dig deeper into the Michigan numbers — there’s an 18-point gap between women college grads and male college grads. The gap in education achievement and voting patterns is a chasm … and almost a complete reversal of the New Deal Coalition from decades ago.
Now, this is exit poll data, and we should take it with a grain of salt. These numbers tend to move around as more analysis and further surveys are done. Moreover, other exit pollsters show slightly different responses. But the trend lines seem pretty straightforward — at the same time, Republicans are consolidating their hold over white non-college graduate voters, Democrats are consolidating their hold with white college-educated voters. The education gap in voting is only getting wider.
What’s Going On
Fascinating piece that suggests John Fetterman’s debate performance actually improved his standing with Pennsylvania voters.
I’m not joking when I say that I’m not sure Twitter survives Elon Musk.
Always read Ron Brownstein on American politics.
Mixed-race neighborhoods are now the norm in America.
Musical Interlude