ELECTION TAKEAWAYS P.1
- Nikola Ranick
- Nov 10, 2020
- 6 min read
Sick of your inbox and social feeds consumed by election takeaways, call-to-actions, and varying diatribes of despair? Me too, but here’s another to skim anyway. I have organized my key takeaways, and the first is as follows:
On Partisan Agony: Demmed if You Do, Demmed if you Don't
As the results finalize, I hope that the irony of the Left’s Election Disappointments will either fade, or at the very least, rationalize. Sure, progressives in particular craved a landslide in order to send a message to the nation and world that an America of Civility, Social Justice, and Progress was once again emerging. The Right, on the other hand, emphasized media bias and shy Trumpism in the belief that the recent course of the country would prove to be decisive going forward. As is typical, both got a little of what they wanted and are instead filled with agony of lacking an absolute. For my crowd of mourners, here are a couple of sub-themes I would recommend you examine to check your despair.
-In a Partisan America, Any Victory Margin Should be Heralded as a Margin of Morality. -
Especially considering that Clinton won the popular vote decisively in 2016, Biden’s even stronger national consensus along with an electoral college win is the epitome of Team Blue's beliefs triumphing. Especially as the politics of progressivism are themselves increasingly niche and one-sided, any victory enough should be (and by its leaders, likely will be) considered a mandate for those involved. Further proving the cause are policy logistics going forward. The last decade or so has established an increasingly imperial Presidency, proving they at the top dictates ample authority no matter what victory margin is finalized. After all, executive orders are not tethered by decisive victories, and any mandates is as hollow as the partisan environment we live in (Remember Trump's Mandates? Republicans do but Democrats don't).
Speaking of which, Conservatives know better than to wallow in an election whose narrative looks to have spun in favor of their shy Trump voter beliefs as opposed to a 2008-era wave. Indeed, for proving the polls at least somewhat wrong, they have again won a narrative victory that could be just as influential in prostrating Trumpism down the line-2024 anyone? As for the lower chamber, true power is limited, but it is still there and alongside a map moving in Team Red's favor. The very demographic makeup of the Senate favors the GOP, and their narrow majority there will likely be more unified than a Democrat one would, making policy prevention much more malleable. As for their House prospects, such is so elaborate it merits an entire other section below.
True, Dems are disappointed that, bar a swiftly moving GA-7 and easy Senate wins in Arizona and Colorado, their many House and Senate pick-up opportunities look to have failed- and that is without examining the much larger failure in gaining Legislative Seats and subsequent influence/redistricting power that come with them (they lost ground almost everywhere, including both chamber majorities in New Hampshire). Any failure to expand a playable map is understandable, but perhaps just as understandable as their further bemoanment over select loss of seats. After all, 2018 was the election that proved Dems could beat back their enthusiasm gap enough to make inroads in GOP (and Trumpy) locales. Now in 2020, both sides were at full capacity with the highest turnout in a century, an equanimity of which would lead to a reasonable political adjustment (in this case, against the Dems after they had faced both strong support of their candidates and weak turnout of the opposition in the cycle prior). Specific to the seats that changed hands- or look to have changed- were those suffering from a simultaneous political realignment. As Trump’s base arrived -and expanded-with him in a curious Obama-ballot like turnout, as did the Democrats BUT in a much more nuanced manner. With a specific focus on affluent suburbanites, the most educated and therefore, I argue, the most likely to want to split their tickets, there was no need to vote against Trump and his new GOP via the party writ-large. Now they could literally vote against the President while also supporting the style of GOP politics they prefer. Granted, many House recruits aptly embraced Trump but the break is still evident in the down ballot returns. In this respect then, suburbanites find themselves in a stalled realignment along with a pretty noticeable disregard for any moral imperatives progressives have previously laid forth.
-A House Majority is a House Majority…. Except when it Isn't-
With these competing flavors, it is then completely rational that any additional Dem gains would be checked while some of their 2018 pickups would become presently unsustainable-hence losses of Dem seats in strong Trump areas as SC-01, NM-02. As to whether suburbanites stay stuck in the middle or shift back or forward in any direction, I recommend analysis of the many incumbent Dem House Seats that were close yet still broke in Team Blue’s favor. In the future, I hope to study these results in spots such as the DC and Atlanta Suburbs as well as Orange County, so as to understand the extent of shift, both in 2018, now, and going forward.
And where to go from here? I predict this very outcome of a narrow majority will result in an arguably inevitable re-assessment of House Dem’s ancient leadership, especially in dichotomy to an expansive bench of lawmakers who, well, aren't that. In terms of who benefits most from narrow margins, I would have to say those who are already most disappointed: Progressives and the GOP writ-large.
1) The Far Left, most aptly personified by the Squad, will have an incredible amount of influence in the House voting down legislation deemed progressively unworthy, as both less moderates and the corresponding desperation for caucus unity will follow in 2021. Speaker Pelosi has always done mystically well at keeping her compatriots cajoled, but the changing political and numerical landscape could create a Freedom Caucus-style blockade that stymies deal making, humiliates leadership, and exhausts general American perception of government once more.
2) Even a mellow case of what I just laid out will benefit Republicans, who should expect a natural swing of support toward them during a President Biden's first midterm- and therefore a very clear path to reclaiming a House Majority. The map has always been fickle for Dems since the mid 90s, with demographic makeup of the country and extensive gerrymandering creating a lastingly painful 1-2 punch. Mild but notable Dem gains/independent redistricting commissions combined with the new political demographics of 2018 showed majorities could be possible and perhaps even enduring, but I suppose we will have to wait to see the effects of redrawn maps and the likelihood of suburban political evolution as detailed above.
We May not Like HOW Our Electorate Thinks, But At Least We Have an Idea of WHAT It Is
With the highest turnout since 1908, we have a clear conscience as a nation that modern politics has inspired attention from even the most traditionally removed in our system. Fair, turnout was down in certain select constituencies, but bulk turnout speaks for itself even as some voters don’t. Alas, many Americans were suddenly disconcerted in realizing their political voices were starkly different from their fellow citizens, even (or rather especially) after four years of dealing in near moral absolutes. Granted, there are many reasons to vote one way or the other, and no matter what loud extremes tell you, a vote for one candidate is never a clear embrace for every single issue they stand for. But in the policy conglomerate that is Representative Democracy, voters weigh their options and choose that of which they are more in favor of. In an Indignant Era of Us vs. Them, this has evolved less out of an incentive of candidate support and moreso of candidate dislike-just as many in favor of Biden voted moreso against Trump than pro-Joe).
Now, it would be easy to claim that supporting one’s side out of pure opposition means acceptance of every single specific line of policy in absolution, but I argue the very appearance of such conditions provides a pathway for remedy. After all, we can never cure ourselves of crisis without an accurate diagnosis. With such massive turnout, it is clear the American people both voted in a way indicative of what they believe and in numbers with which vacate the concept of silent majorities. After all, arguments of money’s influence and enthusiasm gaps are depreciated when the voting populace is indeed incentive to do its job. As we move forward as a nation, there is both a strong political presentation of the country's DNA presently, and hopefully correspondingly observant eyes looking to further course-correct based on where we go from here. It has been said before, but the nation’s eyes truly are on us for both where we presently stand, and where we may go given the results they have just delivered to us. If there is ever a time to study, examine, reanalyze, and expand on our political and social philosophies, it is now. So let’s get started!
Thoughts, comments, concerns? Let me know below and stay tuned for my next installment, aptly named-Polling Critiques Should Wait (Yes, Even Now).
I have a question. Why r u a bich?