Primary Day Outtakes

Texas, Georgia, Kentucky, and Arkansas all went to the polls. As this is a year of high Democrat enthusiasm, there was a lot more going on in that party than the Republicans. Here’s what I find interesting/noteworthy:

AR Gov-Statewide GOP Riding Strong

- If there is one area where a blue tidal wave wouldn’t hit, its Arkansas. Governor Asa Hutchinson easily survived his primary, one contested likely due to his more moderate policies, such as his support of Medicaid Expansion (Arkansas, ancestrally Democratic until Republicans gained the legislature in 2012 and Governor’s Office in ‘14, was the only Southern state at the time to accept this Obamacare provision). Not only did he win, but his backed candidate even managed to knock off an anti-Medicaid incumbent in the state senate, signaling the standing popularity of Hutchinson’s style. Most analysists expect a very clear and capable win in the General.

- Congressionally AR-2 could be competitive but that is a story for a day closer to the General Election.

KY 6th-Democrats Bemoaned by False Narratives Once More

- I felt myself experiencing a bit of déjà vu from this race. KY-6, much like the Virginia Gubernatorial Primary, saw a common media narrative of liberal vs. establishment. And indeed, this narrative isn’t completely incorrect, for there was a rivalry. But just like between Ralph Northam and Tom Perriello, the race between Amy McGrath and Jim Gray was not a Clinton/Sanders proxy fight. McGrath did talk the high-game, rejecting Gray’s establishment support and expressing skepticism about Nancy Pelosi. And Gray himself was a previous candidate who won the district in his loss against incumbent Rand Paul via the 2016 Kentucky Senate Race. But the distinctions end there. Their political beliefs are not radically different. And despite the establishment name-calling, the DNC saw either as highly competitive against Andy Barr in a general election (this was not the case in the early days of the primary, but their choice to ultimately not add Gray’s name to their Red-to-Blue rankings proved they grew content with McGrath as well). Ultimately, what was different was the weak turnout Gray saw in winning Lexington, and how it was unable to overcome McGrath’s impressive margins in rural and suburban areas, catapulting her to a narrow win and setting up a tight battle in a district with many ancestral Dems. Like West Virginia, Kentucky Democrats have a strong statewide brand that distinguished it from the national party. And like West Virginia, that distinction came crashing down, first with a surprise Gubernatorial defeat in 2015 and then with loss of the State House in 2016. But Kentucky’s 6th is still a competitive seat. It was competitive as early as 2012, and in this environment, an R+9/55-39 Trump seat is competitive territory. In order to put this seat in play though, these ancestral Dems need to give one last go (or vote) for their party, something which McGrath’s interesting primary turnout may indeed create. Right after, the DNC released an… early poll showing McGrath leading significantly. That was an outlier, but needless to say, incorrect media spins wouldn’t stop either McGrath or Grey from engaging in a credible race.

GA GOV-Stacey Abrams is Cruising…in Democratic Circles

- Perhaps what I found most noteworthy was a candidate who finally eclipses Richard Cordray in hype, Stacey Abrams. Like Cordray, former GA House Minority Leader Abrams received much hype by the establishment and acquired an impressive fundraising edge. Unlike Cordray, she managed to excite both the establishment and the ever-present liberal faction as well (she was actually seen as the more liberal choice on the ballot, as opposed to GA House Member Stacey Evans). She had the support of both liberal surrogates (Our Revolution, who endorsed Cordray’s opponent in Ohio) as well as establishment faces (see Hillary Clinton). Most unlike Cordray, Abrams is the first black female major party gubernatorial candidate. But most like Cordray, I find Stacey Abrams to be guilty of severe exaggeration. True, she has accomplished two impressive feats already: 1) She has unified her party base pre-primary. Although not nearly as divided as Republicans in 2010, the Democrat divide in style is noteworthy-the fact she could assuage this even before the election points to her strength, as does her impressive 73-27 romp over Evans. Of equal importance, she 2) Appeals to the most loyal and dedicated group of Democrats who have led the party to recent victories. Black voters, in particular black women, were instrumental in the Alabaman special election that lifted Doug Jones to the Senate. Considering that they now have a candidate they can fully identify with; the hype is to be merited. All of this points to a strong Democrat contender for Governor and I do agree. But strong does not mean enough to win a state like Georgia. Indeed, analyst veteran Stu Rothenberg pointed out how both Amy McGrath and Lizzie Fletcher (see below) received less hype, yet both likely have a much better shot of winning. Again, anything is possible if a Blue Tsunami develops, but if we look at the pure political angle of it, GA’s Gov is not in the bag for Dems. Even in an open seat, the electoral map is not kind to the party. It has a Republican history and 60%+ of the legislature is red. Furthermore, Abrams broke strongly from Evans and many past nominees by focusing less on cross-party reach and more on really amplifying the traditional Democratic base. This should make the election close, but I don’t think it creates the potential for a win, unless a broader strategy is pursued. Many optimists point to the Alabama Special to refute this, but they miss a key detail: Black turnout was only half of the equation. Doug Jones was able to eke out a win simply because many suburban Republicans did not come out to vote for a candidate as damning as Roy Moore. The same will not be so in this race-Casey Cagle (or Brian Hemp) has plenty of red meat without the scandal, meaning normal Republican turnout will overcome strong a strong Democratic one. Attracting these suburbanites or at least convincing them that Abrams is good enough to not come out and vote against, is essential. Abrams can do this, but the broad support behind her current style suggests it won’t be so. Still, if such an impressive result could happen in Alabama, it would take a lot less disengagement from Suburbanites in Georgia. A Republican candidate need not be as dreadful as Moore in order for enough GOP voters to stay home and allow strong Dem turnout to win the day. And the two-month long runoff between Kemp and Cagle gives Abrams an extra campaign window. However, that is not a long-term strategy. Most analysts share the belief that Georgia has become more competitive via statewide immigration: Many people moving in the state are college educated, a group moving more and more towards the Democrats. They are, for the most part, not liberal but do agree with more moderate leadership (case-in-point: Their shift towards Clinton). That type of voter needs to vote blue in order for Georgia to become a Democratic leaning state. In conclusion, I agree with former 538 Reporter Harry Enten that Abrams, at this point, has about a 25% shot at being governor. This could change, but it is an appropriate Leans Republican race for now.

TX 7-Resolving a Mess the DNC Arguably Created

- Speaking of college educated and moving towards Dems, this is the epicenter of such movements. It also may be a better example of the Clinton/Sanders feud. Prior to this runoff, the DCCC took the unusual step of releasing opposition research on one of the Democrats running in the primary, Laura Moser. They said her past comments and recent move to Texas made her essentially unelectable. Lighting a match indeed started the fire, for Moser suddenly picked up the mantra as an anti-establishment candidate, getting many endorsements such as Democracy for America and Our Revolution. In fact, in McClatchy’s most recent Beyond the Bubble podcast, Leah Greenberg of Indivisible points out how Moser was not on anyone’s radar until the oppo drop. Ultimately, the backlash allowed Moser to make the runoff against Lizze Fletcher. Fortunately for the DNC, Moser’s fundraising mostly dried up and Fletcher ended up trouncing her in the runoff, 68-32. This win was one based in style more than policy. As FiveThirtyEight discussed in their recent podcast, Fletcher and Moser hold similar beliefs, but broke on how they would achieve an electable coalition: Moser thought more in the Abrams model of maximizing Democratic enthusiasm while Fletcher channeled Evans in pushing for more moderate votes. The differing preference of the DNC here, in comparison to Georgia Gov, points to how they see the latter as more prone to victory than the former. Nonetheless, this race should be hotly contested. After all, the concept of a Blue Texas is always the rage for political scientists at the start of any election cycle.

- The Dem establishment win is in contrast to the GOP, where The Club for Growth, a conservative group once affiliated with longshot candidates, backed candidates who won ¾ runoffs and won one outright in the original March primary. McClatchy writes that these candidates, if victorious in November, could notably shift Texas’ Congressional delegation to the right.