At Roll Call election analyst Nathan L. Gonzales points out the lessons of the 2019 elections may be different than most think. Here are his hypotheses:
- Kentucky was not an upset.
- Trump was an asset, not a liability.
- Impeachment isn’t the silver bullet for Republicans.
- Bevin clearly had a unique problem.
- Transformation of Virginia is complete.
- Suburbs continue to be a problem for Republicans.
- Mississippi is a red state.
Read the whole thing.
My own view is that people tend to over-interpret elections. Just because a candidate with a certain profile wins a particular election in a particular state, county, city, etc. doesn’t mean that another candidate with a similar profile is a shoe-in in another state, county, city, etc. Politics remains stubbornly local whatever analysts may think.
Update
Also, check out the author’s four potential scenarios for the way the 2020 elections might play out. I have lost any predictive ability I ever had in the Era of Trump. All I can say is that I wish that Democrats were taking a lower risk “eyes on the prize” strategy rather than a “high risk/high reward” strategy. And don’t underestimate Trump.
Agreed. Even in a very blue or red state you can still lose if you run the wrong candidate. Roy Moore anyone? Even when you run a bad candidate, the other side can always find someone worse. Wasn’t it Delaware that had a weak candidate and the the GOP decided to run the witch for office?
Steve
This was a slow election year for us with only three items on the ballot for my jurisdiction: Filling two seats on the local school board and two state ballot measures – one legalizing and taxing sports betting (narrowly passed), one that would chip away at TABOR by letting the state keep any tax revenues above a state spending cap (rejected by a wide margin).
Colorado may be turning blue, but we’re still an anti-tax state, even for backdoor revenue increases.
That highlights something of which people should be more aware. Just because you believe in expanding state services does not necessarily mean you also support higher taxes and just because you oppose taxes does not necessarily mean you oppose expanding state services. People are quite capable of holding two contradictory thoughts in their heads simultaneously.
The highlight on the West Coast was Washington State, an initiative to re-introduce affirmative action looks to be defeated.
The coalition that defeated the initiative was eclectic, but if the Democrats are not careful on this issue, it could blow up their dominance in the West Coast.
My other takeaway from last night is “—– face” does not matter electorally. It didn’t stop Trudeau from re-election, it did not stop Virginia Democrats from taking over the state.
As for 2020; I think Canada’s recent Federal election is a more useful harbinger. Trudeau won despite (a) huge scandal from alleged interference into a prosecution (b) Conservative parties winning control from Left of Center parties in 6 of 10 provinces in the last 2 years (c) personal scandal (d) polls that showed he would lose from the beginning of the year till about August
Trudeau was helped tremendously by the unpopularity of Conservatives who took power in the provinces (in particular Ontario, where 40% of Canadians live).
What you describe is certainly the case here. People constantly complain about the roads and various growing pains as the state population (especially along the front range) expands, but voters consistently reject any revenue increases, even those specifically marked for education and transportation.
TABOR and the resulting spending caps also stymies unions here – Your teacher salaries are among the highest in the nation, ours are among the lowest.
When Pierre Trudeau was PM—those were the good old days!
He’d never have been elected in the first place if his name were Jean Dupont.
It just oozes loyalty to country, eh steve?
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/whistleblowers-attorney-vowed-get-rid-trump-2017
Impeach equals a coup? Link below goes to a place where you can read the Constitution. Regardless of what this guy, who I never heard of, said there was no attempt at impeachment until Trump solicited help from a foreign country with his election. Of course to you, Trump doing that means he was just being loyal to the country, or something.
Steve
https://constitutionus.com
They set in place plans to impeach the day after inauguration. Try honesty for once, steve.