Midterms: How To Interpret The Election Results

The Big Red Tidal Wave swamped Democrats in the midterm elections as voters sent an unmistakable message: they want a change in the direction of their country.  Exit polls confirmed two-thirds of voters believe President Obama's policies have placed the country on the wrong track.

Every major media outlet from the Associated Press to The New York Times tried to spin this election as a normal shift in power to be expected for presidents in their second term.   But the size of the Republican landslide, including in state races, was too embarrassing to soft pedal as politics as usual.

Make no mistake about it: this was a shellacking of historic proportions for Democrats.

This election was about a deeply unpopular president whose polling numbers have nosedived.  Even Democrats quarantined Obama from campaigning in their states and distanced themselves from his policies.   In a surreal development, one Democrat refused to divulge if she voted for Obama.

The president set the tone for this election when he reminded everyone the midterm elections were about his policies.  His pronouncement made every Democrat flinch.  But the narcissistic Obama could not resist making this election about himself.  His bluster doomed his party to a stinging defeat.

In fact, since Obama took up residence in the White House, Democrats have lost 69 House seats and 13  Senate seats with several midterm runoff elections still to be decided.  Under Obama, Democrats have given up more seats than under any president since Harry Truman.

As soon as a Democrat ambush was evident, the media pirouetted into damage control.  News pundits fabricated a narrative about the results being an indication voters wanted to end gridlock in Washington.  Not a single exit poll supported that theory.  Properly analyzed, the Republican sweep means:

1.  Voters made it clear they want to stop the Obama agenda.  Exit polls showed most voters opposed the president's policies.  A majority of successful Republican candidates painted their Democrat opponents as rubber stamps for President Obama. While Americans are not opposed to compromise, they are not interested in political bargains that advance President Obama's programs.

2.  The president's broken promises to heal the economy hurt Democrats.  Exit polls showed that 45 percent of voters named the economy as the top issue in the election.  Although Obama endlessly drones on about economic recovery, many Americans have not experienced any change in their personal fortunes or job outlook. Voters don't care about government GDP figures, unemployment numbers or job growth data.  Workers have struggled as their wages have remained static, full time jobs have evaporated and business layoffs have mounted.  That's the reality Washington has ignored.

3.   The GOP should not read the results as an endorsement for the party brand.  Few Republicans ran on issues, but instead forced Democrats to defend the president and his policies.  This was not a campaign about bold ideas.  In fact, there was a dearth of ideas in Democrat and Republican campaigns.  The single issue was President Obama.  Republicans now need to make their case on how their party is better equipped to govern.  Opposition to Obama must take the form of creative ideas on issues important to Americans.  The first step should be to announce a comprehensive legislative agenda early in January before the State of the Union address.

4.  The midterms cannot be extrapolated to give Republicans an upper hand for 2016.  The turnout for midterm elections, as documented here in this space last week, is very different than presidential contests.  As the last two elections have shown, minorities and young people tend to stay home for midterms but turnout for presidential elections.  The Republicans need to extend their reach to take advantage of the momentum they created in last week's election. Unless they do, the GOP faces an uphill battle because Democrats have won the same 18 "blue" states in six straight presidential elections, accounting for 242 electoral votes. That leaves Democrats needing only 28 more electoral votes to win the presidency.  Those are daunting numbers to overcome.  

5.  The touted Clinton magic fizzled.  Former President Bill Clinton campaigned relentlessly in his home state for Arkansas Democrat Sen. Mark Pryor.  The incumbent senator lost as did Iowa Democrat Bruce Braley, who enjoyed the full-throated endorsement of Hillary Clinton. The former Secretary of State also backed Martha Coakley in Massachusetts, another loser.  In all, her coattails were entangled with five losing candidates.  This does not bode well for Mrs. Clinton, who has already been anointed by the media as a shoo-in for president in 2016.  Based on the election results, the Clinton candidacy no longer enjoys an aura of invincibility or inevitability.

For his part, President Obama's post-election news conference made it clear he assumes no responsibility for the demise of his party.  He defiantly clung to his defeated vision for America in the face of a bitter rebuke by voters.  His self-denial made him seem pitifully equipped to lead the nation.

Six years ago, the president crowed about how "elections have consequences."  Indeed, they do.  For his final two years in office, President Obama will have to deal with a suddenly empowered opposition party, a dispirited Democrat minority and an angry electorate.

Obama has only to gaze in a mirror to find the culprit for the dismal outlook for the remainder of his presidency.