How Democrats Turned Red Wave Into Blue Foam

This year's midterm elections shattered every historical axiom.  Dating to World War II, the incumbent president's party has loss an average of 28 House seats and four Senate seats.  Losses are normally worst in times of economic distress.  Yet Democrats defied precedent, staving off deep losses.  

Never have so many experts been so wrong about an election. Republicans seemed poised to rack up big gains. Instead, voters shrugged off record inflation, a brutal stock market, rising crime and an influx of illegal immigrants. They voted Democratic in spite of their sour mood about the country's future.   

Even the political class cannot explain this conundrum.  Exit polls by the National Election Pool Survey found about three-quarters of voters rated the economy as weak and about the same number believed the country is headed in the wrong direction.  Voters, illogically, cast ballots for the party in power.  

In the aftermath, political pundits, party strategists and the news media gleefully named former President Donald Trump as the culprit. Trump, a habitual target, certainly deserves some responsibility  for the GOP's lackluster results.  But this knee-jerk analysis doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

Another popular view is the caliber of some candidates hurt the GOP. But an unbiased observer must admit there were more than a few clunkers on the Democratic Party side.  Exhibit A is John Fetterman in Pennsylvania, a stroke victim who hid from voters and reporters for most of the campaign.

No Republican wants to confront the reason for their embarrassing performance.  Democrats outsmarted, out spent and out maneuvered the GOP, managing to narrowly lose the House and hold the Senate. Here are a few insights into how the Democrats crushed the red wave.

• Democrats focused on mail-in ballot initiatives to build sizable margins, just as they did in 2020.  More than 40.7 million Americans voted either by mail or early in person. More mail-in and early ballots were cast in this election than in the 2018 midterm (36 million), despite record turnout that year. Republicans spent too much effort on turning out voters on election day.  Banking votes early is the best way to guarantee turnout. The GOP still hasn't learned that lesson, disdaining efforts to harvest mail-in ballots.
• Democrats intervened in GOP primaries, spending money on negative ads to smear candidates they deemed less extreme and therefore the toughest to beat.  The move triggered blowback within the party because it cut into funds in Democrat primary races.  But in the end, it worked. The GOP primary winners often had baggage that made them vulnerable to Democrat attacks.     
• A record $16.7 billion in campaign funds was spent in the midterms. By some estimates the Democrats outspent Republicans two-to-one in key races.  The GOP, especially in Senate races, spread the funds too thin, often depriving candidates of needed dollars.  Mitch McConnell, in particular, made funding decisions based on Senators who would back his candidacy as minority leader. Too many "out of favor" GOP candidates were starved for campaign funds that could have made a difference.
• More young people turned out to vote in the midterm election than anticipated.  Estimates are 27% of young people (18-29) cast ballots in the election.  It is the second highest youth turnout percentage in the past 30 years.  The National Election Pool Survey estimated 63% of youths voted Democratic.  Those votes swung key races in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia.  Polling showed the top issues with young voters were student loan forgiveness and abortion. 
• Republican messaging was a an incoherent hodgepodge, ranging from crime to the border.  This election was about the economy stupid!  Inflation and the economy should have been the laser focus. Even when candidates talked about this issue, they offered few solutions.  Illegal immigration didn't resonate with voters outside border states.  And even in crime ridden areas, voters didn't trust Republicans to fix the issue.

Despite the appalling showing, Republicans can take some solace from a few positives that emerged. Based on CNN exit polls and the National Election Pool Survey, Republicans made inroads with suburban women.  Hispanics and African-Americans were more supportive of Republicans than in past elections. The GOP garnered 5 million votes more than Democrats in the election. Those are encouraging signs. 

Republicans had more advantages this election than they may ever have again. But still lost. Republicans have no one to blame but party leadership in the House, Senate and the GOP National 

Committee.  If the GOP insists on following the same script, they will be a permanent minority. 

GOP Overconfidence Spells Trouble in Midterms

Giddy Republicans are popping the champagne corks in celebration of a Red Wave in the midterm elections.  That over exuberance may prove their undoing in November.  While the GOP is in party mode, Democrats are building a war chest and sharpening their political rhetoric to pull an upset.

For months, President Biden's underwater poll numbers fed GOP confidence.  Scorching inflation, record gas prices, a porous border, and education issues foreshadowed a Red avalanche.  Early national polls showed voters preferred GOP control of the House and Senate. Happy times are here again. 

Republican also have history on their side.  The president's party usually loses 30 House seats in the midterms.  Democrats currently hold a thin majority in the House, 220-211.  If history repeats, the GOP would begin 2023 with a solid 241-180 majority.  But history can be fickle.  

Currently, the Senate is deadlocked 50-50, although Vice President Kamala Harris casts the deciding vote in the event of ties. There are 34 Senate seats up for grabs this year.  However, Senate control will likely hinge on closely contested races in 10 key states, where turnout will tilt the outcome. 

The latest Monmouth University Policy Institute poll offers a clear picture of voters issues. Inflation and gas prices are the chief concerns.  More than four in ten Americans told pollsters they are struggling financially.  Despite the Democrat drum beating, abortion is a priority for just 5% of voters. 

Beware: Some polls show abortion as a priority issue but those are not open-ended, where respondents select their own priorities. Democrat-sponsored research limits the choices for respondents, forcing survey participants to select from a narrow list of issues, which includes abortion.  

Irregardless,  Democrats insist the emotionally charged issue will motivate its voters to turnout in the midterms.  To up the ante, Democrats are disingenuously claiming the Supreme Court ruling on abortion also imperils gay marriage, racially mixed marriages and LGBTQ protections.

Democrats are also banking on smearing Republicans as extremists in the January 6 hearings.  Although former President Trump is the target, the House committee is crafting a narrative that many GOP House and Senate members were tangentially involved in the Capitol riots. Thus Republicans are fanatics.

As an extension of this strategy, Democrat fund raising committees are supporting Trump-endorsed GOP candidates in the primaries in hopes they will be easier to defeat in the midterms. Some Democrats are beginning to notice and are criticizing their party for being hypocritical. 

In light of the Democrat maneuvers, Republicans need to quit reading the polls and stop taking victory laps.  Elections are won in November and voters preferences can flip in a heartbeat. Instead of just regurgitating voter issues, the GOP must begin offering solutions.    

Voters want to know how Republicans will govern and what changes they will make.  This is especially important to woo independents as well as traditional Democrat voting blocs, such as Hispanics, Asians and African-Americans.  Voters are keen on a change of direction in the country.

Republicans need a clarion call that resonates with voters.  How about the American Prosperity Plan? GOP candidates for the House and Senate should rally around an action agenda that stirs voters passion. instead of just reminding voters who bad things are. Here are a few suggestions:

To deal with inflation, the GOP should vow to stop the Democrats inflationary spending.  Republicans should pledge to reject boondoggles with clever names, such as the Inflation Reduction Act. They should adopt a "no new spending" mantra and end government welfare for green industries.

Since the House controls the purse string, the GOP should argue for less spending on federal government agencies, which are expanding. Republicans should insist on across the board 5% budget  cuts at every Washington agency to reduce the federal budget.

Budget cuts would also be a way to reign agencies or in other cases reduce the size of regulatory bureaucracies.  A plan to eliminate the Department of Education, for example, would draw broad support. States have their own Departments of Education.  No need for another layer of bureauracy.

On taxes, Republicans should campaign on lowering tax rates for all Americans making less than $400,000 annually.  Such a promise would offer a stark contrast to the Democrats plans for raising personal and corporate taxes in the midst of an economic recession. 

The border issue reverberates in many key election states, such as Arizona.  Republicans should pledge to pass legislation to finish the border wall.  The suppliers and the construction materials have been paid, but President Biden halted construction.  No additional funding would be required. 

To address energy, Republicans would pledge to revive the GOP-backed Keystone XL bill that died in 2021 in the Democrat controlled House. The bill to authorize completion of the  construction on the oil pipeline, specified the project would not need a permit from the president. 

Health care costs are a factor in rising inflation.  Republicans, who had a chance to end Obamacare in 2016, should cap funding of subsidies for government health insurance, which enrich private insurers.  Another way to reduce health costs is to oppose further expansion of Medicare.

Some Democrats are no doubt shaking their heads in laughter. President Biden would veto any legislation that does not fit the Democrat agenda.  Actually, that would help Republicans draw a clear distinction between the parties on key issues for voters now and in the 2024 presidential election.

Listen Republicans.  Don't waste this opportunity by touting an investigation of President Biden and his son Hunter will be your first act.  That might fire up the base, but average Americans don't care. There will be a time to address the issue at some point.  For now, can the comments.

There will be a time for celebration.  But right now the priority is to unite GOP candidates under a broad agenda to restore American prosperity.  That's what voters want to hear.  

Attacks On Supreme Court Are Midterm Strategy

The unethical leak of a draft Supreme Court decision on abortion has unleashed a vicious flurry of attacks orchestrated by the Democratic Party.  The fiery response is fueling rage that threatens to dig deeper divisions in America.  The president who promised to heal the country is nowhere to be found.

Make no mistake that the leak was an egregious act to undermine the court. The court's secrecy is sacrosanct.  In this writer's opinion, a Supreme Court justice likely knew about the leak or perhaps encouraged a clerk to leak the document to intimidate the other justices into changing their opinions.

There is little doubt this calculated deceit also is aimed at propping up the sagging political fortunes of Democratic Party candidates facing midterm electoral carnage. With President Biden's approval ratings below sea level, Democrats desperately needed a Hail Mary pass to level the playing field.

The draft, penned by Justice Samuel Alito, appeared first in Politico which licensed  the media cabal to expose the entire document without criticism. It's an old media trick. Politico takes the heat while the liberal media does a Pontius Pilate, washing its hands of blame. 

Moments after the Politico story broke online, pro-abortion activists were in front of the Supreme Court building, waving perfectly printed signs. This is no coincidence.  It should be obvious the protest was staged by groups that had been tipped off about the Politico bombshell report. 

An activist group funded by dark money, Ruth Sent Us, publicly released the home addresses of conservative court justices and urged supporters to show up at their residences to protest. This is not a protest but an attempt to frighten the families of justices by recklessly invading their privacy.

On its website, Ruth Sent Us issues a call for muralists or chalk artists. The website adds: "Large-scale art will be included in the protests against the Supreme Court. Stipends available." On May 11, the bullies plan to protest at the "homes of the six extremist justices." This is a new level of anarchy.

Ruth Sent Us leaders are acting more like terrorists than activists. The group's recruits jumped the gun and gathered outside justices homes this weekend and urged extremists to harangue Catholic Churches on Mother's Day for the religion's stance on abortion. 

In a social media post , Ruth Sent Us mocked Catholics with this message:

"Stuff your rosaries and your weaponized prayer.  We will remain outraged after this weekend, so keep praying.  We'll be burning the Eucharist to show our disgust for the abuse Catholic Churches have condoned for centuries."  This hate speech was not banned from the social platform. 

Biden apologist Jen Psaki refused to condemn protests at the justices private homes. She said peaceful protests are part of the American experience.  Not a single Democrat raised any objections. In fact, Psaki and the president never criticized the leak.  It's an election year and Democrats need an issue.

The lone Democrat to show any decency was Senator Mark Warner of Virginia who unequivocally denounced the leaking of a draft opinion. Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer avoided criticizing the leaker, focusing on the draft opinion. Leaking is fine when it helps Democrats.  

Americans deserve some answers. Was the leaker paid?  Did a sitting justice facilitate the leak? How did Politico obtain the copy of the opinion?  It is the public's right to know. But Democrats control all levers of government, so no one will be held accountable. 

At this point, let's review some facts.  A draft opinion is not the final decision.  Drafts are routinely circulated before the court announces its decision publicly.  Secondly, even if the draft reflects the majority, abortion will still be legal in the United States.  Each state will decide any restrictions.

Now Democrats are huffing and puffing about enlarging the Supreme Court and stuffing it will liberal extremists.  (Yes, if Republican-nominated judges are extremists, then Democrats should be judged by this standard.) They are also threatening to unleash a whirlwind against the conservative judges.  

Such heated rhetoric is a tactic to light a fire under Democrat voters, who are less than motivated to show up at the polls for a party that has overseen the highest inflation in 40 years.  Abortion is an inflammatory wedge issue designed to drive more Democrat voters to the polls in the midterms.   

However, a Pew Research poll released May 6 suggests abortion is a nuanced issue with Americans.  Six-in-ten Americans support legal abortion.  However, the survey discovered when asked about abortion at a specific time in the pregnancy the public opinion shifts.

The survey shows 56% of Americans say how long a woman has been pregnant should matter in determining whether abortion should be legal. That includes 52% of Democrats, according to Pew Research, and 64% of Republicans.  

There are so many ironies surrounding the abortion kerfuffle that it is difficult to know where to start.  Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose name Ruth Sent Us appropriated, actually was not fond of the Roe vs. Wade ruling. On several occasions, she opined that the decision tried to do too much too fast.

"My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change," she said in a speech at the Chicago Law School.  She called the decision too far-reaching and too sweeping. To be clear, she supported abortion, but not the 1973 decision's approach.

President Joe Biden once advocated outlawing abortion.  In 1981, then Senator Biden championed a Constitutional amendment to allow states to overturn Roe vs. Wade. The bill never made it to the full Senate.  When Biden entered the Senate in 1973, he said the court went "too far" on abortion.

Now President Biden showers abortion with his full-throated backing.

In politics, senators and representatives routinely change their stances on issues about as often as they change their underwear. That's just the ethically-challenged politics of Washington. Both parties are stone cold guilty.  Members follow the prevailing political winds, not their consciences. 

The leak and attendant rancor on both sides will fuel nastier politics. Rage will remain in vogue. In recent years, hordes vandalized statutes.  Rioters terrorized the country for an entire summer, looting, killing and burning buildings.  A uncontrolled mob invaded the Capitol. This is more of the same. 

Many Americans are sick of the political discourse, the division, the hatred, the name-calling and the anarchy.  But if Americans keep voting for the same people and expecting a more civil America they have no one to blame but themselves.  The nation will change when voting reflects American values.  

Midterm Elections: The Important Numbers

In the rush to analyze the midterm elections, most media and political pundits have stuck to a partisan script.  They have zeroed in on party control of Congress, the Trump factor and the impact on the 2020 presidential election.  Their interpretations missed some eyeopening numbers.

Voter turnout was the biggest surprise of this midterm.  Despite declining voter turnout in previous midterms, there was a sharp reversal of form.  According to the U.S. Election Project, an estimated 113 million voters cast ballots, making it the first midterm to exceed 100 million votes.

If those projections are verified, it means nearly 48 percent of eligible voters exercised their right in these midterms.  In the most recent midterm in 2014, the turnout was a paltry 36.4 percent.  The last time voter turnout reached 49 percent was in the 1966 midterm elections, more than 50 years ago.

Political forecasters were stunned by the size of the early balloting results in many states.

For instance, by November 1 the number of Texans who cast an early ballot had exceeded the state's entire turnout for the 2014 midterm.  Another 19 states, plus the District of Columbia, recorded higher early voter turnout than the entire total for the last midterm.

In previous years, early voting had no influence on total turnout. This midterm was clearly an exception to that rule.  One difference from previous midterms is that more than 3.3 million voters aged 18 to 29 voted via early ballot, a whopping 188 percent increase from 2014.

However, seniors were the largest demographic to vote early.  By some estimates, seniors aged 65 and up comprised more than half of those who cast ballots before November 6.  Voting early is a trend that is likely to mushroom as people decide to skip the dreaded lines on election day. 

Turnout for this midterm hopefully signals a renewed desire for people to become engaged in democracy. America, forget the political parties, wins when people vote.  America needs citizen participation for democracy to succeed as the founding fathers intended.  

More women were elected to Congress and state legislatures than ever before.  There were 3,379 females running in midterm races nationwide, according to a report from Rutgers University's Center for American Women and Politics.  That represents a 25 percent increase from the last midterm.

As a result of these midterms, more women will serve in Congress than at any point in our nation's history.  There will be at least 118 females in the House and Senate.  The total includes 31 first-time House members, seven more than the previous high established in 1992.

The majority of the women in the House are aligned with the Democratic Party--84 of the 96 females that will represent state districts.  And 30 of the 31 female newcomers in the House are Democrats.  But the first Korean-American ever elected to Congress is a Republican from California.

The House and Senate will be the most diverse in history.  That bodes well for a country that embraces diversity.  These midterms ushered in a new era for women in politics. And it portends a day when a woman soon will occupy the White House.

The 2018 midterms were the most expensive in history.  The Center for Responsive Politics estimates that the two political parties raised a record-breaking $5.2 billion.  That smashed the previous mark of $3.7 billion in fundraising in the 2014 midterms.

Democrats benefited from the numbers of retiring Republicans.  The media tried to pin the blame on President Trump for Democrats flipping the House.  However, Republicans had the largest number of congressional retirements since the Brookings Institute began tracking the statistic 88 years ago.

There was an exodus of 39 before the midterms.  Most of them were House members.  Many, but certainly not all, represented suburban districts where the demographics have changed in favor of traditional Democratic voters.  GOP newcomers faced steep odds to hold these districts.

Incumbency is a sizable advantage in any election.  As a result, Republicans lost 31 seats in the midterms against well funded Democrats.  Historically, the party of the sitting president loses the House and Senate in midterms, however, the GOP survived a catastrophic defeat.

In 1994, President Clinton lost 54 House seats in the first midterm after his election.  President Obama suffered an even worst fate as his party surrendered 63 seats in 2010.  Measured against those midterms, Mr. Trump's party fared better than previous first-term presidents.

Although Democrats will control the House and Republicans will be the majority in the Senate, there are 14 Congressional races that remain unsettled a week after the polls closed.  This may be the most contests hanging in the balance in election history.

As of this writing, Democrats will have a 227 to 198 majority.  There are still 11 House races that are awaiting final tabulation of votes.  Despite all the advances in technology, counting votes remains a labor intensive process that often leaves neither political party satisfied.  This must be addressed.

In the Senate, there are three races undecided, all likely headed for recounts.  For now the Republicans hold a 51-46 majority.  The Democrats had more seats to defend in battleground states that President Trump carried in 2016, giving the GOP the upper hand.

By now your head is spinning with numbers, so here is an antidote for data overdose.  In Nevada, a dead man won a seat in the state assembly.  Republican Dennis Hof, owner of a brothel, passed away a month before the midterms.  Officials ruled it was too late to scratch his name.  It didn't matter.

Voters overwhelming elected Hof.  Apparently, having a pulse is not a requirement for election to the state assembly in Nevada.   Truly a sad state of affairs.  But nothing should surprise anyone after the tumultuous midterm elections of 2018. 

Sizing Up the Midterm Election

Leading up to the November midterm election, the most hackneyed headline is: "Democrat Voter Enthusiasm Surging." Virtually every mainstream media propaganda machine has churned out stories predicting a Blue Wave sweeping Democrats into power.  Forecasters are ignoring the past.

In the last midterm election in 2014, the country recorded the lowest voter turnout in history.  Even by midterm standards, turnout was a clunker.  An anemic 36.4 percent of eligible voters bothered to go to the polls.  That was five percent less than 2012, another disappointing year for turnout.

Going back to 1916, midterm voter turnout has been significantly less than presidential election years. Since 1970, midterm election turnout has been sinking.  In every single one of those years, both political parties claimed voter enthusiasm was soaring off the charts.  Reality always bites.

Midterms since 1970 have generated turnout in the 40-percent range.  By comparison, presidential election years historically attract higher turnouts, mostly in the 60-percent range. The highest voter turnout in the midterms in recent history was the 1962 election with 47.7 percent.

The 2014 midterm is a likely predictor for the upcoming election.  That year was the most expensive midterm in United States history with an estimated $3.7 billion lavished on election campaigns.  Even gobs of cash failed to nudge the enthusiasm needle.  Turnout was the worst in 72 years.

Experts have analyzed midterm elections and written weighty tomes about why voters stay home. Voters lack interest.  Midterms don't have the sizzle of a presidential campaign.  There are fewer candidates on the ballot.  There are more excuses than votes cast.  (That's hyperbole by the way.)

So why will this midterm be different?  Because the media tells us so?  New polling data indicates that despite all the  media hype, this midterm may see an uptick in turnout, but mostly in Blue states. The rest of the country may follow the midterm norm. Expect frosty voter interest.

Already the two parties are hyperventilating about the long lines of early voters foreshadowing a record turnout.  However, analytics have shown there is no correlation.  In fact, a Pew Research analysis of past elections concluded that heavy early voting indicates a reduction in total turnout.

Early voting is billowing because growing numbers of people prefer to skip the long lines on election day. In the 1996 election, Pew found an estimated 10.5% of voters cast early ballots.  By the 2012 election, the number had zoomed to 36.6%.  In some states, more than 50% of people vote early.

There is no scientific evidence that early voting signals an inflated turnout, regardless of media claims to the contrary.  None.  Nada.  Perhaps this election will prove to be an outlier.  But claims that swollen early ballots is a precursor to heavy turnout should be taken with a heavy dose of skepticism.

Millennials may be a better barometer of turnout.  A poll released by the Public Religion Research Institute and The Atlantic found that only 28 percent of young people aged 18-29 say they will "certainly vote."  That compares with 74 percent of seniors.  Midterms are a snooze for Millennials.

Latinos, another reliable Democrat voting bloc, normally sit out the midterms. A Pew Research analysis found a record 29 million Latinos are eligible to vote this year.  However, Latino turnout in the midterms has declined every year since 2006, tumbling to a historic low 27 percent in 2014.

Despite all the hubbub over the influence of the Latino vote, no one mentions that 71 percent of Hispanics who are eligible to vote live in six states: California, Texas, Florida, New York, Arizona and Illinois.  At least three of those states are traditionally Blue Dog Democrat strongholds.

In recent elections, the media point to the power of suburban professional women voters. Democrats traditionally do well with this group.  But even with this geographic solidly in the Blue corner, Democrats have to energize young and Latino voters to gain a clear advantage.

History may turn out to be the Democrats' best friend.  The president's party has lost seats in Congress in 40 of the 43 midterm elections held in the United States.  It's almost impossible to buck the trend.  The exceptions to the rule occurred in 1934, 1998 and 2002. Will 2018 follow the script?

One unknown factor is  the rising voter approval for President Trump.  In the most recent national poll his approval scaled a peak of 47 percent.  Going into the 2014 midterms, former President Obama's approval stood at 43 percent.  Will that three-point gap made a difference?  No one knows.

Pundits are making predictions based on outdated forecast models.  Put no faith in them because their sophisticated tools have been proven wrong too often. (See 2016 Presidential Election.) Tell me which voters will turnout and I will be able to forecast the winning party with 100 percent accuracy.

Ignore the polling, excessive campaign spending, targeted voter appeals and the media hype and party evangelism. This midterm will hinge on how many people actually go to the polls.  It's that simple. The rest is just mind-numbing political mumbo jumbo.

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.