The Beadle despairs
The Weekly Standard - October 23, 2006
How Bad Will It Be? The GOP debacle to come. by Fred Barnes
REPUBLICANS and conservatives, brace yourselves! Strategists and
consultants of both parties now believe the House is lost and House
Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi will become speaker. At best,
Republicans will cling to control of the Senate by a single seat, two
at most. For many election cycles, Republicans have been the boys of
October, using paid media and superior campaign skills to make up
lost ground and win in November. This year, they were the boys of
September, rallying strongly until that fateful day, September 29,
when the Mark Foley scandal erupted. October has been a disaster so
far. A strong finishing kick for Republicans, minimizing Democratic
gains, is possible. They pulled one off brilliantly in President
Bush’s first midterm election in 2002. But recovery will be harder
this time, a lot harder.
The press is fixated on the so-called generic ballot–Do you want a
Democratic or Republican Congress?–as an indicator of Republican
setbacks on November 7. But that gauge has rarely been predictive.
Two others are more reliable: presidential approval and party
enthusiasm. And they tell an ominous story for Republicans about the
difference between 2002 and 2006.
Presidential approval correlates with how the president’s party fares
in midterm elections. It’s simple: High approval is linked to
election success, low approval to defeat. In October 2002, with
Bush’s approval at 62 percent in the Gallup Poll, Republicans won six
seats in the House and two in the Senate. Now Bush is at 37 percent
in Gallup. The inescapable conclusion is that Bush lacks the clout
with the public he had four years ago. To make matters worse,
presidents associated with unpopular wars are historically a drag on
their parties (Truman, LBJ).
The most overlooked election indicator is the level of voter
enthusiasm. In every election from 1994 through 2004, Republicans
were more enthusiastic than Democrats. That was a decade of
Republican growth. This year Democrats are more excited. And it’s
measurable. In 2002, 42 percent of Republicans said they were more
enthusiastic than usual about the election. Thirty-eight percent of
Democrats said the same. In 2006, the numbers have flipped.
Republican enthusiasm has dipped to 39 percent and Democratic
enthusiasm has jumped to 48 percent. Enthusiasm affects turnout.
Gloomy voters are less inclined to vote.
The Foley scandal did two things, both harmful to Republicans. It
stopped Republican momentum in its tracks. (Also contributing to this
were the negative spin on Iraq from Bob Woodward’s book State of
Denial and the faulty reporting on the National Intelligence
Estimate.) And it changed the narrative of the campaign from one
emphasizing national security, a Republican strength, to one
emphasizing Republican malfeasance in Washington and dysfunction in
Iraq.
Democrats were lucky, as they have been all year. They had fallen
into a trap set by Republicans on the interrogation of high-level
terrorist detainees. They voted against the compromise reached by the
White House and Senator John McCain, choosing to protect civil
liberties for terrorists over national security. That issue, a
powerful one for Republicans, was pushed aside in the Foley frenzy.
Earlier in 2006, events had intervened to snuff out a recovery by
Bush and Republicans in its embryonic stage. After a bumpy 2005
(Katrina, rising Iraq violence, failure of Social Security reform,
Harriet Miers), Bush’s approval was inching upward, pointing to an
end to his second-term slump. Instead, Vice President Cheney’s
accidental shooting of a hunting pal, the Dubai ports fiasco, and the
bombing of the Golden Dome mosque in Iraq combined to prolong the
slump–until the short-lived September surge.
If politics were fair, Democrats would be in as much trouble as
Republicans. And they’d be just as vulnerable. They’ve been
obstructionist, anti-tax-cut, soft on terrorism, and generally
obnoxious. On top of that, Pelosi is the most unpopular national
politician in America. But in the sixth year of the Bush presidency,
with a GOP-run Congress, Democrats aren’t the issue. Republicans are.
This explains why efforts by Bush and Republicans to target Democrats
have been so unsuccessful. A veteran Republican consultant says
lavish spending on TV commercials in races he’s involved in has
largely failed to either boost the poll numbers of his Republican
candidates or drive down those of Democrats. Worse, in blue states,
the Democratic crossover vote on which Republican candidates often
rely has dried up. Democrats have gone home in droves.
In his stump speeches, the president concentrates on terror and
taxes. And the contrast he draws between terror-fighting, tax-cutting
Republicans and wimpy, taxaholic Democrats is reasonably accurate.
But it’s failing to attract independents or lure disgruntled
conservatives back to the Republican fold.
Should Democrats capture the House, “they would raise your taxes and
figure out new ways to spend your money,” Bush said at a rally in
Chicago last week. “It’s amazing what happens when you cut taxes. The
economy grows [and] you end up with more tax revenues.” On national
security, he said, “If the security of the United States is the most
important issue, then part of this issue is which party has been
willing to step up and give those charged with protecting you the
tools necessary to do so.” He didn’t need to identify which party has
and which hasn’t.
The problem here is that national security isn’t the leading campaign
issue. And saying it should be won’t make it so. What’s needed is an
event–a big event–to crystallize the issue in a way that highlights
Republican strength and Democratic weakness. It was two events–the
foiled British terrorist plot and the need to comply with a Supreme
Court decision on handling captured terrorists–that led to the
Republican mini-rally in September.
Of course there’s little time left for a major event to occur. The
North Korean bomb test wasn’t big enough to change the course of the
campaign. So Republicans may have to rely on their two remaining
assets: They have more money than the Democrats and a voter turnout
operation second to none.
Despite their commanding position with the election only weeks away,
Democrats are fearful of a last-minute Republican gambit. What if
White House aide Karl Rove has arranged for the capture of Osama bin
Laden so it can be announced a few days prior to November 7? Rove is
clever, but not that clever. Which is why Republicans and
conservatives need to prepare themselves for bad news on Election Night.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.