Midterm results foreshadow more division; it doesn't have to be that way

The Capital Building will be the scene for more partisan bickering. It doesn’t have to be this way.

A version of this piece was originally published by the Kentucky Standard in Bardstown, KY on 11-16-22.

Midterms are meant to bring stinging defeats to the party in the White House.

But, the predicted ‘red wave’ during the mid-term election last week never materialized.

This is one of the last remaining tried and true axioms of the American political system. It’s been twenty years since a president’s party gained seats in a non-Presidential cycle. And if results during this cycle continue the way they have gone, it’ll be the best midterm for a Democrat in the White House since 1962.

At the time of writing this piece, Democrats look likely to hold the Senate, possibly even gaining a seat, and the Republicans still have work to do if they want to gain the House. They still may.

But we’re in a political era defined by results confounding expectations, prevailing thought is often wrong, even if it comports with polls and statistical analysis. But isn’t that quite the problem with political analysis, the very nature of it means we’re often looking at today and tomorrow through yesterday’s lenses.

For example, the President’s favorability rating portended a resounding defeat last week. It didn’t happen.

Other fundamental assumptions of American politics have turned on their heads. In New York, the deepest of blue states, Republicans made significant gains–even in places like Brooklyn.

Political superstars–Beto O’Rourke, Stacy Abrams, and Sarah Palin–were easily defeated, again.

Abortion was always seen as an animating factor for the right, but in places where it was on the ballot, the GOP-led anti-abortion initiatives were defeated, even if they were in deeply red states. Though, interestingly enough, in many places where voters blocked those state-wide efforts, they still handed wins to Republican candidates who wouldn’t hesitate to pass a nationwide abortion ban.

Republicans took their victory in last week's midterm as a given. And even if they take the House, they don’t seem like all too happy about the results.

In part, because, the incoming post-election autopsy won’t be the only issue facing the GOP for the next two years. An intraparty battle will be brewing for the party’s nomination in 2024. Donald Trump is expected to announce in the next few weeks, if not by the time this is published. He’s already started attacking the likeliest challenger–Ron Desantis, who won a second term as Florida Governor last week, turning a deeply purple state into something closer to red.

They’ll also be well aware that two of the key takeaways from the last three election cycles (18, 20, 22) has been that 1)Trumpism has cost the GOP in swing districts, but that 2)Trump’s stranglehold on the party will both make it hard to effectively challenge in those districts and make a likely break exceedingly damaging. In order to be effective in the next cycle, the GOP will need to do the impossible–break from Trump and keep the base he’s created energized all while coaxing swing voters who are deeply uncomfortable with Trump himself. For a party that couldn’t even put together a cogent platform for the last Presidential election, that may be too tough of an ask.

But here’s a pretty big rub, for the next several cycles, it’s unlikely one single party sustains a large enough stranglehold on the levers of power to fundamentally change the political landscape. For the foreseeable future, power will change hands often and even then the margins will be razor thin, leaving mandates for change virtually nonexistent.

With the sides, and the country for that matter, increasingly polarized, the prospects for progress don’t necessarily look good. Especially when thinking about how similar periods in the past have come to a close. It’s taken a political crisis or a near collapse of the global economy to shake us to our senses.

If we’re truly interested in building on the foundations that came before us, we’ll find ways to compromise. I know, it’s a dirty word in American politics. But that’s what it’ll take to move us forward. And I’m not talking about paying the idea lipservice. I’m talking about tough conversations over giving up some of the things we want to get some of the things we need.

Certainly, there will be folks and powers who will thrive on the chaos and attempt to portray resolute uncompromising attitudes. They’ll position themselves as the virtuous ones, the ones with the moral standing, the ones showing strength in the face of an unrelenting onslaught–whatever it is.

Ignore them. They’re unserious about moving the country forward. They’ll get the clicks and the interviews, but they won’t be in the backrooms working overtime to get a deal on an important piece of legislation.

I’ve written about it before and I’ll write about it again, but Americans spend a lot of time talking about bipartisanship. It’s high time we start putting our money where our mouths are.

We’ll be better for it.