By Noah Rothman
Thursday, October 27, 2022
Do
debates matter? The wisdom handed down to us from America’s political science
departments maintains that the answer is not really. All that accumulated wisdom went
right out the window in the wake of Tuesday night’s U.S. Senate debate in Pennsylvania. The shock of John Fetterman’s
performance seems to have accelerated what was already a building sense of
resignation among Democratic political professionals. If morale in the party’s
trenches was low before that debate, it has all but collapsed since.
“I know
there’s some—I’ll be a little bit graphic here—Democratic bedwetting out
there,” said Democratic Pennsylvania Senator and Fetterman surrogate, Bob Casey, in the wake of the debate. That,
he said, “is often typical of Democratic commentators and officials.” To borrow
the senator’s metaphor, Casey has inadvertently exposed the extent to which he
shares his party’s incontinence problem. Trying to buck up his fellow Democrats
by disparaging Democratic campaign professionals is indicative of the party’s
internal turmoil.
The many
Democrats who called openly for internecine warfare as a response to Tuesday
night’s debacle were less judicious than Pennsylvania’s senior senator. “He
should not have debated,” said one named Democratic strategist in an interview
with NBC News. “Anyone on his team who agreed to
a debate should be fired, or never work again, because that debate may have
tanked his campaign.” The backbiting didn’t end there. “Folks are pretty much
freaking out on the Dem side,” another Democrat confessed. “I really question
the judgment that he continued with this race,” a third Democrat admitted.
The
tacit acknowledgment that Fetterman’s performance may effectively nullify that
pickup opportunity in the Senate for Democrats also implies that the GOP’s odds
of retaking both chambers of Congress are now at least even, if not better.
Couple that with the implosion of the Democratic Party’s frontlines, and you
have the makings of a rout.
The
party’s committees and PACs are sinking resources into the defense of terrain
that is well to the rear of the battlefront. Democrats are pumping funds into
congressional races in Rhode Island, Connecticut, California, and downstate New
York. The party is defending incumbents from unusually strong challenges in
Oregon and Washington’s statewide races. And none of it seems to be staunching
the wound, which, to hear Democrats tell it, is self-inflicted.
“One
Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be more
candid, described a ‘blue-state depression’ for House races,” the Washington
Post reported,
“pointing specifically to New York, Oregon, and California where a handful of
races are ‘closer than normal.’” The causes of that depression are, apparently,
all the maladies that the right has associated with Democratic governance for
generations. “Some Democrats pointed to fatigue in blue areas over pandemic
restrictions, one-party dominance, and concerns about violent crime and quality
of life in large cities such as Portland, Ore., New York City, and San
Francisco,” the Post’s report continued. In that dispatch’s
telling, the debate in Pennsylvania wasn’t the cause of this despondency, but
it contributed mightily to it.
If these
“precriminations” feel a lot like plain-old recriminations, that’s perhaps
because a sense of inevitability has begun to descend on the political
landscape. Writing in the New York Times, Blake Hounshell penned
what the paper headlined an “alternate
history” of 2022.
He asks
whether there were “alternate approaches” that “could have put Democrats in a
better position heading into the final days.” Congressman Ro Khanna insists the
party should have spent more time talking about what it did to “put money in
working people’s pockets.” But according to longtime Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg, talking up the party’s legislative
accomplishments is their “worst performing message.” It communicates to voters
that “this election is about my accomplishments as a leader and not about the
challenges you’re experiencing.” So that wouldn’t have worked.
Others,
such as Bernie Sanders, insist the party should have diversified its portfolio
of talking points to include something other than abortion. And James Carville
claims the party ceded the issue of crime almost wholly to the GOP. These and
other pre-mortem analyses contribute to what Politico’s
John Harris deemed
“a long roster of here’s-why-we-suck analysis from Democrats.” Whatever the
cause of their predicament, there is little left to do now but dig in and
prepare for the worst.
The
whiplash of this election cycle has surely contributed to this deep bout of
Democratic malaise. It was less than a month ago that Democrats were “no longer
swimming in desperation.” Republican voters favored flawed candidates, gas prices were going
down, and the long-predicted threat to abortion rights had arrived. The Washington
Post produced fantastical
video packages in
which reporters and Democratic strategists imagined the existence of an
electorate that would deliver both congressional chambers to Democrats. As
recently as October 3, New York Times analyst Nate Cohn devoted
serious attention to
the notion that Democrats could retain control of both the Senate and the House
in November.
It was a
false dawn. The hope that Democrats inculcated in their compatriots has turned
to ashes in their mouths. It would have been less psychologically devastating
had they never had any hopes for 2022 at all. But now that all seems lost, the
party has succumbed to melancholy. And who knows? Maybe Democratic voters
aren’t as discouraged as their party believes them to be. But the consensus
seems to be that an abject disaster is imminent.
No comments:
Post a Comment