Post Election Analysis - National

-First, to my fellow conservatives and to everyone else . . . breath.  This was not a wipe-out, this was not 2008.  Mitt Romney came within several points in several states of winning VA, FL, and OH.  He made up a lot of ground that McCain lost for us, percentage-wise, and I believe ran the best campaign he possibly could.

-Romney was not the worst candidate . . . he was the best of what was offered to us (except Ron Paul ;-P).  When our choices were Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann, and Santorum are the main opposition; its no wonder most Republicans went to Romney.  The only candidate who could have stopped him was Rick Perry, but he threw up all over himself early on for whatever reason.  It reminds me so much of John Kerry in every way.  Kerry ran a very strong race and would have won almost any other year.  I feel the same way about Romney, that he if he ran that race in others years he might have done enough to win.  He kept his campaign focused, picked a good running-mate, and made no major gaffes.  

-The Senate Republican leadership is a disaster.  Mitch McConnell is an ineffective turtle of a leader, John Cornyn took credit for Tea Party victories in 2010 and then took loses that were his fault this year.  While many point to Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock; George Allen, Tommy Thompson, Denny Rehberg, and Rick Berg were all establishment candidates 100% supported by the NRSC and Cornyn.  The only establishment winner last night was Dean Heller while the Tea Party can claim credit for Ted Cruz and Deb Fischer.  Right now Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman are fighting to replace Cornyn but I would like to see more leadership turnover.  Cornyn and McConnell have had their chance, twice, to take back the Senate in favorable years and have failed.  Results matter.

-The 2006 Democratic Class ALL won reelction - Klobucher, Tester, Kaine (standing in for Webb), Sherrod Brown, Casey, and Whitehouse all got reelected.  Impressive.

-In the House, things settled back down to their natural state.  Some of the more longshot candidates (Craavack in MN) and outrageous (West in FL) have gone down but most of the GOP gains in 2010 have held.  I'm excited about some of the new blood, specifically liberty candidate Thomas Massie, and I think some of the more outlandishness of the House will slow.  Everyone is now an election older.

-All the criticism of of the GOP's demographics is correct, but the solution isn't necessarily to go lurching to the left.  On two issues, however, the GOP is bleeding out badly - gay marriage and immigration.  I was talking to the guys in my office, everyone is in their 20s and we have about 30 people in my bullpen, I would say every single one of them is in favor of marriage equality.  Some are Republican, some are Democrat . . . this is a generation issue.  Younger people of my generation and below have grown up more attuned and aware of homosexuality and are more open about it.  This is a losing issue because, I believe, its becoming something of a settled opinion among younger voters that will only grow.  

-As for immigration, Romney did really hurt himself in the primary.  When your to the right of Rick Perry on the issue, its a problem.  We have to stop lying to ourselves that Hispanic voters will vote for us because we are pro-life and anti-gay marriage as a party.  That shit isn't as important as a relative who came here for a better life and is apparently going to be "self-deported."  I understand it is "against the law," but when I think of breaking the law I think of murder and rape and embezzlement, I don't necessarily believe it is folks trying to make a better life for themselves.  We are telling many Hispanic voters that their family and friends do not belong here.  No social issue will make up for that blight.  The DREAM Act, specifically the portion about allowing kids brought here by their parents, is something the GOP must reconcile ourselves with.  We are cutting our nose off to spite our face.  If students have gone through our schools and we have invested in them their entire lives, forcing them to leave seems counter-productive.  I am interested to see if Sens. Rubio and Cruz, with the help of western Govs. Sandoval and Martinez, can craft our message on this.  

-We should not abandon our dedication to life.  But we need to find a new language to communicate this message.  Old, turkey-necked white men like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock are not the faces we need on the life issue.  Mourdock's gaffe was more forgivable because I understood what he meant, Akin's comment was just as bizarre as it was ignorant.  It was a disgrace to principled supporters of life who deserve to have our views explained better.  What the left was able to do was lump being pro-life in with being somehow pro-rape.  Any time the word "rape" comes up in a campaign, it can't end well.  "Rape and incest" is a perfectly reasonable exception because its a trap, a trap to make being pro-life seem extreme when its not.  Being pro-life by itself is on the ballot, we can win.  But when we allow being pro-life to be mixed up with somehow condoning physical attacks on women, we will lose every time.  Issues like contraception and Planned Parenthood are giant mistakes to engage in because our inherent pro-life position is lost.  We need to learn from what Akin and Mourdock allowed to happen to themselves and understand how to fix it.  But we should NEVER run away or be ashamed to support all life and believe that all life is sacred.

-As for young voters, we don't need to look far.  The liberty movement/Ron Paul movement has tremendous support of younger voters.  Too many establishment Republicans and conservatives think that Ron Paul's supporters are just a bunch of anti-war, Occupy rabble.  Granted, they are there, but at its heart Paul is talking about economic freedom in a way that young people understand.  This is a generation that is coming of age in a bankrupt America, often some are coming back from wars they aren't sure why or who they are fighting, and their sacrifice is not paying any dividends.  Paul understands that it is the young people that are fighting wars and it is something that we shouldn't take so lightly.  Paul has attracted young people to a message of economic freedom, limited governmnet, and social tolerance.  While Paul himself is probably too raw for many Republicans, he has now passed from the scene.  More political adept successors - his son Rand, Rep. Justin Amash - have a better understanding of politics and skill and explaining the message.  It is imperative that the Republican Party embrace the liberty movement to move forward as a party.  The liberty movement is conservativism for Generation X, Y, and millenials.  Obviously it will be tweeked and changed and accomidated; but the blueprint is there for us.  

-The Democrats won a victory, but a phyrric one.  This was not a smashing mandate.  It was teh American people saying we like you just a little bit more than them.  This is a divided country that sent to Congress a divided representation.  I think they need to be very careful.

Winners:

Barack Obama:  2-terms!

Joe Biden:  The Democratic Party might be held hostage by him now.  He's popular, but the man would be a disaster as the party's nominee and even more so following eight years when fatigue always sets in.  But he now has the inside track to the Democratic nomination.

The GOP Bench:  In private moments I have no doubt that Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Susana Martinez, and no doubt a few others smiled.

Conservatives:  Whaaat?  Romney's victory would have ensured at least 12 years of the party dominated by the establishmnet and conservatives/liberty/tea party grassroots would have been left out.

Harry Reid: The man is the king right now.  His hold on the Senate continues to tighten and there is little the GOP can do about it.

John Boehner:  He keeps his majority and loss less seats that many expected.  

Nate Silver:  Take THAT, Joe Scarborough!

Losers

Mitt Romney:  He lost.

Paul Ryan:  He lost, too.  He'll go back to the House and will continue to be an effective chairman but the shine is off the apple.  Obama has scoreboard on him.  I think Ryan may end up being Speaker, but this hurts his national ambitions.  The only losing VP candidate to be elected President in modern times was FDR and that was after 12 years.  There are too many sharks in the water for Ryan to spend that much time.  

Nancy Pelosi:  I honestly wonder if the Democrats might have done well over the last three years in congressional elections with a more mainstream and charismatic leader.  I cannot imagine her staying on as minority leader and expect to succesfull.  She is just too polarizing and its clear that Obama is content to work with Boehner and Reid themselves.

The South:  It has become isolated both politically and socially.  Virginia and North Carolina are creeping away and the South is quickly become more isolated from the rest of the country on race and social issues.  

-Conservative media:  The anti-Obama obsession, combined with embracing Romney after attacking him for years, mad conservative media look silly and out of touch.  Watching Fox News last night was almost sad.

-Democratic hopefuls:  O'Malleyn and Cuomo (among others) will struggle for oxygen with a sitting Vice-President poised to run.  

Comments

[Bwana]

O'Malley and Cuomo will struggle not only with Biden but potentially with Hillary, too.

[Dan]

I'll make a bet right now that neither Biden nor Clinton will run. Biden joked about it, but he would be 74 when inaugurated and I just don't think there was even a kernel of seriousness in that joke.

Clinton is five years younger so age is not so much of an issue. I just don't think we have seen any indication she wants to make another run. She has had a remarkable career. She was a highly respected Senator. People from the Pentagon who testified before the Armed Services Committee said she was one of the best prepared and that she always asked the right questions. Her tenure as Secretary of State is another large feather in her cap. She clearly passes the Commander in Chief test. I just don't think that at this point she is going to want to run again. More chance with her than with Biden though.

[Dan]

Don't look for any move to replace Pelosi as Democratic Leader. Unless she decides she wants to step aside the job is hers.

You probably see her as a polarizing figure because she is such a lightning rod for folks on the right (she's great fodder for all those silly fundraising appeals that read like they are aimed at low grade morons). But I suspect that much of the animosity toward her on the right is due to the fact that she was a very effective leader. And they hate her simply because she was very effective at doing things they didn't like. Those of us who obsessively followed the enactment of the ACA know what a pivotal role she played in securing passage of the bill. It's not terribly objective to hate someone for being effective at their job, but I suspect that is the cause of much of the vitriol directed toward her.

And while we're talking the House of Representatives, I wouldn't be too thrilled that the Republicans lost ONLY a few seats. Redistricting is all that saved the Republican majority. You caught a huge break there. Nationally more people voted for the Democrat for Congress than voted for the Republican. And if the districts that existed prior to this last re-districting had still existed the Democrats would have retaken the House this time.

I'm not complaining. You play by the rules as they exist and gerrymandering is a big part of the way the game is played. I merely mention this to illustrate what a thin reed you are clinging to as you look for good news for Republicans out of Tuesday's election results.

[Dan]

The Senate results are very significant too. You are right to have Reid listed as a big winner. To pick up two seats while defending so much ground is pretty amazing. It makes the possibility of the Republicans flipping the Senate in 2014 a good deal less likely. And then the Republicans have to defend 24 of the 34 seats that are up in 2016.

The odds are pretty good that the first realistic opportunity for the Republicans to regain the Senate majority may be 2018.

[Chris]

Reid is the most powerful man in Washington right now. He can literally do whatever he wants in the Senate, he's that strong and McConnell is that weak.

[Dan]

I'd have to disagree with you about McConnell's position. The nature of the Senate hasn't changed. Unless the Democrats decide to adopt rules in January that eliminate the filibuster, the minority will continue to have tremendous leverage.

I don't think the Democrats will vote to eliminate the filibuster. And I don't think they should. There are sound reasons for keeping it. But the Republicans total abuse of the filibuster during the Obama administration and their cynical political bet (a bet they lost big on in last Tuesday's election) on total obstruction as a political winner for them may have created the environment in which the filibuster is eliminated. Then McConnell's power would be greatly diminished.

[Fairfax Volunteer]

I believe it would be a mistake of truly epic proportions for Reid to make a move at removing the filibuster. Not only is there every reason to believe there's at least a chance Democrats could lose the handful of seats necessary for the GOP to flip the chamber in 2014, but the fear of that possibility is what will keep many Democratic senators from lining up with the idea.

Come the return of Republican control, whenever that may be, the Democratic Party wants to take absolutely no risk of the Republicans passing bills as cleanly partisan as Obamacare and Stimulus II were for the Democrats in 2009.