Midterm Elections Analysis
SPEAKERS
Jim du Bois, Kathryn Pearson
27:28
Jim du Bois 00:00
Dialogue Minnesota...conversations about the issues that matter to you. I'm Jim du Bois. Election Day was this past Tuesday, but we're still awaiting the results of several key races which will decide which party will control Congress. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson joins us with an election analysis. Professor Pearson, welcome back to dialogue Minnesota.
Kathryn Pearson 00:28
Thank you, Jim. Great to be here.
Jim du Bois 00:30The anticipated red wave did not materialize on election night. Did the results on Tuesday surprise you at all?
Kathryn Pearson 00:38
Yes, they did. Political scientists have studied midterm elections extensively. And given the fact that Democrats hold the White House, and President Biden's popularity is pretty low hovering in the low 40s. The expectation was based on economic forecasting models and sort of understanding these fundamentals, that Republicans would pick up many House seats. And while Republicans did pick up House seats, the gains are clearly not as extensive as expected, as Republicans haven't yet reached that 218 magic number and the Senate is still too close to call. And usually, in wave election years, competitive races and state legislatures and for the governor's office all go toward the party that does not occupy the White House. And that just didn't happen on election night.
Jim du Bois 01:28
While many media outlets jumped on the story that Republicans didn't do as well as expected, it seems increasingly likely, as you said, that they will retake the House, and the Senate remains in play. Are the Democrats perhaps a bit premature in celebrating the midterms as a success for the party?
Kathryn Pearson 01:47
In some ways yes, in some ways no. Nationwide, if you sort of add up the state legislative races and the governor's races, it definitely was a better night for Democrats than anyone expected. But you're absolutely right, it looks very likely that Republicans will take control of, majority party control of the House of Representatives, which will mean that President Biden's agenda will hit many roadblocks going forward. Democrats won't be able to use, for example, the reconciliation process to pass major legislation as they have during the past few years. But four states went solidly Democratic, Minnesota, Michigan, Maine, Maryland. So Democrats did have a better night than expected. There's no doubt about that.
Jim du Bois 02:32
In what areas of the country did Republicans do well, and where did Democrats do well?
Kathryn Pearson 02:38
Republicans did extremely well in Florida and New York. If you look at statewide races, if you look at pickups in House seats, I think it is possible that the pickups in Florida and New York alone will be enough to give Republicans majority party control of the House when all the ballots are counted. We'll see. But those are two states where Republicans did extremely well. And Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, won quickly and easily on election night, and that was a big victory for him in his own governor's race, but it was probably a bigger victory for him as he thinks about his position going into the 2024 elections.
Jim du Bois 03:19
What victories or upsets surprised you the most on election night?
Kathryn Pearson 03:24
Well, I was not thinking that the DFL would enjoy unified party control in St. Paul in January. So clearly, it's very narrow. And we knew that whoever won the margins would be narrower, but for the DFL to retake the Minnesota Senate and to maintain the House, and to win all four statewide races, particularly the governor's race by the margin that Walz had was a bit of a surprise. Minnesota is a state that leans Democratic, but yet in a year that's good for Republicans, I expected the statewide candidates to be more competitive. And I thought that the Democrats’ best hope was to maintain control of the House, but I wasn't thinking that they would regain the Senate. So, that was certainly surprising. The fact that Republican Congresswoman Lauren Bobert, that race has not been called, she's narrowly ahead in Colorado, that is a solidly Republican district. So, you know, there were some surprises like that on election night. But the bottom line is, in many states, Democrats and Republicans are pretty evenly and narrowly divided. And so the fact that there's so many competitive races and so many that haven't been called, at some level really isn't that surprising.
Jim du Bois 04:43
Was election night a good night for first-time candidates and challengers, or was it a better night for incumbents?
Kathryn Pearson 04:50
I think overall, it was a better night for incumbents. If you look to Wisconsin, for example, again, a state where Democrats and Republicans are pretty evenly divided. Governor Evers, the incumbent, hangs on his position as governor, but yet Republican incumbent Ron Johnson holds on to his US Senate seat. So their incumbents did pretty well. That's not to say that there weren't some surprises, both in congressional races and other races looking at incumbents who were defeated. But by and large, the incumbency advantage does appear to have helped candidates in tight races.
Jim du Bois 05:31
There's still likely a lot of data to suss out from exit polls, but from what you've seen so far, what issues were most important to voters this year?
Kathryn Pearson 05:41
Well, we know the economy was important. We know inflation was important. But we also know that abortion was important. And although it never topped the economy and inflation in polls, the fact that it regularly showed up in polls is a change from the past. And of course, that is due to the Dobbs decision back in June, and DFL candidates talked a lot about abortion. And I think that issue really motivated the Democratic base to come out and vote. We saw in the states that had initiatives about abortion that all of the states that had abortion on the ballot, passed an initiative at the statewide level to maintain abortion rights.
Jim du Bois 06:23
Since he emerged as the Republican presidential front-runner in 2016, former President Trump has been a powerful and often divisive force in the GOP. How did the candidates who aligned with Trump or had his endorsement fair on Tuesday night?
Kathryn Pearson 06:40
Not very well, and that narrative has definitely been one that has been repeated many times since Election Night that former President Trump's candidates did not perform as anticipated. JD Vance, the Republican candidate for Senate in Ohio was certainly a notable exception. He won, he won easily early on election night. But if you look at Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania, President Trump's endorsement of Oz likely helped him win that Republican primary, and then he lost decisively on election night. And Pennsylvania is a state that a Republican could have won if it had been a different Republican who would run a better campaign. So that was clearly a failure for the former president. And then in Arizona, the president endorsed Kari Lake, a 2020 election denier, as governor in Arizona, and that race is still too close to call. But certainly, his endorsement did not help Republicans in Arizona.
Jim du Bois 07:37
Well, as you mentioned, Governor Ron DeSantis handily won reelection, and Tuesday was a good night for Republicans in the state of Florida. Did this win give DeSantis a boost for a presidential run in 2024?
Kathryn Pearson 07:50
Yes, there's no question that now DeSantis, he was always going to be a contender, but his win in what used to be considered a swing state definitely gives him an advantage going into the nominating contests. Now, how that will translate in terms of endorsements and money is too soon to tell. But there's no doubt that the narrative coming out of the 2022 midterms is that DeSantis really helped Republicans in Florida, and Trump contributed to some key Republican offices across the country.
Jim du Bois 08:23
Well, neither DeSantis nor Trump have formally announced their candidacy for the GOP nomination for president in 2024. But given the current situation, do you see a coming showdown between Trump and DeSantis as likely?
Kathryn Pearson 08:38
Yes, I do. And we're already seeing it play out with the former president insulting DeSantis, and sort of clearly realizing that if the former president does announce on November 15, as many anticipate, he says he has an important announcement that they will be quite competitive if they indeed both run.
Jim du Bois 09:03
Turning to the Minnesota races, Trump endorsed Dr. Scott Jensen for governor and Kim Crockett for Secretary of State, both of whom lost. What does this say about President Trump's influence on the GOP in Minnesota?
Kathryn Pearson 09:17
Well, significantly, he endorsed them very late in the race. And so unlike some of these other races that we're talking about, his endorsement was not key to their primary win, for example, and neither candidate really touted the former president's endorsement very much, sort of, I think realizing that in Minnesota, it would not help them with independent voters. But it does say that President Trump is not popular in Minnesota. I mean, he's lost Minnesota twice, by a greater margin in 2020, of course, but it does speak to some of the the factions and the divides within the Republican Party. We saw those divides play out at the Republican convention. And I think that less extreme Republican candidates statewide would have likely done better. I don't know that they would have won, the margin of victory for Governor Walz and Secretary of State Steve Simon were pretty substantial. But I don't think that the Trump style will do well in Minnesota. Many elections have shown that.
Jim du Bois 10:20
The Democrats have a split in their party between progressives and moderates. How would you compare the performance of progressive Democratic candidates versus moderates on Tuesday night?
Kathryn Pearson 10:30
Well, it really depends which districts we're talking about. So for example, Congresswoman Angie Craig from Minnesota Second District is a moderate, and she campaigns and governs as a moderate, and she defeated her challenger, Tyler Kistner, by a bigger margin than people were anticipating. This was a rematch for them. She had also defeated him in 2020. On the other hand, progressive Democrats in Minnesota, for the most part, won their seats quite easily as well. And so a lot of the differences really have to do with the districts that they, that they represent, and by and large, moderates tend to represent swing districts, and so it's harder for moderates. But moderates in the DFL did, did pretty well on election night. There was a surprise that Mary Murphy, a long-serving incumbent, a moderate DFL'er in the in the statehouse lost, but nonetheless, DFL'ers did pretty well on election night in Minnesota. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, many predicted that women would be motivated by this decision. Was there a strong turnout by women in this election who were energized by the abortion issue, and did they tend to vote for Democrats? Yes, the answer to both those questions is yes. Since 1980, there has been a gender gap in the electorate, where women are more likely to identify as Democrats and vote for Democrats than men are. The source of that gender gap by and large is actually not disagreement over abortion. The source of the gender gap overall is a disagreement over the size of government and the role of government. Having said that, I think this election cycle was a little bit different in terms of motivation, that women were motivated to come, to come to the polls. You know, that said, we'll, we'll look at the final exit polls as they and the results as they continue to trickle in. But partisan differences above all else sort of explain differences on positions on abortion, but women are more likely to identify as Democrats and to support abortion rights.
Jim du Bois 12:41
How did women candidates for both parties fair in this election? Was any progress made toward creating a more gender-balanced Congress?
Kathryn Pearson 12:50
No, in fact, the number of women will go down in the 118th Congress. There are caveats in that many of the races haven't been called. But, but it looks like the number of women in the US Congress, in the US House, will go down pretty significantly. So far, there's a drop among women in both parties. And that's not necessarily because women are more likely to lose, although some prominent women in the House have lost such as Elaine Luria in Virginia. But just the numbers of new women running weren't high enough to bring in a new cohort of women. And then many women have also retired.
Jim du Bois 13:29
We talked about a potential Trump versus DeSantis showdown for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination. On the Democratic side, we don't know yet if President Biden will run for re-election. And some Democrats are hinting that Biden may not be the party's best choice for 2024. What signals did this election send to Democrats who may be thinking about seeking their party's nomination in 2024?
Kathryn Pearson 13:54
Wow, that is, that's a tough question. And I think Democrats will certainly be looking to the Republican Party to see what they're doing because I think that many Democrats actually do think that Biden would be the best choice to run against former President Trump. But I think it's less clear that he would be the best choice to run against a Governor DeSantis. And so, the other question, of course, that is complicated for Democrats is if not, not Biden, then who would be the best choice? And that is not particularly clear. And so, after the 2016 election, Democrats were looking, first and foremost, to the most electable candidate. I don't know that Joe Biden sort of generated the most enthusiasm among Democrats. But Democrats were enthusiastic about him because they thought that he offered the best chance of defeating President Trump, which indeed he did. And that calculation will certainly be on their minds as they think about 2024. There are obviously a lot of talented Democratic senators who could get in the mix. But I think a key question for Democratic actors and those who donate money and endorse would be, you know, would any of these candidates be more electable in a general election than President Biden? And I don't know the answer that.
Jim du Bois 15:10
In Minnesota there was definitely not a red wave on election night. In his concession speech, GOP gubernatorial candidate Scott Jensen said a blue wave had actually swept through the state on Tuesday, with all the Democratic incumbent constitutional officers winning their races. The DFL also held on to its House majority and picked up the Senate. Was Jensen's characterization of a Minnesota blue wave accurate?
Kathryn Pearson 15:35
I don't know that I would call it a blue wave. There is no doubt that it was a surprisingly good night for the DFL in Minnesota. But if we were truly to see a wave, that would have meant that DFL candidates won in every competitive legislative election, and we did not see that happen. There were many competitive elections where Republicans indeed won. But Democrats just won a surprising number of them, enough to maintain their majority in the House and take the majority in the Senate. And then, of course, the statewide candidates all won, even if two of them did win narrowly.
Jim du Bois 16:09
With the Democrats in full control in Minnesota now, what do you expect Governor Walz will try to accomplish in the 2023 legislative session?
Kathryn Pearson 16:18
Well, I think there are a lot of Democrats that are likely already making demands on, on Governor Walz. A $9 billion surplus, which is really extraordinary. Democrats and Republicans got close to a compromise on that surplus in the last session. And I suspect that Democrats are breathing a sigh of relief that they didn't reach a compromise, and Republicans are not happy about that. It was surprising at the time. Perhaps some thought that Republicans were strategically waiting until they may have enjoyed majority party control of both legislative chambers, which obviously did not happen. So, I think Democrats will feel a lot of pressure to spend additional funds on education, on sort of health and human services, on the environment. Also to legalize marijuana, that's been an issue that has long been discussed. And so, I think that there will be just a lot of issues sort of coming to the forefront, some that were worked out in the last session, and some that will be new. And obviously, Democrats are in a great position in Minnesota. That said, the majorities are extraordinarily narrow. And so, in order to pass this legislation, they'll need every vote in the Senate and nearly every vote in the House. And so, compromises within the party will still need to be made. I'm sure there'll be some effort to reach out to some Republicans as well. But in this polarized era, I'm not sure how that will go.
Jim du Bois 17:49
It looks like the GOP will control the US House of Representatives. What does this mean for Minnesota Republicans? I'm thinking in particular, of Sixth District Congressman Tom Emmer. Will he perhaps have a more prominent position within the party, assuming the GOP takes control of the House?
Kathryn Pearson 18:08
And that is a great question. So before the election, a lot has a lot was made about the fact that Emmer is one of three Republicans who would be vying for the position of Republican Whip. And so that is, you know, a senior leadership position, and Emmer seems well positioned to do so. He has been the chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee. So, in other words, in charge of Republican House candidates, recruiting funding, sort of getting the party to victory, and certainly regaining majority party control is a lot to celebrate. On the other hand, House Republicans did not have the night that they were anticipating. The gains are not certainly not as large as anticipated. And so, I'm not sure how costly that will be to Emmer in the battle. He's clearly well respected by his Republican colleagues and well positioned to be in the leadership, but the thinking was that the election would be a big victory for him. And although it still seems like it will be a victory, I don't know that it will be quite as big as he was anticipating or how that will affect us leadership bid.
Jim du Bois 19:16
The midterms are often positioned by the media and political pundits as a referendum on the president or the party in power. Do you think the issues that were of concern for Minnesota voters mirrored those of voters nationwide or were there specific local issues that drove Minnesota voters to the polls?
Kathryn Pearson 19:34
I think this was a very nationalized election, both in Minnesota and across the country. Minnesotans, the candidates and voters alike, were talking about the economy. They were talking about inflation. They were talking about crime. And they were talking about abortion. And those are the same issues that candidates were talking about nationwide. Now, that doesn't mean that, you know, when some of the legislative candidates were door knocking, they were not also mentioning issues specific to their legislative districts and communities and neighborhoods. But the elections were really very nationalized.
Jim du Bois 20:06
Incumbent DFL Attorney General Keith Ellison held on to his seat by about a 20,000 vote margin, much tighter than other state races where incumbent DFL constitutional officers defeated their GOP challengers. Does Ellison's comparative underperformance on Tuesday night signal that Minnesotans split their ballots between party lines in this particular race?
Kathryn Pearson 20:30
Well, that is always sort of the the narrative is that Minnesotans like to split their ticket. But if you actually look at the votes, I mean, most partisans still voted straight party line. But it didn't take that many Minnesotans to either slit their tickets or to drop off, in other words, vote for the top of the ticket but not some of the, the other races, such as Ellison's, to produce this result. So, the vast majority of Minnesotans probably voted straight party line, but enough supported Walz and not Ellison to create this difference.
Jim du Bois 21:05
The Georgia Senate race will not be decided until after a runoff between Democratic incumbent Raphael Warnock and GOP challenger Herschel Walker. That's because neither candidate received over 50% of the vote on Election Day, and according to Georgia law, such an election has to go to a runoff. A Libertarian Party candidate received just over 2% of the vote. Let's talk about the role of third parties in this election. Did any make a significant showing, or do many of them simply play the role of spoiler for a major party candidate?
Kathryn Pearson 21:37
By and large, they play the role of spoiler, and that is particularly true in the two states that require a runoff if neither party's candidate gets to that 50% plus one margin. Minnesota obviously does not have that rule; otherwise, we'd be going to a runoff for some of these races. So, third-party candidates, you know, in those states really affect the outcomes, but they can affect the outcomes in other places as well if voters are voting for a third-party candidate instead of one of the two major party candidates, even if you know absent the third-party candidate, they would have voted for them. But what we don't know about third-party candidates is whether or not the voters who support them would just not vote in that race otherwise or if they would give their vote to someone else. The other way in which third-party candidates are affecting the race is they encourage voters to talk about their issues. Certainly, the presence of the marijuana candidates, I think, really prompted Democrats to keep talking about the legalization of marijuana to try to ensure that third-party candidates didn't siphon support from them.
Jim du Bois 22:45
So far, it seems that candidates from both parties have been fairly gracious losers. They have made concession speeches where they acknowledged that they lost the election. They congratulated their opponent. Do you think this is a trend perhaps that we might see some of this election denialism go away in this, following this cycle, or is this an anomaly?
Kathryn Pearson 23:12
I certainly hope it's a trend. It has been a great relief to see the losers concede. It seems striking to have to say that, but at this particular point, it has been a real relief to see so many candidates who have lost, including those who have denied the results of 2020, concede their own races. Now, we'll see what happens in Arizona with gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake in that very close election. She has made false allegations about Arizona election workers. So, we'll see what happens there.
Jim du Bois 23:46
There are several outstanding elections, not just in Congress, but also at the state level and even the local level. A few that come to mind, two in particular. One is the gubernatorial race in Oregon, where there's a very tight race between the Democratic and the Republican candidates. If by chance the governor's seat in Oregon would flip to the GOP, that'd be the first time in 40 years that a Democrat has not held that seat in Oregon. We're also seeing something rather interesting playing out in Los Angeles, the mayoral race, where there is a billionaire businessperson challenging the Democrat, and that race is coming down to the wire as well. Do you think in those particular locations, and maybe we tie in a third one here, we know that in the suburbs surrounding New York City, there was a swing to the GOP as well. So, if we look at Los Angeles, New York, and at the state level in Oregon, we've had obviously some crime issues in the Portland area. Do you think crime may be weighing on these particular races and might be one of the reasons why more voters tacked to a GOP candidate in areas that are normally considered pretty safe for Democrats?
Kathryn Pearson 25:00
I do. I mean, I think all of the issues are still in the mix, and the fact that the election fundamentals still favored Republicans because President Biden occupies the White House and is not very popular and the economy is struggling, so all those things still matter. But yes, I do think crime had a particular impact on some of these races.
Jim du Bois 25:20
Let's talk about some of the demographics coming out on the exit polls. We did hear that younger voters showed up in greater numbers than was anticipated. And also some interesting trends, I think an AP poll was indicating that more younger Blacks tacked to the GOP in the midterm elections. We also know there was some loss of Latino voters to the GOP, too. Normally Latino voters have been pretty loyal to the Democratic Party. Do you think it's a little too early to try and draw any conclusions about whether these trends will continue? And should the Democrats be concerned, especially with the potential loss of two bases that have been a very important part of the party's support?
Kathryn Pearson 26:06
I think overall when looking at younger voters, Democrats should be encouraged. Because the youngest age group, whether it's 18 to 25, or 18 to 29, however you parse it out, is the most Democratically inclined age cohort in the country. And political science tells us that partisan identification for most voters is actually fairly stable. So, to the extent that younger voters are voting democratic, those voters will likely continue to vote Democratic. Now, turnout was greater than anticipated among younger voters, but it was still lower than every other age cohort. So, Democrats are well aware of this and really tried to mobilize younger voters because of this issue. And we actually, I think, you know, same-day registration states likely will see a larger turnout of younger voters because younger voters are the most residentially mobile. And so, in general, I think Democrats are encouraged by the vote choices of younger voters but really need to not take them for granted, especially as they're harder to mobilize to turn out.
Jim du Bois 27:17
Kathryn Pearson is an associate professor of political science at the University of Minnesota. Professor Pearson, thanks again for joining us on Dialogue Minnesota.
27:26
My pleasure, Jim. Great to be with you.