What Joe Biden Needs to Avoid in the 2022 Midterms
This week will mark ten months until the first midterm election of the Joe Biden administration, and the political class has not yet decided what the theme of this election will be. Many determining factors remain to be decided. Republicans may nominate unelectable candidates in close Senate races, making their hopes of regaining that body more difficult. Democrats may pass a Build Back Better plan that validates Biden’s agenda and gives him a boost before November. But in general, political observers believe that Democrats will be facing headwinds and are already trying to decide what a 2022 defeat would mean for the party.
The expectation is that Joe Biden will lose one house of Congress in next year’s midterm elections. Such a loss would be routine. Nearly every president in American history has lost seats in their first midterm election. Unlike those who came in with significant margins, Biden’s House majority of four seats has no room for error. Every president since Franklin Roosevelt, and every president but one before him since 1866, has lost four or more House seats in their first midterm. Several of those presidents had decent poll numbers and were presiding over better-than-average economic conditions. First midterm defeats are more of a consequence of a two-party political system than any reflection on a particular president’s political acumen.
Such a defeat is eminently worrying to both political observers and the Democratic Party. After all, both are convinced (with good reason) that the Republican Party is an authoritarian group of obstructionists and sycophants to former President Trump. Giving that group power in such a volatile time is alarming. Who knows what they could do with one half of Congress? Observers believe that government shutdowns and potential debt defaults are just two of the tools Republicans will use to cut government spending and doom the party that controls the White House.
But the poor prospects for Biden’s party do not mean that he has nothing to fight for in November. Indeed, it may be less important that he loses the House than how much he loses the House by. A minor defeat of a few seats or even a dozen would not mean the end of the world. It would in fact leave Democrats with a prime opportunity to retake the branch in 2024. They could bide their time and focus on the Senate and executive orders while Kevin McCarthy and House Republicans preen for the cameras and hold symbolic votes. A two-year Republican majority would be similar to earlier two-year majorities that have mostly been forgotten by history.
The alternative, however, is more harrowing. A forty-seat defeat by Biden in November would be much tougher to overcome. It would entrench House Republicans for years. The blowouts in 1994 and 2010 led to majorities for House Republicans that lasted twelve years and eight years, respectively. During those periods, significant midterm wins helped lead to Republican trifectas that resulted in bills passed and significant headaches for Democrats. Ten years of Republican rule now could make it much easier for the party to restrict civil rights, change voting laws, and entrench its governing coalition. A Democratic landslide in 2024 or 2028 of between 25 and 35 seats, a prospect that has happened six times in both parties since 1900, would mean little if Republicans had a forty-seat majority.
Democrats are understandably worried about giving the Republican Party any branch of power. Republicans have proven themselves unfit to govern in many ways and in many potential situations. But at this time, the focus should be on the party’s realistic prospects and on lessening any damage that may occur. Democrats should focus on 2022 for what it might mean both for the next year and for the next two or three elections.
Pondering what the big issues will be in 11 months and what the Admin/Party can do regarding it.
Economics:
This is a tough one to move at will and always an important one for voters. Keep doing what they’re doing basically? Figure out what Manchinema will accept and pass that.
Inflation:
I think Bidens’ on the right track here. He’s been very supportive of the Fed regarding what decisions they have/will make. The market believes (via long term price contracts) that, if inflation keeps up, that the central bank will stomp on it and Biden won’t interfere.
Covid:
Whatever bureaucracy that is holding up tests, vaccines and treatments Biden needs to lean hard on it to move with all possible haste. The bureaucracy always wants to spend time to get certainty and won’t choose otherwise unless political pressure and cover is provided. Biden needs to generate both.
Schools:
This is a big one, I fear. The science is unambiguous. A fully vaccinated and boosted adult teacher in a school with masking has trivial odds of catching Covid, lightning strike odds of getting seriously sick and lightning strike PLUS lottery winning odds of dying from Covid. There is no balance between teacher safety and the needs of kids (especially poor and minority kids) for in person learning. The latter’s needs utterly dominate the former. The unions have no ground to stand on if they are pushing for remote learning. If they try to go to the matt to force remote learning then a boot needs to be publicly kicked in their faces and it’d be salutary for the Dems if that boot was blue.
Foreign Affairs:
No fishing wars. I think Bidens on track with this. Afghanistan is a non-issue now which proves that Bidens call to leave was the correct one. The only hot spot that could be an issue is Ukraine but I don’t honestly think that Putin is dumb enough to invade. If he does then they should levy serious sanctions, boot Russia off of Swift and go after all the Russian assets sequestered in foreign banks.Report
Economics – the Administration also needs to lean harder on the media to reframe its successes. Right now the narrative doesn’t favor the things the Administration has actually accomplished. That’s got to change ASAP.
Inflation – spot on.
COVID (Tied to Schools) – the Administration has to fight for mandates for vaccinations, and has to fight in the court of public opinion as much as the actual courts. Teacher vaccine and mask mandates are a must, but counting on local school districts to do this is folly, especially in red states. The trade off has to be crystal clear – if you want open schools, then you have to have 100% adult vaccinations of faculty and staff, and full masking. The Administration also needs to up the game on funding air filtration in schools, which few districts can afford to overhaul quickly.
Foreign Affairs – Putin may have bigger problems then invading Ukraine if the protests in Kazakhstan continue and spread. The Administration should make clear its support for those protests, and freeze the funds of any state that intervenes. And play up the old Cold War sentiments against Russia while they do it.Report
I basically agree with you on most points here Philip. Pushing the media on narrative is a necessary part of the job but it’s so fishing difficult to move media narratives. It’s a game as old as media and our media is so fishin set on their false even handedness. What can ya do?
I’m 100% in favor of vaccine mandates and masking requirements. I don’t have a beef with air systems/filtration, it’s a good general policy but it is a side show on Covid so long as you have full teacher (and pervasive student) vaccination and general masking.
I am not comfortable about getting granular about foreign policy because I don’t have much confidence in my knowledge about it. I’d be pretty strongly inclined, personally, to take a light hand on Kazakhstan which is so outside of the US interests as to be virtually on the moon. Say the right things human rights wise but butt out otherwise. If Putin feels like he’s being besieged or encircled he’s liable to do something stupid. Time is on the US’ side. Strategic patience is, thus, to our benefit.Report
Kazakhstan shows a way for people in Hungry and even Russia to start pushing back against their regimes – which has benefit in the US as showing why the right wing embrace of these regimes is so troubling.
And the President of Kazakhstan has ordered his police and military to shoot protestors openly without warning. Seems to me we don’t want to just send thoughts and prayers after that, but we don’t want to send troops either.Report
We have no interest there. I haven’t looked at polling but I would be shocked if Kazakhstan is a top 25 issue of any voting demographic. Maybe foreign policy cranks and militarists within a 20 mile radius of DC. Other than that I doubt many people are even aware something is going on there.Report
This isn’t the back yard of some some tin pot dictator in a mud hut in the middle of a desert in no where. It’s mother fishin Russia with a massive military, enough nukes to destroy the world and a whole mountain of fishing belligerence and inferiority complexes. The last thing we need is a W. Fishing Bush (still, bar none, the most terrible and destructive to American interests President in modern history- Trump doesn’t come close) only under the Democratic brand.
Speaking softly and acting with intelligence and restraint is imperative.Report
Stuff and nonsense. Biden hasn’t started any new wars and ended a major one. If anything you said was true we’d be dealing with the reverse.Report
Real Americans aren’t going to entertain any lib media feelgood economics propaganda while we’re still living in the current virus regime.
For better or worse, I don’t see anything relating to Kazakhstan that materially changes Putin/Russia’s intentions wrt Ukraine (and it’s probably for the worse).Report
What makes the economy a particularly bad issue for the Democrats is that, for now at least, it’s doing worse in their districts than in the R ones. That puts “blue” voters less pleased with the status quo, and “red” voters more pleased.
Of course you can’t really separate the economy from inflation. Usually the president gets disproportionate credit or blame for this, but today’s problems are closely tied to policy. People are afraid to go out and find work, and the supply chain problems are driving up costs. This could turn around pretty quickly, and I hope it does, but then again a lot of inflation is psychological, and a sudden availability of larger paychecks could drive up prices even more.Report
What they’re doing right now is not passing BBB because they can’t get Machinema on board. It seems to be working pretty well.Report
If this issue cuts any ice at all for you, get ready to start voting Republican.Report
“Such a defeat is eminently worrying to both political observers and the Democratic Party.”
What a small spectrum of political observers you must follow! I mean, not even a courtesy reference to “many political observers” or even “astute political observers”. All of them!Report
RE: Covid
Covid is going to infect everyone over the next two months and then it will burn out. It’s going to be a really nasty two months but the election will be later. Maybe late enough that covid will be a history books thing.
RE: Trump
The real question is whether Jan 6th will be an issue and how it will play out. The GOP seems determined to play the “It wasn’t me” game because a good hunk of their base wants that. Whether everyone else punishes them will be interesting.
This is where we get into potentially “unelectable” territory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_x6QmuJdmsReport
The OP has the right framing, I think, but at least part of the conclusions are wrong.
Demo’s have to think about 2024 because 2022 is a lost cause and 2024 is their first, and maybe last for a while, shot at competitiveness. 2022 is baked in the cake and has been for a while, and probably not just a five or ten seat thing either. I’d be shocked if GOP gets out of 2022 with less than 230 House seats and probably at least 240.
In any case, the goal for Republicans is the flip side of the OP: win enough House seats to where that chamber is, realistically out of play for 2024.Report