Capitol Hill Blue Forums Hot Topics & Breaking News News GOP and Democrats All But Tied Going into Midterms

Now that the 2022 mid-terms are in the rearview mirror, analysis of the election is trickling out. This is what we know to be true about the election:

• Republicans and the media were focused on pundits and polls saying that history, inflation, gas prices and Biden's approval rating would sink the Democrats.

As things turned out, the Democrats did very well, historically speaking, for a party that holds the White House. They picked up a seat in the Senate and held all but one of their own governorships while flipping three (there are now 24 Democratic governors), and only giving up 10 House seats. Kevin McCarthy predicted a 60-seat pickup.

• The notion that Joe Biden's popularity would be a key factor.

Nope, dead wrong. A president's approval rating has become a long-outmoded measure.

• "GOP-inflected" polling pushed by right-wing media.

There were many problems of poll aggregation, especially when it relies on overtly partisan polls. Who even came close to calling this outcome? The staff at FiveThirtyEight? Real Clear Politics? Other pollsters? No. Michael Moore did.

As more or less a political strategist and forecaster, I found this very interesting. I’ll give you the bottom line, then if you like you can take a closer look at the poll/article for a lot more information.

Bottom Line
Given that Americans’ political ideology is not prone to sudden shifts, the stability seen in 2022 is not surprising. But it masks the continuation of an important long-term trend, which is increased liberalism among Democrats that has been slowly pushing the percentage of liberals higher nationally. The four-point uptick in liberal identification among Democrats in 2022 was not enough to move the U.S. rate, in part because the percentage of Democrats in the population declined. However, it sets the stage for expanding liberalism nationally in future years.

At the same time, conservatism seems to have leveled off among Republicans while the ideological preferences of moderates have long been steady, suggesting future national shifts will continue to depend on changes among Democrats.

The poll/article

Democrats' Identification as Liberal Now 54%, a New High

https://news.gallup.com/poll/467888...nt=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

Very interesting. Thanks! (Reading it now)

If it were not for progressives, we would all still be sitting around a fire in some cave waiting for the next meal. People willing to adapt to evolutionary changes in technologies, philosophies, and society has brought us to this day whether good bad or ugly. If you want to go back in time ... be my guest ... just don't drag down in the hole you're in.

As I was going trough the article, my foremost thought was, "What do the respondents think the labels actually represent?"

It is my long held observation that, when asked to connect the various political labels to real policy, social, economic, environmental, etc. definitions, most people have no reality-based idea. It's more of a tribal or sports team affinity thing - perhaps more about dislike of others than reality. Within the labelled groups themselves there is a wide, and and often personally transient, range of ideas about what a Conservative or Liberal or Independent political ideology is. In simplest form, the Other is just bad, no matter what. (Jordan Klepper has shown us that in grand fashion)

This perverse understanding is especially true of the Progressive label - my own experience with it was in the late 90's when a group of local activists (me included) got together to define an alternative to "Liberal", which the right had corrupted (ConROT-wise) into meaning something that none of us were to any meaningful extent. We spent a good deal of time discussing the art of framing (can't remember the name of the guy at the time who had gotten well-known for formularizing framing techniques) - both from the position of avoiding our "new" party getting trashed through framing, and also how to get ahead of opposition framing by framing them first. After multiple meetings, we decided to call ourselves Progressives - as it happened, the same thing was happening all over the country, so our label (and its specific definition) was lost from its inception to the chaotic seas of fellow travelers. Not long after, the Conservatives successfully framed it as bad, and there was no resistance.

As it happens, righties seem to be much more adept at corrupting information than lefties are. So the Gallup poll, in my assessment, is meaningless in terms of real ideological thinking, but very accurate in terms of which tribe people have been convinced to side with - which happens to be largely an effect of dishonest sales campaigns (political framing).

I recognize Perot's knowledge and facility with assessing and predicting how elections are likely to go, based on the realities of people generally being dupes of framing and not based on clear thinking. This is the reality of the human condition.

What I am interested in is understanding and creating solutions for that unfortunate human condition of sleepwalking through life, that is eating up the Earth and shitting out chaos and destruction.

My fundamental definitions for the Cons and the Libs?

Conservatives - selfish and stupid, with little consideration of the Other.

Liberals - selfish and stupid, with a nagging conscience about the welfare of the Whole.

There is a difference...

I agree that the progressive label is relatively new. Teddy Roosevelt used the progressive label and then it fell out of use until recently. My idea of a conservative goes back to Barry Goldwater and his brand of Traditional conservatism. Liberalism of a more classical type to JFK. Of course, I grew up during Eisenhower, at least he’s the first president I’ve had personally experienced although I was born during Truman right after WWII. Today, neither political party falls into my definition of conservatism or liberalism. The meanings have changed from the time I formed what each was, later 50’s and early 60’s.

When describing my politics, I usually say I’m a Goldwater conservative with some of Ross Perot thrown in. Which probably means nothing today. What I would say it means probably would be being social liberal while being fiscal responsible witch has nothing at all to do with being fiscal conservative which fiscal conservatives are fiscal at all. One of the tenets of being a traditional conservative is that government should stay out of a citizen’s private business and lives. What does that mean today, abortion, it means the woman decides, not government. Gay rights and marriage let love decide, not government. That every American regardless of race, religion, gender and anything else one might think of has the same rights and liberties, no discrimination. Basically, what people today would be classified as a social liberal.

There’s more, but I won’t bore you as you mentioned the tribal aspect. Meanings today don’t have the same meanings as they once had or as I view them. Each of us attaches a meaning they want to conservatism, liberalism, progressivism, libertarianism, socialism and all other ism’s.

You make it sound as if your beliefs on social issues and a liberals beliefs on social issues are separate and distinct i.e. non-intersecting Venn circles. The reality is they are the same. The only difference now is liberal/progressives still maintain those same beliefs while conservatives who once held those beliefs no longer do. Witness Gov De Santos. He once touted his small government creds, but now he promotes the full weight of government to interfere not only in citizens personal lives but in private business as well. And he is not alone. Where once Republicans believed states should regulate regarding social issues, now at the Federal level these same Republicans want to enact laws which abrogate those states rights and interfere in Citizens personal lives.

Glad I don't have to deal with the dissonance these characters create for their constituents.

Trends on the movement of States: Blue to Red or Red to Blue

There has been movement from 2000-2023 for the states from red to blue or blue to red. Below is the movement based on PVI, Partisan Voting Index along with their number of electoral votes for the 2024 presidential election.

Arizona from an R+6 down to an R+2. Moving blue. 11 electoral votes
Florida from R+1 to a R+3 getting slightly redder. 30 electoral votes
Georgia from a R+10 down to an R+3 Moving blue 16 electoral votes
Michigan from a D+6 to a R+1 Moving Red 15 electoral votes
Minnesota from a D+10 down to a D+1 moving Red 10 electoral votes
Nevada from D+3 to R+1 Moving Red 6 electoral votes
North Carolina from an R+13 down to a R+3 moving blue 16 electoral votes
Ohio From an R+4 up to an R+6 Becoming more red 17 electoral votes
Pennsylvania from D+4 to R+2 moving red 19 electoral votes
Texas from an R+20 down to an R+5 moving blue 40 electoral votes
Wisconsin from a D+10 to a R+2 moving red 10 electoral votes


Interesting to note some southern states trending blue, Georgia, North Carolina and Texas with Florida being the exception as it is trending redder. States from the Midwest, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin are turning red with Ohio getting redder. Out west Nevada is trending red while Arizona is trending blue.

I don’t know how many of you keep track of these things, but government/poor leadership has regained its spot as this nation’s number one problem with inflation falling to number two.

More Cite Gov't as Top U.S. Problem; Inflation Ranks Second

https://news.gallup.com/poll/468983...nt=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

Both major parties rate government/poor leadership as this nation’s number one problem, 24% of Republicans, 18% of democrats. The graph for party division is further down in the article/poll.

It’s early, but I found these polls in New Hampshire for both major party’s primaries interesting. Others may not, but I did.

Republican NH Primary DeSantis 42, Trump 30, Haley 8, Sununu 4, Hogan 4, Cheney 4, Noem 2, Pence 1, Cruz 1, Pompeo 0, Youngkin 0

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...epublican_presidential_primary-7396.html

Democratic NH Primary Buttigieg 23, Biden 18, Warren 18, Sanders 15, Ocasio-Cortez 6, Klobuchar 5, Harris 2, Newsom 1, Warnock 1

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...emocratic_presidential_primary-7835.html

Buttigieg leading the Dems with DeSantis leading the Reps. DeSantis I expected would be the leader, Buttigieg was a surprise. NH by no means comes close to representing America, but the Republicans are still keeping Iowa and NH as 1, 2 in their primaries for 2024 whereas the Dems will lead off with SC, then NV & NH followed by GA and MI.