For your
Sunday School Extra Credit this week, I dropped by the
Meet the Press (
NBC) classroom to listen in on some talk about the upcoming midterms.
For the first part of the conversation, host Kristen Welker was joined by NBC's Chief Data Analyst, Steve Kornacki. Here's how Welker set the stage:
Today marks 100 days
until the midterm elections. At stake: control of Congress. Will the war in
Iran -- and its impact on the economy -- hurt Republicans’ chances of holding
onto power? Or can Democrats flip the House and Senate? Even as a fight rages
within the party over its future.
Kornacki dove right into the numbers, putting the landscape in perspective, he said.
- Trump's approval is at 41% on average across all polls, a little lower than before the 2018 midterms in his first term.
- In a recent Fox News poll on specific issues, "majority disapprove everywhere. His best mark is 42 on immigration." On Iran, the economy, and inflation, the numbers were apparently much worse.
- In 2022, under Biden, the Dems lost "only a few seats" in the House, and picked up one in the Senate. That's what the Rs are hoping will happen this year, and they "think that their one chance is the image of the Democratic Party."
- A majority of Democrats, in the same Fox poll, "have a favorable view of socialism" but that ends at the party door - socialism is "deeply unpopular" with Independents.
- The Dems need to gain four Senate seats to get control, and they can't lose any seats, either. Their best hopes are in Maine and North Carolina, but where are the other two? Can they come from states that Trump won by double digits - Alaska, Iowa, Ohio, or Texas?
- Iran hangs over the whole mess; in a Politico poll, "65% say the war shouldn't continue, or should continue only if it doesn't make costs worse. And 56% of MAGA share that opinion, compared to several weeks ago when it was 41%.
Later in the lesson, the panel gathered to continue discussing the midterms. Today's crew: New York
Times White House correspondent Tyler Pager; Democratic strategist Adrienne
Elrod; and Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Welker asked Pager what he was hearing from his sources about Iran and the mood at the White House. He said for a while folks were optimistic that "the war would be winding down or at least not on the front of voters' minds when they went to the polls, or even after Labor Day." And now? It seems there are some concerns that fluctuating prices and continuing attacks in the war could be "a huge issue for voters." On the other hand,
...when
you talk to Republicans, they point out a few things that make them somewhat
optimistic that things could go a little bit better. One, the huge cash
advantage that the Republicans have in the committees. Two, the redistricting
efforts that have given Republicans a fighting chance in some areas that they
didn’t think they would compete in. And lastly, they think they have a message
of attack, particularly around the Democratic Socialist candidates that have
won, trying to paint them as representatives of the entire Democratic Party. But
most voters care about the economy. And that is going to be — continue to be a
huge issue for the party as they try to stave off what appears to be a losing
hand heading into November.
Welker turned to Chen, asking about Labor Day as a key date, especially when it comes to getting gas prices down. She said, "The economy is always the single biggest issue" for voters considering which party to support, but noted there's some complexity to the picture for the Rs. She pointed to the redistricting efforts in red states making perhaps 10 to 15 seats more competitive, and the progressive Dems who are far to the left of most Americans.
So those are advantages, no question about it. But the challenge
Republicans face is what I consider to be an expectations gap. There’s an
expectation about the end of the war. There’s an expectation about prices
coming down. And the reality hasn’t always met those expectations. So not only
are you seeing challenges with independent voters. The bigger issue for
Republicans is energy. It’s the energy of the Republican electorate. Are those
most loyal Republican voters going to turn out and vote when Donald Trump is
not on the ballot? That’s the big question.
And, talking about "the progressive branch of the Democratic Party," Welker noted the energy level there, and how there's a divide playing out in primaries. She talked about Michigan, where there's a primary next month with a progressive battling a moderate for a Senate seat. She asked Elrod to talk about what's at stake.
In a nutshell? If the Dems want to take back the Senate, they have to hold Michigan, and "we have a much better shot of holding onto Michigan" if the moderate candidate wins. She also thinks that, in terms of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) candidates more generally, it's a challenge for the Ds because some of the primary winners "may not be as appealing to the electorate in the general election.
But so far, we are seeing this
relatively isolated to places like New York City, you know, urban areas, and of
course that little blue dot in Colorado in Denver with Diana DeGette’s loss. If
El-Sayed is successful in Michigan, that will sort of blow that argument. It’ll
flop that argument significantly. Because this is a state that is in the Rust
Belt. It is a state that is critical to anybody winning in 2028 for the
presidential - for the presidency. So if this happens there, then I think
Democrats are going to have a bigger challenge.
And on the other side of the aisle, how much of a challenge does the erosion of the MAGA base on Iran pose? Pager turned back the clock a bit to answer this one, noting that JD Vance endorsed Trump in part because "Trump would not bring the nation to war." And Vance has been "concerned and frankly opposed" to the war (from the beginning, at least according to many reports - ed.)
So obviously that is
a huge concern for the base. And that was what Vance was trying to channel in
some of his opposition. The other thing as Lanhee said, we have seen the
Republican Party struggle when Donald Trump is not on the ballot, particularly
with turnout when it relates to the base... some of these voters that are
huge Donald Trump supporters, but are not as reliably showing up for the
midterm elections. And so without Donald Trump on the ballot, plus this ongoing
protracted overseas conflict, that is a problem for Republicans.
Chen noted the concept of "the MAGA base is a
little bit misunderstood" - it's not really a 'base' for the Rs.
... what it really is, is it’s Donald
Trump’s coalition. It’s a unique coalition that no other politician has been
able to replicate in recent American history. When Donald Trump is not on the
ballot, as we talked about earlier, it changes the dynamic, the dynamic
significantly. The question of course is: does the president want to get more
involved? And what does that mean for individual candidates?
She pointed to Susan Collins, running for her *sixth* term (after pledging to only serve two), as an example of the quandary facing some GOP candidates. In Maine, she'll need the so-called MAGA base, but she can't turn off the moderates who wield a lot of power in the bluish-purple state.
... she’s got to be able to turn
out that base of Republican voters while still not turning off moderates who
might have a different opinion of the president. Her challenge is going to be
very different than you might see in other races. So, the question of how far
the president gets involved - this is his base. If he wants to turn on his base,
if he wants to devote time and energy to getting those people out to vote, it’s
going to change the outcome of the election.
Does that make everything clearer, as we enter the push to the midterms? Iran, affordability, DSA, Trump... right now, these are the likely suspects; we'll see if that changes over the coming weeks.
Thoughts on the midterms? Want to see me tackle something specific? (And yes, I'll be sharing some info on the DSA in an upcoming post.) Drop a comment.
