Numbers don’t lie. Headlines might. Media professionals might. Political partisans might. Numbers can’t, and they don’t.
The numbers in the November 6, 2018 midterm elections are clear — the Republicans lost the U.S. House of Representatives’ elections, but they did NOT lose the elections overall. In fact, the Republicans made POSITIVE history in the 2018 midterm elections by gaining two to three seats in the U.S. Senate to increase their majority (election results still pending in FL as of this writing).
“It was the first time since the nation started directly electing senators in 1914 that a party has won control of the House without gaining seats in the Senate,” reported USA Today. “The gains are significant because a larger Republican plurality will make it easier for (President Donald) Trump to have cabinet and judicial nominees approved.”
You read that right. There have been 53 Congressional elections since 1914 and the Republicans just accomplished something historic. The victories of Mike Braun in Indiana, Josh Hawley in Missouri, and Kevin Cramer in North Dakota over Democratic Senate incumbents Joe Donnelly, Claire McCaskill, and Heidi Heitkamp meant that Republicans had done something that neither party had achieved in the 52 previous elections.
Many reporters and political partisans have compared the Democrats’ “win” in 2018 to the Democrats’ win in 2006 and the Republicans’ wins in 1994 and 2010, but those comparisons are astonishingly wrong. Yes, it’s true that the party of the president often loses seats in Congress in midterm elections. The Democrats lost 54 House seats in 1994 and 63 in 2010 while the Republicans lost 30 in 2006. This time around, in 2018, Republicans lost 31 seats.
But the Democrats’ “win” last week was NOT comparable to what happened in 1994, 2006, and 2010. The Democrats lost nine Senate seats and control of the U.S. Senate in 1994. The Republicans lost six Senate seats and control of the Senate in 2006. The Democrats lost six Senate but maintained control of the Senate in 2010.
President George W. Bush called the Republicans’ loss in 2006 a “thumping.” President Barack Obama called the Democrats’ loss in 2010 a “shellacking.” They were right. Trump called the 2018 results “a very close to complete victory” for the GOP.
Was he right?
Trump is known for being confident. That’s one of the reasons tens of millions of Americans like and respect him. He might be overconfident on this issue, but let’s look at some facts that put a different spin on what happened last week than the spin advanced by many Democrats and media outlets.
* The GOP’s expansion of its majority in the U.S. Senate gives it a better chance to confirm more Supreme Court judges like Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 85. Remember, the U.S. House has zero impact on Supreme Court judges or the prospective confirmation of dozens of judges at lower levels. Also remember that Kavanaugh was confirmed by only two votes.
* The U.S. House also has no impact on the confirmation of Cabinet officials. Several Cabinet officials were barely confirmed in 2017. Trump wants a new attorney general to replace Jeff Sessions, who was confirmed by only 52-47. Attorney generals are crucial in fighting crime — and can also make sure the Robert Mueller probe doesn’t spiral out of control. In short, more GOP senators enhances the chances that true Trump conservatives will be confirmed.
* Republican wins in states are more crucial than wins in congressional districts because winning states is what a presidential election is all about (except in Maine and Nebraska).
* Republicans continue to dominate the crucial swing states of Florida, North Carolina, and Ohio. The GOP lost no congressional seats in North Carolina and Ohio and continue to defy predictions that Florida will be moving leftward any day now.
* Republicans continue to dominate the nation’s rural areas. S.E. Cupp wrote in a column that Democrats “have not figured out how to capture a silent majority of voters who turned out in surprising numbers for Republican candidates. They were voters the party did not anticipate in 2016. They came out again in 2018, and they will come out again in 2020.”
* While it is unquestionable that suburban voters, particularly women, moved significantly toward Democrats in 2018, suburban voters have a history of making voting decisions based on the economy. It’s possible that Trump isn’t being given credit for the nation’s strong economy because he has been in office for less than two years, but will be rewarded in 2020 when far fewer people will credit Obama for the strong economy.
* The more conservative Republicans did significantly better in the 2018 elections than the more moderate Republicans. This means that the Republican Party has moved significantly rightward. This could be construed as a win for the conservative agenda.
* As Trump mentioned himself at his Nov. 7 press conference, Republican candidates who campaigned with him fared considerably better than those who turned down the opportunity. Republican voters themselves might have been responsible for Republican moderates losing because they’re so supportive of Trump and don’t like it when a Republican official isn’t.
All elections need to be put into the context of history. When you do that, you can only conclude that the GOP’s losses in the 2018 U.S. House of Representatives’ elections were less significant than the Democratic Party’s defeats in the House elections of 1994 and 2010 and the GOP’s gains in the U.S. Senate elections were very significant because of how badly the presidential party fared in 1994, 2006, and 2010.
