Yes, I know, I know, Republicans had a big night on Tuesday. But not everything turned out quite the way they wanted.
Republicans took the House by a comfortable margin - but they fell well short in the Senate. Projections are showing that Democrats will likely hold onto Senate seat in Washington - meaning that Republicans will take six seats in total in that chamber. That's two less than they flipped in 1994, and four less than they needed to take the chamber this time around.
What happened? The Tea Party blew it.
This theory runs contrary to what you'll hear and read about this election. Since the rise of the Tea Party "movement" coincides Democrat's losses in Congress, many pundits and politicos are eager to give it credit for those losses. Furthermore, since many Tea Party candidates themselves were elected to the House, that proves that America has been persuaded to their way of thinking, right?
Wrong.
As Chris Matthiews pointed out on MSNBC last night, a House election is not a Senate election. Senate elections are statewide elections - high profile elections. Voters really get a chance to know both candidates. And the more voters learned about Tea Party candidates, the worse they did. That explains why Republicans had a worse night in the Senate than in the House - and why Tea Party Senate candidates had an especially bad night. Furthermore, in other races, the Tea Party screwed up what were "sure things" for the Republicans - forcing them to play defense during a year where they should have taken advantage of every chance to take out Democrats. Combined, these two factors show that Republicans likely would have taken control of the Senate - and made Tuesday a truly historic election - if it wasn't for the Tea Party.
Tea Party candidates lost seven high profile Senate races in Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Deleware, Nevada, and West Virginia. They had success in four: Florida, Wisconsin, Utah, and Kentucky. But there were special circumstances in three of those races. In Utah, the race wasn't ever seriously contested, allowing the Republican a walk. In Kentucky, the race was only ever close because Rand Paul was such an odious candidate - his Republican primary opponent, the more moderate Trey Greyson, likely would have made it no contest. In Florida, the sane vote was split two ways in a three way race, prevented the Democrats from coalescing around a single candidate. If it wasn't for the huge egos of Charlie Crist and Kendrick Meek, or if Crist had been smart enough to switch parties, Democrats would have won Florida: the support for Crist and Meek combined beat Tea Party candidate Marco Rubio. Only Wisconsin counts a real, honest to Teabag victory. It was Republican establishment candidates who largely led the field for the victories they did enjoy in the Senate. Five of their six pick ups were establishment candidates.
In Delaware and in Nevada, the Tea Party backed ideological extremists over more moderate, establishment candidates that already had clear leads over their Democratic opponents. Those ideological extremists both prevailed in the primary and then subsequently lost in the general election - costing the Republicans two seats. In two other races, Colorado and Connecticut, the Tea Party propelled a clearly weaker Republican to victory in the primary - potentially costing them two more seats, although the chances of the stronger Republican winning those races is more unclear. In Alaska, Kentucky and Florida, Tea Party candidates ruined sure Republican wins and forced them to spend money playing defense when just a little more resources in other states might have meant victory.
Without the Tea Party, Republicans would control the Senate seats in Nevada and Delaware, and would had had strong chances in Connecticut and Colorado. In addition, they would have had more money to spend in close races like Washington. Four of those five would have been enough to take the chamber - but, if they had taken only three, it's likely a conservative Democrat like Joe Lieberman or Ben Nelson would have switched sides and handed Republicans the majority.
In other words, the Republicans were likely one cup of tea away from a total takeover of Congress - effectively hamstringing Obama's ability to appoint cabinet officials, make treaties with other countries, and perhaps most importantly replace Supreme Court justices. It would have been a truly historic turn away from Democrats and would have ensured Obama's status as all but a lame duck President.
But as the American people learned more about the Tea Party and its vision of America, they rejected it. In time, they will learn more about their allies in the House - and reject them as well. Enjoy your reign while you can, Mr. Boehner - it may be shorter than you think.