Skip to main content

After a very successful senatorial election six years ago, many of the freshmen senators elected in that cycle are at risk this year. The previous races were during a presidential election year with a popular and charismatic outsider promising change in Washington. This year these new senators face not only an election without a presidential race to attract voters, but also a president whose popularity is declining.

Welcome to 1986.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan took the White House in a sweeping victory over Jimmy Carter whose approval rating has dropped to 35%. The Republicans also gained 12 seats to take control of the Senate for the first time since 1952. Four of the new Republican senators gained seats in the formerly Democratic Solid South - including Jeremiah Denton in Alabama, Paula Hawkins in Florida, Mack Mattingly in Georgia, and John East in North Carolina.

Not only that, but some of the most famous Democratic senators fell to upstart Republican challengers, as well - including Warren Magnusen in Washington, Frank Church in Idaho, George McGovern in South Dakota, Gaylord Nelson in Wisconsin, and Birch Bayh in Indiana. And back to the South, Herman Talmadge in Georgia.

When 1986 rolled around and these freshmen GOP senators were up for reelection, not only did they not have a presidential groundswell to assist them, Reagan's approval numbers were declining. The 1984 landslide was political history as were the Los Angeles Olympics and "Morning in America". Ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and Central America were taking their toll on Reagan's patina and Iran-Contra was about to break.

Thus, in the 1986 election the Democrats gained 8 seats - 9 gains and 1 loss - and retook the Senate from the Republicans.  Seven of those were from among the 12 GOP freshmen senators - all 4 Southern seats which had flipped in 1980 plus Andrews in North Dakota, Abdnor in South Dakota, and Gordon in Washington.

<<<>>>

Fast forward 28 years and we are in a similar political environment. Prior to the 2008 election, the Democrats had a slim majority in the Senate with the support of two independents to give them 51 to 49. The unpopularity of the Bush administration was worse than Carter's at 30%. The appeal of Barack Obama combined with the economic meltdown produced a Democratic wave with 8 takeovers in the Senate - some of them in very red territory. The gains were - Mark Begich in Alaska, Mark Udall in Colorado, Al Franken in Minnesota, Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire, Tom Udall in New Mexico, Kay Hagan in North Carolina, Jeff Merkley in Oregon, and Mark Warner in Virginia.

Granted, senatorial elections are impacted by state issues and state politics; yet, national politics have come to play a greater part since 1986. Although senatorial elections are not retention votes for the president, the public view of Obama and Democratic policies in general in Congress does have an increasingly significant role given the highly polarized nature of the American political sphere today.

Nearly every two-term president and two-term administration - such as Kennedy-Johnson or Nixon-Ford - have seen congressional losses in the second midterm. Since WWII, rarely have losses been small - the 1998 election being the only exception. Eisenhower 1958 - Dem + 49 House, Dem +15 Senate; Johnson 1966 - GOP + 47 House, GOP + 3 Senate; Ford 1974 - Dem + 49 House, Dem + 4 Senate; Reagan 1986 - Dem + 5 House, Dem + 8 Senate; Clinton 1998 - GOP -4 House, GOP even Senate; Bush 2006 - Dem +31 House, Dem + 6 Senate.

In each of the above second midterms there were national issues that influenced the vote in addition to pattern of voter weariness with a two-term administration. Recession and cold war in 1958, Vietnam and urban unrest in 1966, Watergate in 1974, cold war conflicts in 1986, Iraq and Afghanistan in 2006. Despite the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the humming economy of 1998 trumped any presidential shenanigans in the voters' eyes.

Not only are Democrats facing the ongoing Afghan conflict under the Obama administration, but an economy that has, at best, a sputtering recovery. Regardless of Obamacare or gay marriage or whatever, world conflicts and the poor economy will weigh heavily on Democratic senate candidates - especially the freshman class of 2008. In addition, Democrats will not have the benefit of presidential-year turnout which favors Democrats while lower turnout favors Republicans.

If the Democrats lose control of the Senate in 2015, then the Obama administration will have little chance of implementing even a fraction of its policy goals. Furthermore, judicial nominations up to and including the Supreme Court will grind to a halt unless Obama picks extremely conservative judges. One would think that the Obama administration would do all it could to ensure that such an eventuality would not come to pass, but this does not seem to be the case.

Unless there is a significant improvement in the economy or a major international settlement during the next six months, political history suggests a serious defeat for the party of the president. Barring those, is there any possibility of domestic legislation that can benefit the Democrats?

Otherwise, a Republican gain of 8 Senators and 22 Representatives is a distinct possibility.
Is it worth it?

<<<>>>

Errata - In the poll below -
The numbers below 'Even" should be 'Lose 1' then 'Lose 2'.
I have no idea how it turned out the way it did.
Nor can it be corrected in the poll box.

Poll

What Will the Net Dem Gain/Loss in the Senate Be in 2014?

12%5 votes
2%1 votes
7%3 votes
5%2 votes
12%5 votes
5%2 votes
10%4 votes
20%8 votes
0%0 votes
10%4 votes
0%0 votes
5%2 votes
5%2 votes
0%0 votes
5%2 votes

| 40 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  One correction (5+ / 0-)

    It was Paula Hawkins elected in Florida, not Paul. And she was a disaster.  Like others who tried to exploit the rage of right-wing parents over offensive lyrics in pop music of the day, she participated in the hearing which led to the "explicit lyrics" designation on CDs and so forth.  And she provoked a confrontation with Frank Zappa of all people, who kicked her tail and handed it back to her.  Hawkins' buffonery in the episode was a factor in her defeat.  

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by Kangaroo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 10:57:55 AM PDT

  •  No offense but this was well known for a long time (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jon Sitzman

    now.  I've been writing about all these races and yeah, it's a mid term election and of course it's tough but you have to look closely at all the races instead of just a general look.  We will very likely lose WV-Sen and SD-Sen but we are very likely to gain GA-Sen and KY-Sen.  Also waiting to see if any real traction happens with ME-Sen.  These Dems know this and have been campaigning hard and issues like Medicaid Expansion and the minimum wage could be very helpful to their chances.

    Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

    by poopdogcomedy on Wed May 14, 2014 at 11:14:42 AM PDT

    •  There Are Midterms and Second Term Midterms - (0+ / 0-)

      Typically, second term midterms involve senators who were elected in a surge for a popular president who do not have the benefit of that president leading the ticket.

      There's a difference.

      PS - I find you usage of "very likely" interesting.  In West Virginia and South Dakota, the Democratic candidate is way, way behind in polling. In Georgia and Kentucky, the Democratic candidate is roughly even. Numbers are not everything, but they are something.

      •  SD is a crazy race with third party candidates (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jon Sitzman

        having an effect and PPP showed WV voters tend to change their minds a lot.  I understand what you're saying, and that applies in states like Alaska but PPP has showed that third party Libertarian candidates are hurting GOP candidates there and in NC.  Nunn is only even with Perdue, anyone else she leads.  Grimes has been even with McConnell for a while and I think it's going to be that way for a while.  But states like Coloardo, which have been trending blue for a while, it won't matter about the President.  Most of these races will come down to certain issues, both on the national and local levels.  

        Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

        by poopdogcomedy on Wed May 14, 2014 at 12:12:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The "Afghan Conflict" Has Been Ongoing For 13 Yrs (0+ / 0-)

    It's not a #1 issue for most Americans unless they have a kid or a spouse over there.'

    I doubt  Afghan will sink Democratic freshmen senators or a Democratic President.   It's a back burner.  

  •  The people predicting "Gain 4" are dreaming. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Zack from the SFV, MikePhoenix

    If we stay even, it'll be a miracle. But I don't think we're going to lose the senate.

    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

    by raptavio on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:56:55 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site