Here’s a question: What are the Democrats thinking?
Before we get into this: I ask this question earnestly.
Democrats are currently on track to lose control of Congress next year. That’s not a foregone conclusion, but it is a relatively high-probability event. You can look at this two ways. The first is history. The party that controls the White House has lost House seats in eighteen of the past 20 mid-term elections (ie between 1942 and 2018). They lost Senate seats in 15 of the last 20. Our prior, then, should be for Democrats to lose control of both; on average, the party that controls the presidency loses 26t seats in the House and 4 in the Senate,
Polls show the same thing. The graph below charts the relationship between the average vote share for the president’s party in generic ballot polls today versus on election day. Notice the general decline for the party in the White House: an even race in polls today translates to a 47% vote share on election day.
Plug in the values for the Democrats today and you get a prediction of 48% in the polling average next November. Of course, the polls could be wrong and mean expectations don’t always come to fruition (the margin of error here is around 7 points in either direction), but it’s a good guess.
So here’s the original question restated: If Democrats are most likely going to lose their House and Senate majorities next year — and this simple model puts those odds around 70% today — what is their calculus for which legislation to proceed or ignore? Should they pursue ambitious bills, like a $3trn sum for infrastructure and the budget (as progressives currently favor), or something more stripped back? How far do they need to moderate to materially increase their odds of holding onto Congress, which probably won’t happen, and is that worth it?
I don’t know the answer. I suspect I could ask some legislative aides and report on it. But what are your thoughts?
Talk more next week,
Elliott
PS: Enjoy this photo of a cheesecake I baked for my wife on her 25th birthday today. (The baking process takes a long while, and is why this newsletter is coming to you so late in the evening.)
If a party has the majority, they should use it to deliver results. If the party doesn't, why should they have the majority? I'm supportive of a parliamentary system, where the majority party or majority coalition implements their policies and the voters judge the policies during the next election. I think that is good democracy.
When I was 25 I could eat cheesecake too. I am glad I did when I could. I think the Democrats are counting on deploying all that money to the states before November 2022 to get votes in key states; more but not now.
Hi Elliott,
If a party has the majority, they should use it to deliver results. If the party doesn't, why should they have the majority? I'm supportive of a parliamentary system, where the majority party or majority coalition implements their policies and the voters judge the policies during the next election. I think that is good democracy.
Nice cheesecake!
-Elliot
Elliot: How very parliamentary of you. FWIW, I think James Madison would generally agree.
When I was 25 I could eat cheesecake too. I am glad I did when I could. I think the Democrats are counting on deploying all that money to the states before November 2022 to get votes in key states; more but not now.
Martha: I hope I can eat cheesecake til I die
Great points Eric