Joy Only Cometh in the Midterm

Yesterday’s elections, though interesting, are not terribly significant in the long-run. They were no referendum on President Obama. Of course I am glad to see the more conservative candidates win the governors races, but we should be very cautious about our optimism. After all, the House candidates lost. The real referendum on the administration will, rightly, come at this time next year with the midterms. The race to track until that time and the best race to gauge the mood of the country next November is the Ohio gubernatorial race.

There are three critical reasons why the Ohio governor’s race should be the focal point of the midterm election cycle.

1. As goes Ohio, so goes the nation

Ohio may well be the ultimate swing-state. The winner of Ohio has won the White House in every presidential election since 1964.

Ohio, as a state, is about as politically diverse as they come. Ohioans send both John Boehner (Republican Minority Leader) and Dennis Kucinich (Democrat and perennial uber-left presidential candidate) to Congress.  They send a Senator from each party to Washington, and ten Democrats to the House along with eight Republicans. The state-wide offices are dominated by Democrats, but the legislative branch is split.

Furthermore, Ohio boasts manufacturing, farming, coal-mining, urban, rural, and suburban areas. From the blue-collar voters of Youngstown to the white-collar voters of Columbus, the solidly blue cities like Cleveland to the solidly red suburbs of Cincinnati, it is a political Disneyland of sorts for pollsters and election trackers.

It is a state that looks like America, and Ohioans seem to have a knack for voting with the mood of the country.

2. The 2010 governor’s race will pit a mainstream, incumbent Democrat against a fiscally conservative Republican

The incumbent, Governor Ted Strickland, is straight out of central casting for an establishment Democrat. He is a mainstream, liberal populist and was rumored to be on the VP shortlist had Hillary Clinton secured the nomination. Gov. Strickland is presiding over a state struggling for jobs, a problem magnified by the recession. The state has seen no notable job growth, he’s flirted with raising taxes, and his administration has had some corruption issues.  

The challenger, former congressman and Fox News host John Kasich, is an experienced, energetic, and popular Republican. Kasich is a common-sense, fiscal conservative with the added bonus of actually having walked the walk on fiscal discipline. In the House from 1982-2000, Kasich was an important part of the Republican house takeover in 1994, and as chairman of the house budget committee, played a critical role in balancing the budget.

Though the quality and experience of candidates will vary, the theme of fiscally conservative challengers railing against establishment Democrat incumbents will be a popular one in the coming year.

3. Ohioans will have to choose between two distinct, competing visions

The challenging party is most effective when able to convince the voters their reforms are better than the status quo, and create a clear distinction between the parties. For examples, Ohioans need look no further than their bordering neighbors—Michigan to the north and Indiana to the west.

In Michigan, Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm has had a rocky two terms. At best, she has been unable to stop Michigan’s decline as a state, and at worst, she has accelerated it. Under Gov. Granholm, Michigan has attempted to tax and spend their way out of economic trouble. Her job approval is low and Michigan is in an unenviable state.

In Indiana, reform-minded Republican Governor Mitch Daniels has seen much more success. Gov. Daniels fought difficult budget battles resulting in Indiana now operating in a surplus. He has lowered taxes and attracted jobs to the state to counteract the loss of manufacturing jobs. A headline last week in the Detroit News read, “Financial Discipline has Spared Indiana much of the Budget Pain Michigan is Enduring.”[i]    

To be sure, not every Democrat incumbent is Granholm and not every Republican is Daniels. But if the GOP can make voters see big-spending, establishment Democrats in the same light they see Granholm, and then make the case for reform with the competence and clarity of Daniels, then 2010 will be very kind to the GOP.

Much can happen in a year and there will be many unexpecteds in the next twelve months. There is still work to be done for the GOP in terms of crafting a national message, finding good candidates, and raising the money to compete in every winnable district. Likewise, voters need more time to judge the Obama administration, as so many issues are still up in the air.

Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie both won governors races impressively in states Pres. Obama carried last November, and I certainly do not intend to downplay those accomplishments. But a handful of local elections do not a referendum make. The next twelve months will be worth watching, and Ohio may well be the best indicator of the nation’s mood.

---

[i] http://www.detnews.com/article/20091026/OPINION01/910260303/1008/Financial-discipline-has-spared-Indiana-much-of-the-budget-pain-Michigan-is-enduring

Comments

[Grant]

Kevin, I think you may be understating what these elections say about the national mood. Seems to me it is more significant than you think

[Kevin Goll]

Grant,

Perhaps. To me, the Democratic candidate in Virginia was a complete dud (ie an especially bad candidate), and the New Jersey race saw a moderate Republican take out an unpopular incumbant whose administration had corruption issues. Hence, the two victories. And the Democrats won the House races. I just don't see this as conclusive evidence of a turn in the politics tides.

What are some reasons you do?

-Kevin