- Thailand crisis deepens as opposition quits Parliament
- Campbell Soup apologizes for SpaghettiOs’ Pearl Harbor tweet
- Former Reagan aide James Baker: President regretted apartheid veto
- Some donations to gay waitress who allegedly forged hate note refunded
- German President Joachim Gauck boycotting Sochi Olympics
- Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel: If you want to pay more for your doctor, you can under Obamacare
- Sen. Rand Paul: ‘I am seriously thinking about’ running for president in 2016
- Sleet, ice, deepfreeze hit large swath of U.S.
- ‘Welcome to the edge of freedom’: Biden’s boots touch down in DMZ
- Obama: Hole U.S. ‘digging out of’ requires billions more in unemployment benefits
LAMBRO: Silver lining to GOP’s gloomy performance
New conservative leaders emerging from statehouses
Lost in the news media’s ecstasy over President Obama’s victory in the midst of a terribly weak, job-starved economy is the political reality behind his narrow popular vote margin, the GOP’s still-muscular House majority and its rising strength among the nation’s governorships.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent out news releases the day after the election that they had “succeeded last night in rolling back the [GOP‘s] Tea Party wave of 2010. In fact, Democrats had defeated “only three members of the Tea Party Caucus,” election tracker Stuart Rothenberg noted in his post-election analysis.
The Democrats were making preposterous pre-election claims of winning 25 seats and taking back the House, but they never came close. In the 2008 election, Mr. Obama’s party gained 21 House seats. They gained only eight this year, leaving the GOP in firm control of the people’s chamber.
Democrats had a net gain of two seats in the Senate, winning all of the close toss-up races in a year when the Republicans had expected to at least tighten their margin in the upper body. Now Majority Leader Harry Reid rules the Senate with a 55 to 45 majority.
This means that nothing passes the Senate without the hard-to-get 60-votes needed to take up any administration legislation.
The really big, untold story on Election Night is that the Republicans will be in control of 30 statehouses next year. That’s “the highest number for either party in more than a decade,” says The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza and is a sign of the GOP’s continued strength in the states.
Four of the five previous presidents before Mr. Obama were all governors: Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Now Republicans head into 2013 with a long lineup of politically ambitious chief executives who are eyeing the presidency, including Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Chris Christie of New Jersey, Susana Martinez of New Mexico, Mike Pence of Indiana, Bob McDonnell of Virginia, John Kasich of Ohio and Scott Walker of Wisconsin.
The large pool of GOP governors, including many in the largest electoral states — Pennsylvania, Texas, Ohio and Florida — means they will be able to rebuild stronger political ground organizations for their party. The new crop of Republican leaders also has begun talking about playing a stronger role in the GOP’s political future.
As for the GOP’s presumed electoral obstacles, he says “the party is not that far, electorally speaking, from creating a credible path back to 270 electoral votes.”
Put the key Midwestern states of Ohio, Iowa and Wisconsin into the GOP column, and possibly Pennsylvania, and the party’s future looks much more promising.
“No, this was not a blowout election for Democrats, but the hardening of the party coalitions and the changing face of the country — and the electorate — pose major problems for the Republican Party,” Mr. Rothenberg says in an analysis that sees a very “mixed message” coming out of the 2012 contests.
Some are calling the results “a status quo election,” and that’s what it has turned out to be. Congress remains as divided as it was before, give or take a few seats. Mr. Obama stays in the White House, but he is facing the same weakening economic and worsening fiscal problems he said he would fix four years ago but didn’t.
The Republican National Committee is now engaged in a nationwide poll-and-focus-group examination into why the electorate voted the way it did. The answer to that question seems self-evident. Mr. Obama received more votes than Mitt Romney because of a clearly superior voter turnout ground game in the electoral battleground states.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Get Breaking Alerts
- Obama: Hole U.S. 'digging out of' requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- PRUDEN: British press horrified as London's new mayor dares to proclaim the truth
- Sen. Rand Paul: Supreme Court needs to re-examine Fourth Amendment
- 'Hunger Games' delivers Obama's message on income inequality
- Dick Cheney: Family feud over gay marriage has been 'dealt with'
- Obamas call to close Vatican embassy is 'slap in the face' to Roman Catholics
- 'Dude, I'm dreading that I will have to go': Czech prime minister on Mandela funeral
- Sen. Rand Paul: Long-term unemployment benefits are disservice to workers