Observations about the 2018

Elections

PROFESSOR JAMES A. THURBER

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
THURBER@AMERICAN.EDU
History and Context for the 2018
Election

Center for Congressional

and Presidential Studies
www.american.edu/ccps
 Overture: 2016 Lingers

In 2016, voters were anxious

about changes in the economy:
Job loss to other countries
Lower wages for remaining jobs
Growing inequality
Less opportunity to get ahead
 General Sense of Anxiety
2016 voters were also anxious about
other changes in the country.
Many (especially white males without
college education) saw their status
and security threatened…
Largely by trade deals
and waves of immigration.
 Pendulum Swinging
Energy and impact
of newly installed president
generates pushback
in first two years of term and
incentivize the opposition party.
 Coattails Missing

The rising tide of a presidential win

lifts all boats in the winning party.
The absence of that president
atop the ticket depresses
that party’s turnout in next midterm.
 Campaigns Matter
We always see surprise winners
who beat the odds by being
better candidates or
running better campaigns.
It often happens in concert
with other factors cited above.
 The Case of 2010
2010 Obama 45% approval
Lost 63 seats and House majority
Lost 6 Senate seats
Painful recession
Unpopular TARP
Messy Obamacare
Tea Party uprising
Poor turnout for Democrats


 The Case of 1994

1994 Clinton 48% approval

Lost 8 seats and control of Senate
Lost 52 seats and control of House
Newt Gingrich becomes
first GOP Speaker since 1954

GOP wins majority of Southern seats in both

chambers for first time since Reconstruction
 The Case of 1974

1974 Ford 54% approval

Lost 48 House and 5 Senate
(GOP already in minority in both)

Watergate scandal hangover

Ford’s pardon of Nixon
Weak economy / Inflation / Energy crisis
Other Bad First Midterms
1966 LBJ 44% approval
Lost 47 House, 4 Senate

1946 Truman 33% approval

Lost 45 House, 12 Senate
(and control of both chambers)
 Ambiguous Midterms
1982 Reagan 42% approval
Lost 26 House, Gained 1 Senate
It seemed a setback at the time, in part because
GOP was losing from a minority base and Reagan
had been so popular in early 1981.
But given his 42% and the lingering effects of
recession, the loss was not great.
Could this be a model for 2018?
Moderate Midterm Losses
1954 Ike 61% approval
Lost 18 House (and control), 1 Senate

1978 Carter 49% approval

Lost 15 House, 3 Senate

1970 Nixon 58% approval

Lost 12 House, Gained 2 Senate
 Minimal Losses
and One Outlier (2002)
1990 GHW Bush 54%
Lost 8 House, Lost 1 Senate

1962 JFK 61%

Lost 4 House, Gained 3 Senate

2002 GW Bush 63%

Gained 8 House, 2 Senate

 PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL CONSISTENT w/ PRIOR WAVES

66
63 63

58

52

45 46
42 43
39 40

2006 2018 2014 1982 2010 1994 1978 1990 1986 2002 1998
H -30 ? -13 -26 -63 -54 -15 -8 -5 +8 +5 H
S -6 ? -9 0 -6 -9 -2 +1 -8 +1 0 S
Chamber lost Already in minority Chamber gained 4
 2018: Trump Approval
 Presidents under 50%
had brutal midterm losses
LBJ / Ford / Carter / Clinton ‘94 /
Bush ‘06 / Obama 2x
Historic average 36 House seats
lost when President under 50%
 2018: Trump Approval

 Rasmussen always > 45%

 YouGov around mid-40s
 Gallup & Quinn & WP/ABC <40%
 RealClearPolitics average = 41%
 538.com average = 40%
2018: Trump Approval
Danger sign for GOP:
“Strongly Disapprove”
beats
“Strongly Approve”
by nearly 2-1
 What Might
Save the GOP House?
(Democrats “gerrymander”
where they can,
they just control far fewer states.)

Bottom Line:
GOP gets bigger impact per vote.
 2018 House:
Still GOP’s Map

GOP has controlled redistricting

in most states since the 2010 census.
GOP maps build on the existing
concentration of minority vote in cities
 Historical Note
on Midterm Losses

GOP usually tends to

suffer less in midterms
than Democrats when
they are the party
in White House
 Midterm Losses by the
President’s Party (House)
2018 Year of the Woman?

 House: 476 filed to run vs. 298 previous

record; 251 are still running

 Senate: 53 women filed to run vs. 340

old record; 26 are still running

 Governorships: 61 women filed to run

vs. 34 old record; 18 are still running

Center for Congressional

and Presidential Studies
www.american.edu/ccps
 2018 Year of the Woman?
 Women more than men have reacted
negatively to the election of Trump providing
energy behind many candidates
 66 percent of women said they disapprove of
Trump’s performance
 White college educated women are a key part
of the Democratic coalition (only 23 percent of
college educated women approve of Trump’s
performance)
 Partisan Trends by Education

College grads = 37% all registered voters

Majority of them (58%) Dem or “lean Dem”
Only 36% identify with or lean to GOP
But voters with no college = clear majority
Nearly half (47%) identify as or lean to GOP
Up from 42% in 2014
 The Profile of the U.S.
Voter is Changing

Millennials are already

the biggest generation in
the U.S. workforce and will be
the largest among voters by 2020.
 The Profile of the U.S.
Voter is Changing
Younger voters do not vote

Younger voters differ from older on:

LGBTQ rights and policy

Gun laws and gun violence
Abortion
 The Profile of the U.S.
Voter is Changing
The share of U.S. vote cast
by all people of color
has been rising by about
2 percentage points
in each presidential cycle
from 11% in 1980
to nearly 30% in 2012
 The Profile of the U.S.
Voter is Changing
There are 50,000 Hispanic youth
turning 18 every month in the U.S.
counting only the ones born here.

POC could cast one third

of the total U.S. vote by 2024.
 BUT, BUT, BUT… IT’S ALL ABOUT TURNOUT

% Absolutely Certain They Will Vote

TRADITIONAL DEM TRADITIONAL GOP
CONSTITUENCIES CONSTITUENCIES
Afr. Am. Hispanics 18-29 Dems Whites 50-64 65+ Reps
66% 27% 26% 63% 65% 69% 82% 65%
Source: Gallup, Sept. 28

Source: Washington Post, Sept. 25, 2018 9

PARTIES GETTING WEAKER, ROBBER BARONS STRONGER
Record Outside Spending in a Midterm Election
$1,000.0 $1.17B
Thru Sept. 29 After Sept. 29 projected
Historically 33% of total Historically 67% of total
$900.0

$800.0

$700.0

$600.0
$566.1M

$500.0

$400.0 $385.1M
$309.8M
$300.0

$200.0

$100.0
$69.5M
$15.2M $27.6M
$7.3M $9.5M
$-

1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018

 What happens
in in the lame duck session, 2020
and beyond?
 #3. WHAT REMAINS FOR THE 115TH CONGRESS?
Battles Over Wall-Funding & Nominees Likely

1. Funding Government Past 12/7

Continuing resolution expires
Pres. Trump may veto spending
bill that fails to significantly fund
border wall.

2. 154 Nominees awaiting Senate Confirmation (on Executive Calendar)

3. Farm Bill / Food Assistance (SNAP)

4. Intelligence Reauthorization 8. IRS Reforms

5. Nat’l Flood Insurance Program 9. Election Security

6. Higher Education Act 10. Violence Against Women Act

7. Tax Extenders & Technical corrections ** Opioids & WRDA Bills

(expected to pass pre-election)

Source: Senate Executive Calendar, pending civilian nominations

14
 MAJOR TURNOVER IN COMMITTEE LEADERSHIP
Term Limits & Retirements Guarantee Changes, Others May Lose
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
# Departing
House Chairs 6 1 2 2 3 2 5 7 4 2 5 3 2 8 3 5 2 4 3 10

HOUSE COMMITTEES WITH NEW SENATE COMMITTEES WITH NEW

CHAIRS / RANKING MEMBERS CHAIRS / RANKING MEMBERS
Administration Commerce, Science & Transportation
Appropriations Commerce, Science & Transportation
Financial Services Energy & Natural Resources
Foreign Affairs Finance
Homeland Security Foreign Relations
Judiciary Homeland Security
Oversight & Government Reform
Space, Science & Technology
Small Business
Transportation & Infrastructure
Veterans’ Affairs

Italics = Toss Up race

19
 Post 2018 Election Politics

 Little consensus about problems and threat:

e.g. Trade Policy, Deficit-Debt, Health
Care, Immigration…Polarization/Gridlock
 Little consensus about solutions to problems
 Parties and Strong interest groups disagree
about problems and solutions
 Limits on resources, large deficits/debt
 Micro politics (Individualism) & pluralist
subsystems will dominate unless Crisis
 2018 Election and Continued Decay of
Trump’s core of political authority. Center for Congressional
and Presidential Studies
www.american.edu/ccps
 Congress Post 2018
Problems?
 Money: permanent campaign and constant
fundraising
 Maps: redistricting to safe-political
gerrymandering-missing
middle=polarization
 Media: local newspapers and TV stations have
withered-social media and partisan echo
chambers
 Mingling: lack of collaboration and personal
interaction-TuTh Club Center for Congressional
and Presidential Studies
www.american.edu/ccps
Questions?

Comments?

Center for Congressional and

Presidential Studies
www.american.edu/ccps