A lot of people have already commented on the results of yesterday’s closely-watched races, and I pretty much agree with them: the election results are not a referendum on Obama or Democrats by any means, but they should certainly make elected Democrats think long and hard about what they are doing in Congress. If they don’t get with the program, 2010 will end up be a pretty big disaster.
Voters go out and vote for a candidate for one of two reasons: either to vote against something, or to vote for something. Failing to pay attention to those two motivators can get you into a lot of trouble; conversely, tapping into them can lead to great benefits. Last year’s election went so well for Democrats because they were able to tap into both simultaneously: voters were voting against the terribly unpopular Bush administration, and at the same time voting for a charismatic, intelligent, popular candidate who would make history. On the Republican side, the motivators were much weaker. Few people really got excited about voting for McCain (which is why he gambled and picked Sarah Palin), and although Republicans tried to make the 2008 elections about voting against Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, it just wasn’t gaining any traction. Little surprise, then, how election night turned out.
Now, however, the situation has changed. Democrats control the White House and Congress, so Democratic voters can’t really be motivated to vote against the status quo. On the other hand, Republicans (especially conservatives and “teabaggers”) are incredibly fired up to vote against Obama and Congressional Democrats. This leads to a huge motivation gap, best evidenced last night in the race for governor in Virginia. Consequently, the only way that Democrats can motivate their base to turn out to vote in 2010 so they can battle on a somewhat-even footing with Republicans is to give them something to vote for.
Not every candidate can be a Barack Obama, so mere personality isn’t going to cut it. Thus, Democrats have to deliver on an agenda. Voters have to feel that by voting for Democrats, elected Democrats will deliver on important issues. So far, they have been unable to do that. Health care is just the most obvious example, but there are plenty to go around: TARP, Guantanamo, climate change, financial regulation, Obama’s continuing reliance on Bush-era “state secrets”, and so on. DADT and gay marriage are two more big ones, especially considering what happened in Maine yesterday: Obama wasn’t willing to expend any capital on the ballot in Maine, so why should people in favor of GLBT rights expend energy on Democrats?
The situation is this: there are millions of Democratic voters out there who worked their asses off in 2006 and 2008 to elect Democrats. They did, and as a result Democrats have control of Congress. The voters did their part, and if members of Congress can’t fulfill their end of the bargain and actually start passing laws they were sent there to pass, then those voters are not going to show up in 2010. Why bother electing Democrats if Harry Reid and Max Baucus can allow Republicans to stall health care for months at a time?
Republicans rarely had a problem with delivering red meat to their base to give their voters a reason to vote for them. Unless Democrats realize, and realize quickly, that they need to get some serious work done on their agenda in the next year, 2010 won’t be pretty.