It’s tempting to explain Republicans’ resounding victory in last
night’s midterm elections simply as a rebuke of liberal overreach
and an outcry for conservative governance.
Barack Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress were swept
into power on an abstract message of change, yet they took their
victories as a mandate to aggressively impose their liberal vision
on America. Having been reminded what liberalism looks like, the
American people delivered a major thumpin’ to Democrats.
While that storyline may help explain part of what happened last
night, it risks being short-sighted. Lest we forget that after
2004, when President Bush was reelected and Republicans gained
seats, there was talk of a permanent GOP majority and of a need for
Democrats to move back to the center if they had any hope of
remaining relevant. Instead, Democrats moved to the left, and over
the course of the next two elections, took back Congress and the
White House, even attaining a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in
the Senate.
At the start of Obama’s term, he had a 67 percent approval
rating, and pundits warned that Republicans would confine
themselves to political oblivion if they pursued a policy of
obstructionism. Yet this election season, Democrats who voted with
their party leadership were massacred at the polls, while
Republican candidates nationwide confidently touted their
opposition to the Obama agenda.
The American public didn’t go from being socialists to Reaganite
conservatives in the past two years, any more than their ideology
radically transformed from 2004 to 2006. The lesson of recent
elections, thus, may not be that the American people are right of
center, or left of center, or dead center, but that many of them
aren’t terribly ideological. This means that political power is
ephemeral. No matter how popular one party is, they could be only
one election away from embarrassing defeat. No matter how badly one
party is defeated, they could be on the verge of a historic
comeback. In this environment, reports of the demise of any
political party, at any time, are likely to be greatly
exaggerated.
One reaction to this reality is to argue that a political party
should enact as many of its policy goals as they can while in
charge. While Obama’s presidency is shaping up to be a spectacular
failure from a political perspective, he may view it as a smashing
success from a liberal ideological point of view. Instead of
squandering Democrats’ time in power by playing small ball, he went
bold.
His efforts culminated with the passage of a national health
care law, which has been a primary goal of American liberalism for
decades. Even if Republicans ultimately succeed in repealing it
(which remains an uphill battle), they will have expended so much
political capital to do so that it will inhibit their ability to
advance conservative policies.
So what does this mean for the incoming Republican majority in
the House, especially if eventually joined by a Republican Senate
and president? When Republicans controlled the House from 1995 to
2007 (and the presidency for six years of that time) they failed to
live up to conservative principles. The GOP will have to decide
whether they will act boldly and truly attempt to rein in
government while they have the chance, or play it safe. In this
sense, the true test of the Tea Party movement will be whether it
can successfully pressure Republicans to actually govern as
conservatives once in power.
Republicans were defeated in 2006 and 2008 because Americans
felt that the country was being mismanaged. And in 2010, Democrats
had to explain their vote for an $862 billion economic stimulus
package to the American people at a time of near double-digit
unemployment. The lesson any party should take from recent election
cycles is that voters will brutally punish poor governance,
regardless of ideology.
Yet as fleeting as political power may be, it can be extended if
voters believe those in charge know what they’re doing. Heading
into 2012, conservatives will have a lot of debates over which
presidential candidate is the best to challenge President Obama.
But the chief question they should be asking themselves is which
candidate, if elected, would actually be the best at being
president. Or else, even if Republicans capture the presidency in
2012 and complete their dramatic comeback, they’ll be sowing the
seeds of their next landslide defeat.
