The Magnitude of
Democratic Spin over Florida 13
Now that the dust has settled on the Florida 13 special
election, let me offer a few thoughts on the deceptive spins placed on the
results by each Party.
I will start with the Republicans because there is far
less to criticize. Many on the right
have been crowing that a GOP victory came despite the fact that Democratic
challenger Alex Sink outraised/outspent the eventual Republican victor David
Jolly by a 4:1 margin. They argue this demonstrates
the extreme toxicity of Obamacare against Democratic candidates.
Republican victor
David Jolly (left),
Democratic
challenger Alex Sink (right)
|
It is true that Sink outraised Jolly by the substantial
margin cited. However, money raised is
not equivalent to money spent and the 4:1 ratio ignores the obscene gobs of
outside money poured into this election by PACs and other special interest
groups, both left and right. It is disingenuous
to pretend the campaign ads paid for by this money were any less effective
influencing voters.
Outside Republican interests slightly outspent their
Democratic counterparts. According to
the Tampa Bay Times, the final count
was approximately $4.65 million by Democrats over $3.57 million by
Republicans. This is still a hefty advantage
but translates to a ratio of more like 1.3 to 1 – a far less overwhelming deficit
to have overcome than advertised.
However, this little white lie pales in comparison to the
fog of obfuscation generated by Democrats over the (non-)role played by
Obamacare in the race. Sure, they
concede, it was disappointing to lose a House race in a district that has been
friendly toward President Obama in the last two Presidential elections. And, yes, Republicans used the Affordable
Care Act (ACA) as a single overriding issue.
However, turnout was light and the margin relatively close. Rather than an indictment of Obamacare, it
was a failure to turn out the Democratic base in a non-national election year.
Sink did not run away from health-care reform. Instead, she embraced it as a good idea that
needed changes to work better rather than a disaster necessitating repeal. Democrats can cite numerous polls to suggest
this is a solid strategy heading into November.
A recent CNN
poll found only thirty-nine percent of Americans favor the ACA law, while fifty-seven
percent oppose it. Yet only thirty-nine
percent oppose the law because it’s “too liberal,” while twelve percent say it “isn’t
liberal enough.” This translates to an
advantage of fifty-one percent among those who wish to keep the law, with
varying types/degrees of tweaks, as opposed to forty-five percent favoring
outright repeal. A CBS News poll from January confirms those numbers, with fifty-six
percent supporting the law with changes versus thirty-four percent calling for
complete repeal.
It all sounds warm and comforting until we consider that
the November midterms were always going to be harsher ground for Democrats than
Florida 13. Simply through random issues
of timing, a majority of the House races and virtually all of the Senate races this
year are in districts where Obama is highly unpopular – before, during, and
after the botched rollouts of the ACA website and exchanges.
It does not matter if Obamacare is less toxic than
Republicans hoped it might be nationally.
It well may be toxic enough in the places where it counts to sweep away
reasonable Democratic arguments with right-wing partisan fervor. There are polls with ominous warnings for
Democrats.
A March Bloomberg
poll shows seventy-three percent of those favoring repeal say a candidate’s
position on Obamacare will be a “major” decider of their vote, compared with only
forty-five percent of those who support
modifications and thirty-three percent of those who back the law as is. Likewise, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News
poll shows that forty-seven percent of voters say they would be more likely to
vote for a candidate who supports repeal compared to thirty-two percent who say
they are less likely. In contract,
voters are about evenly split over candidates who support keeping and fixing
the health-care law.
Suddenly the turnout problem becomes more knotty for
Democrats. They must maximize enthusiasm
for the law where little exists and where enthusiasm for repeal is already
maximized/maximizing.
There is evidence for growing acceptance of the ACA among
all facets of the electorate, even as approval for it remains stagnant. Democrats
had been hoping against hope this acceptance could be parlayed into a midterm
elections strategy that might not only hold their Senate advantage but gain
them seats in the House. The Florida 13
race suggests this strategy is not practicable.
True, a big victory this year might cause Republicans to overestimate the mandate they have been given as regards ACA repeal. This, is turn, could result in a backlash that will benefit Democrats in the 2016 Presidential election. However, this year looks very bleak for Democrats and all the whitewash in the world will not make it brighter. If Democrats don’t see that and start preparing for it, then they are telling the most toxic lie possible politically – they are lying to themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment