“No serious political analyst has ever suggested that as the 6th Congressional district goes, so goes the country.”
With Republican Karen Handel defeating Democrat Jon Ossoff for the 6th Congressional district seat last night, a sober assessment of the race itself—as opposed to the frequently hysterical post-election coverage—is in order. In the past, the spinning of results used to be the purview of party operatives; now, spinning seems to be a requirement for journalists at major media outlets desperate to drive traffic to their websites to sell advertising. As the press overhypes the results of this race to draw in their audience, there are several issues that should be presented to properly frame the election results for meaningful consideration. First are the misconceptions journalists have used to make this race far more spectacular than it really is:
The Trump Referendum. The race was not about President Donald Trump for the voters in Georgia’s 6th Congressional district. It has been widely reported that both candidates consciously avoided discussing the president in the final month or more of the campaign. The Democratic National Committee did brilliantly paint this race as “Ossoff versus Trump,” which drove staggering amounts of donations into Ossoff’s coffers. For actual voters, though, Trump was not a topic of discussion from the candidates.
Neither Side is in Trouble. No serious political analyst has ever suggested that as the 6th Congressional district goes, so goes the country. When you outspend your opponent approximately four to one, you can expect to have a closer race than usual. Republicans won a district they were supposed to win. Ossoff is completely inexperienced and didn’t even live in the 6th. Ossoff’s only experience was working in Washington, D.C. for five years after graduating from Georgetown University. While he was working for a Georgia Congressman, that hardly makes him a boiled peanut-buying local. Republican Handel has lived in the 6th Congressional for 25 years, by comparison.
The Centrist Message Didn’t Work, and Dems Need to Veer Further Left. Ossoff was clear that he opposed any tax increases and was against an attempt at a single-payer healthcare system. An inexperienced candidate in a red district used a centrist message and deep pockets to get the best showing in that district in decades. Ossoff moved away from a hard-core Progressive message because it is highly likely his polling, which he spent a lot of money to procure, told him that is what would work. Ossoff did what most smart politicians do in campaigns—he threw red meat to the party faithful for donations at the start of campaign and later moved center to win over undecideds.
There are some important takeaways worthy of consideration:
The Democrats are Fundraising Effectively. While the race was not about Trump in the Georgia 6th, for many people outside of Georgia, it was. The Democrats raised a staggering sum of money for a candidate whose platform could pass as Republican in a deep blue state. If Democrats would open their wallets to donate to a candidate campaigning against core issues they believe in, it shows that the Trump “bogeyman” is a powerful tool to mobilize resources.
Republicans Should Beware Democratic Turnout in the Upcoming Off-Year Elections. The Democrats should never have gotten as close as they did. The turnout was exceptionally high in a district where Republicans are believed to outnumber Democrats. (The State of Georgia does not track voter party as part of registration, so it is impossible to be sure other than by looking at past elections.) Republicans will have to get the “Reluctant Trump” wing of the party fired up to stave off a very dedicated Democratic base in the mid-term elections.
The Democrats Have an Asymmetric Advantage as the Minority Party. For the Dems, a tie is a win; for the GOP, it is a loss. The Republicans have to deliver on the promises made by the Trump campaign, with tangible results, before the mid-terms. The Democrats can simply obstruct and call the stifling of the Republican agenda a win that energizes their base. Clare Malone of FiveThirtyEight assesses that reluctant Trump voters make up 7% of the total that supported the president. In close races, the defection of half that bloc could spell doom for many Republican candidates.
You can sum up the 6th Congressional Special Election simply—an inexperienced Democratic outsider lost to a career politician in a district that consistently votes Republican. There was an extraordinary amount for fundraising, which speaks to a very formidable challenge to the GOP in future elections if Democrats can sustain this sort of excitement to oust President Trump. All the other analyses? They’re designed to make you click ads on websites by frightening or exciting you, depending on your party affiliation.
