Skip to content Skip to footer
|

Blocking the Vote

Lackluster Democratic campaigns, coupled with vote-suppressing maneuvers, gave the GOP its edge.

Lackluster Democratic campaigns, coupled with vote-suppressing maneuvers, gave the GOP its edge.

When she heard that the GOP had nailed a Senate majority, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska grabbed a chair, lifted it over her head and shouted “I’m the chair, maaaaaaan!”

The presumptive next chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee’s victory dance symbolized the scale of the GOP’s 2014 midterm elections win.

Depending on who Alaska’s other senator will be and the outcome of Louisiana’s runoff election, the GOP could gain as many as nine new Senate seats, giving it majority control over that chamber. Democrats also surrendered at least a dozen House seats and lost more governorships than they picked up.

President Barack Obama’s low approval ratings sure didn’t help. But it took a toxic brew of crummy Democratic Party campaigns, voter suppression, and unfettered corporate campaign cash to deliver this drubbing.

In other words, as Democrats failed to rock the vote, Republicans succeeded at blocking it.

Candidates like Martha Coakley, a Democrat who won’t serve as the next governor of Massachusetts, refused to channel the dynamism of the climate movement that converged in New York City in September. And they didn’t tap into the mobilization for gun sense in the wake of the mass shooting that killed 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut and similar tragedies. That meant fewer progressive voters felt moved to show up at the polls.

“Where the hell is the Democratic Party?” former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean growled on NBC’s Meet the Press. “You’ve got to stand for something if you want to win.”

Instead of inspiring their party’s base, an alarming number of Democratic nominees took it for granted. That helps explain why many voters supported progressive ballot initiatives on everything from minimum wage increases to campaign finance limits in what otherwise looked like a Republican wave election.

But the outcome wouldn’t have been the same — and turnout might not have sunk to its lowest point since World War II — without massive new restrictions on voter registration.

“In several key races, the margin of victory came very close to the likely margin of disenfranchisement,” observes Wendy R. Weiser, Director the Brennan Center for Justice’s Democracy Program.

For years, the Republican playbook has included strewing roadblocks on the pathway to the polls. Since citizens who face economic hardship, belong to communities of color, or happen to be young tend to support Democrats, suppressing their votes has become a booming new conservative industry.

Assorted vote-suppressing tactics may have distorted the outcome of North Carolina’s close Senate race and the surprisingly close governor’s race in Kansas. They also magnified Greg Abbott’s edge over Democrat Wendy Davis in the Texas gubernatorial contest.

In Florida, Republican Governor Rick Scott — who narrowly won reelection despite an idiotic ad that compared him to an affordable wedding dress — is embroiled in a major gerrymandering case.

You see, the state’s legislature voted to cram as many black and Latino voters as possible into a few convoluted-looking congressional districts. This arrangement was designed to keep these Democratic-leaning communities from turning any of the remaining white-majority districts that keep the GOP in power blue.

When a federal judge overturned that map, Florida lawmakers returned with a similar one. Maybe things will get sorted out there by 2016.

Yet ultimately money, not Republicans, won the midterms: 94 percent of the candidates who won House races — and 82 percent of Senate winners — outspent the competition. That’s no surprise after Citizens United and related Supreme Court rulings granted corporations and wealthy individuals the ability to ladle record quantities of cash, often anonymously, into campaign coffers.

Clearly, Democrats are in trouble. Can they raise enough money by sweet-talking the rich to outspend Republicans and still manage to connect with the working-class Americans whose votes they need to win?

The answer is probably no. The Democrats who stop worrying about offending rich donors and stand up for the progressive issues Americans backed in ballot initiatives on Election Day will be better at rocking the vote.

Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn

Dear Truthout Community,

If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.

We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.

Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.

There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.

After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?

It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.

We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.

We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.

Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.

We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.

With love, rage, and solidarity,

Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy