It's their own damn fault if the GOP loses in November
If Republicans and Democrats were coming to the table in November as equally heavy hitters, my money would easily be on the GOP to clean house in D.C. But that’s not what we have.
The other week, as I was scrolling through my RSS newsfeed, I came across a post from a well-respected Pennsylvania-based politics news site. This post discussed the dozens of bipartisan endorsements being touted by three-term GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, who — like his late brother, Mike — is one of the most pragmatic legislators ever to represent SEPA in Congress.
We’re not talking about small-potatoes endorsements, either: Among the 30+ endorsements mentioned were more than a dozen major unions, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Fraternal Order of Police, AND several gun control groups.
It got me thinking because, well, you don’t see these types of organizations coalescing around a single candidate or cause that often in 2024. Both Fitzpatrick brothers — like many of their colleagues in the Problem Solvers Caucus, or the once-powerful Main Street Caucus and Blue Dog Coalition — appear to be a dying breed in Washington, as ideologue and authoritarianism reign superior at the expense of policy and pragmatism.
But is that really what the American people want? Even with the summer shakeup created by President Joe Biden’s departure from the Democratic ticket, former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris remain neck-and-neck with just a couple of weeks to go before Early Voting begins.
The facts are simple: Voters are unhappy with the status quo. Voters do not like the direction the United States is headed in. Voters want change and WILL vote for that change in November. What is up for debate — and what is left to be determined over these next seven weeks is what that change will look like and who will lead it come January.
I mean really, does anyone actually think that Liz & Dick Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Geoff Duncan, and the myriad of other former GOP officials who’ve endorsed Harris this cycle believe they support her based on the policies she espouses?
Instead, look at the fight that the former Wyoming Congresswoman chose to pick with Nikki Haley over the former South Carolina governor’s endorsement of Trump:
As CNN’s roundtable put it so astutely, the former GOP presidential candidate is taking the cautious road here — endorsing but not actively campaigning for Trump — so she has some cover no matter the outcome of November’s election. If Trump wins, she will still seen favorably by the party, whereas if he loses, Haley can’t take the blame for the result and can be part of the party’s rebuild moving forward.
If Republicans and Democrats were coming to the table for November’s election as equally heavy hitters, my money would easily be on the Grand Old Party to clean house in D.C. this fall. But that’s not what we have.
Yes, a majority of voters may agree more with Trump (i.e. Republicans) on the issues this cycle. And yes, at the end of the day, issues and policy may be the most important thing that drives voters to the polls every cycle.
But there’s a reason so many Republicans are refusing to vote for Trump (or not voting for POTUS at all, like former GOP Senator Pat Toomey from my home commonwealth of Pennsylvania). And it’s those intangible things that are not only making this a much closer race than it has any business being but could potentially lead to Harris in the Oval Office on January 20th.
For the sake of argument, and to avoid writing an entire tome here, I’m going to skip over candidate quality for now. I think that’s been discussed enough — both by me in my past posts and by others. But that’s not the only advantage Democrats have in their pocket this cycle.
Let’s start with the financial one: In the two months since Kamala Harris replaced Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee for president, fundraising up and down the party ticket has skyrocketed. Democrats currently hold a 3:1 advantage over their Republican counterparts in terms of fundraising headed into the fall, something that will help them dearly with churning out the early & absentee vote. Harris’ fundraising efforts have been so strong that she was already able to transfer nearly $25 million from her campaign fund to the DSCC, DCCC, DLCC, and other state-party organizations to help with down-ballot efforts.
We may not be living in the days of party bosses anymore, but when candidates up and down the ticket still rely upon the party for the bulk of their operational and voter contact resources, that $25 million could make a difference in a state-level race on Election Day.
On the contrary, Republicans decided to take up a different approach this cycle — and it’s very likely to be their downfall regardless of who opposed Trump on the ballot. This brings me to the second — and probably biggest advantage — Democrats have going for them this cycle: centralized party organization at all levels (state, local, national) this fall.
Upon taking over the leadership of the Republican National Committee this past spring, Trump (and his daughter-in-law, Lara) scrapped the committee’s lauded voter contact departments (grassroots, political/communications, and data/research), arguing that this outreach could be better managed and funded by super PACs. This move came after a March advisory by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) effectively allowing campaigns and outside groups to collaborate more on voter turnout efforts in federal races.
The issue with this is two-fold: First, as 501[c]4 organizations, these groups cannot campaign directly for specific candidates (aka Trump), but rather for specific causes (such as abortion bans or conservative leadership in Washington, D.C.). Thus, many down-ticket candidates who would normally rely on the RNC and its state-level affiliates for institutional support with their grassroots and voter outreach programs will likely not get as much support this year — a difference that could be make-or-break in some marginal races.
Secondly, all of these groups — including but not limited to America PAC, Turnout for America, Turning Point Action, and America First Works — are private organizations that are ultimately beholden to their donors before that of the GOP and its affiliated candidates. It’s free market competition at its finest, ladies and gents!
Because they’ve yet to sustainably coordinate with one another, let alone Trump and the RNC, there’ve been multiple situations reported where the groups have duplicated efforts among targeted voters and/or prioritized certain pockets of the voting electorate — such as low-propensity rural voters — over others that the RNC/party leadership would rather they contact (i.e. swing-state suburban voters).
The GOP then (perhaps unsurprisingly, given the events of the last few years) funneled much of the money it saved by not mounting a sizable voter contact program into building out a massive voter integrity and election information program — ensuring that if Trump wins or loses in November, it was done legally. They would have been better off integrating with (or building their own version of) a voter contact system like Buzz360 if they wanted to ensure victory for all GOP candidates both in November and in elections to come.
Meanwhile, things are status quo at the Democratic National Committee, and down-ticket Democratic candidates aren’t struggling to mount a last-ditch voter contact program the same way their GOP counterparts are.
I don’t know about you, but it’s gonna be one heck of an autopsy this winter if the answer for the GOP’s defeats all comes back to this.