Election Lessons

Although the results overall were disappointing, the two Congressional Democrats representing Tucson appear to have survived the barrage of lies aimed at them by special interests. Now that most of the “early” ballots have been verified and counted, both will be returning to Washington. Having weathered the Republican wave, the two Democrats should be recognized nationally (and not just by Keith Olbermann) as truly understanding the concerns of their constituents in southern Arizona. Their expert opinions would provide a counterpoint to the fear and hate that has prevailed in discussions of border issues.

My representative, Gabrielle Giffords, should give some of the credit for her victory to the presence in the race of Libertarian candidate Steven Stoltz, who took about four percent of the total votes. I enjoyed listening to Mr. Stoltz during the debates as he gave calm, concise explanations of the Libertarian positions on the issues. Although I disagree with him on many of those issues, I sometimes found myself nodding in agreement. As best as I can comprehend it, the Tea Party is an awkward marriage of Libertarians and Social Conservatives. Congresswoman Giffords managed to remind at least some of the true Libertarians that they had an option other than the Republican/Tea Party. Pundits are mistaken when they attribute the abating of the Republican wave as it moved west solely to the Hispanic vote. It's also due to the Libertarian streak in the West.

Much has been made of those McCain districts (districts carried by the Republican presidential candidate two years ago) where a Democratic congressional incumbent was running for re-election this year. A few of those incumbent Democrats survived, including Congresswoman Giffords. Two other survivors are in western Pennsylvania, where I grew up, in the middle of the Lake-Effect-Snow Belt (or as Chris Matthews is describing it, the Scranton-to-Oshkosh Belt). In contrast to the West, back in Pennsylvania I don't remember ever hearing about Libertarians. The voters who Democrats need to win back back there could be described as “anti-Libertarian”—conservative on social issues while keeping the faith in public investment. It is a very different situation from the West.

Some, including Chris Matthews, have been discussing what it will take for Democrats to win back voters in the Scranton-Oshkosh Belt. So far the discussion has focused on economic issues. But I think that Democrats also need to understand, and respond to how issues are framed. (See George Lakoff's discussion of framing in the recent election on Huffington Post, along with the comments to Lakoff's post by “Ricktay” and “Olampean.”) Back when the hearings were just starting, Health Care Reform was already being demonized from a variety of perspectives. I'm familiar with a few of the groups who spread Republican propaganda masquerading as advocacy on behalf of the interests of those groups. Paradoxically, that advocacy has harmed the group interests. (For example, see this analysis, A Middling Perspective: Catholic Election Losses?, in the November 3 Common Good Forum at the web site for Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good.) Democrats need to reach swing voters in those groups and remind them that the Republican agenda puts their interests at the bottom of the list of priorities while the policies that they abhor are at the top of the Republican list.