WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This midterm election is about atmosphere.
It is about how the voters feel. Objective considerations have been fading
from electoral politics for a long time. Precisely why that is I cannot say
in my allotted 800 or so words here, but atmosphere transcends objective
considerations nowadays in politics. This might be because today's
politicians are better seducers than in the past. Whatever the reason,
politicians now play more to voters' "feelings" than to their objective
conditions.
In the 1992 presidential race, the political wizard of the hour
played upon the voters' feeling that the economy was in a dreadful state,
though it had already emerged from a mild and brief recession. He played on
the voters' yearning for "change" and invoked the term metronomically like a
preacher at a country revival. Objective conditions did not matter. He won,
beating a far more distinguished public servant and replacing good
government, prosperity and peace with what has come to be known as the
Clinton Scandals.
So it is today. Atmosphere matters more than objective
conditions. Thus the party leaders' optimism waxes and wanes, for over the
past few months the country's mood has been changeable. A few weeks back,
the Republicans anticipated winning both houses of Congress on Nov. 5. Then
the Democrats were in a state of frustrated confusion. Now both parties are
pessimistic. It all has to do with the mood of the country, and the party
leaders are uncertain as to that mood.
Historically speaking, the Democrats should be buoyant. The
Republicans should be in mulligrubs. Owing to the presence of a Republican
in the White House, this midterm election ought to be in the bag for the
Democrats. They should be confident of picking up a seat or two in the
Senate and enough in the House to grain control of it -- they need to pick
up just six seats.
In the last century, on only three occasions has the president's
party gained congressional seats during his first midterm election. Yet the
Democrats and the Republicans are both in doubt of their chances. The
Washington Prowler, my favorite political source who reports regularly
online at theamericanprowler.org, says Republican Senate staffers are not
expecting to move up into the leadership and some are expecting to see
themselves and their bosses unemployed. The Democrats are bluer still,
feeling frustrated that they have not presented a resonant national message
to the electorate.
The real reason they will not take the House and may lose the
Senate is, as I say, "atmospherics." The Democrats' inability to make the
economy an issue reflects the essential good sense of the American
electorate. The economy is not as bad as Democrats have claimed. Despite the
costs of Sept. 11, the corporate corruption (which is clearly not the
Republicans' doing) and the burden on the federal budget of gearing up for
war, the economy has done OK. It has not gone into recession and is in fact
growing, probably at better than 4 percent in the last quarter. Thus the
Democrats' hope of a return to a 1992 yearning for "change" has not been
reprised.
The atmospherics are not working for the Democrats. They are
working for the Republicans. That is because the threat against America
posed by Sept. 11 and the administration's focus on Iraq's potential for
mass destruction have provoked an instinct fundamental to Americans: the
instinct for vigilance. Americans feel the first order of business is to
protect the nation, and that means they will stand by the president and his
party. They will return a Republican majority in the House and may by one
vote tip the balance toward the Republicans in the Senate.
The Washington sniper's brutality has heightened the American
instinct for vigilance. Voters want action taken. This, too, favors the
president's party. The Senate will be decided in Arkansas, Colorado,
Georgia, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, South Dakota and Texas. With
the exception perhaps of Minnesota, all of those states are states where the
instinct for vigilance is high. Right now, the polls suggests a wash, with
Republicans and Democrats returning to the Senate in the same numbers as in
the last Senate, though with different states. My hunch is that enough seats
will actually go to the Republicans to give them a one-seat majority in the
Senate. The reason is American concern for security. It all depends on the
atmospherics, and I say the mood will favor the Republicans with majorities
in both houses.
Notebook