Where are the down-ballot Republicans?

Eliminating the master lever was supposed to assist the RI Republican Party (and strengthen RI’s democracy) by assisting in one of the most important things a party needs: candidate recruitment. The problem, as it was posed, was that the prevalence of the master lever basically acted as a deterrent for potential Republican candidates for the General Assembly; why put in the effort of running if loyal Democrats, voting for president or US senator or governor at the top of the ticket, would simply pull the master lever and obliterate down-ballot Republicans? Eliminating the option would allow Republican candidates to run without fear of such occurrences, thereby assisting efforts to recruit quality candidates.

The only issue is that the candidates haven’t materialized. Here’s the graph of seats (Republicans in red, independents in grey) contested by Republicans since legislative downsizing ahead of the 2002 elections:

Graph of Seats contested by Republicans and Democrats
Sam G Howard; Sources: RI Board of Elections, RI Secretary of State

This year, Republicans will contest 40 seats in the legislature. If they won all of them, they would barely break the Democratic supermajority in the Senate, and still fail to do so in the House. Keep in mind, 40 would be about twice as many districts as they have won, ever. There are only about 20 districts across the state that Republicans have ever won. Winning 20 districts would actually make this the most successful year the Republicans have ever had since the General Assembly reached its current size in 2002.*

Simply put, the Republican candidates necessary to make their party a functioning opposition haven’t materialized. And it’s noticeable to me that Republican recruitment issues have grown worse since 2010, when a Republican wave election empowered Republicans nationwide and gave them majorities in both chambers of the U.S. Congress.

The grey line is candidates running as Independents, and the point to notice here is that they have increased the number of seats contested over time. And Independents in Rhode Island often caucus with the Republican Party in the State House (e.g., Blake Filippi) or are already Republicans (e.g., perennial Providence candidate Luis Vargas who volunteered for the RI Republican Party). Not all, mind you, but many would’ve been Republicans.

Notably, these developments (the increasing difficulty of the Republicans to recruit candidates, and the increasing number of Independents) have happened pretty much independently of the master lever’s existence.

But these are just seats. What about the number of candidates? If Republicans have only ever been competitive in about 20 districts, then this could undercount candidates in safe Republican seats.

RI GA Contested Seats and Number of Candidates
Party Seats Contested Qualified Candidates
Democratic 108 138
Republican 40 43
Independent 31 35

As you can see, Republicans did fairly well in distributing their candidates for seats; as did the Independents (more remarkable because no one is organizing them). Meanwhile, the Democrats have more than enough candidates to contest all 113 General Assembly seats, but didn’t contest five of them: House Districts 30 (Incumbent: Giarusso – R), 36 (Incumbent: Filippi – I), and 48 (Incumbent: Newberry – R) and Senate Districts 35 (Incumbent: Gee – R) and 38 (Incumbent: Algiere – R).

Democrats’ recruitment advantage continues unabated. In fact, just on the numbers, Democrats could split into three parties that could each match Republican recruitment abilities.

The problem was never going to be the master lever for Republicans. The problem remains (as it has been since 2006) their party’s toxicity to a state that overwhelmingly supports Democratic policies. And even one of the most liberal state Republican Parties can’t overcome that obstacle – especially with Donald Trump on the top of the ticket. At this point, I think Republican hopes for growing their caucus (or even keep it the same size) this election is that the commentary on RI Future here is true: Clinton really is so unpopular that liberals will stay home and they can pick up low-turnout seats. The problem is that the people who dislike Clinton tend to be Republicans, and the people who dislike her as much as Trump aren’t really that big, certain in their choice, or even likely to be Democratic partisans.

Now, am I going to say RI Republicans will be massacred this year? No. I do not have a great track record there. But looking at past presidential elections and RI GA results, I’m going to guess the Democrats should win 100 seats and Republicans should win 12 seats. In each off-year election, Democrats have picked up 96 or 95 seats, and in each presidential year election they’ve picked up 99-102 seats.

The big question for me is what effect Trump will have. RI Republican office-holders have fairly closely embraced their presidential nominee, and nominees can have an effect down the ballot even to state legislatures. Trump seems more of an anathema to the average RI voter than a generic Republican, so theoretically, he could do serious damage to what remains of the RI Republican Party since the Bush years caused the liberal Republican to go extinct.

 

 

* An earlier version of this post inadvertently implied that Republicans have never been successful in GA races, that’s obviously not the case.

Which Side of the Tent Should You Be On?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

I have been thinking about the RI GOP situation for a while. I’m one of those people who agree that it would probably be better if the Republicans were a stronger party, that they could actually threaten the Democratic agenda in the state, etc., etc. A problem, I think, is that there are plenty of people who feel this way, but simply would never vote for a Republican. And they’re not wrong to do that (despite what Republicans might say). A great number of Rhode Island voters legitimately dislike Republican policies. Believing in multiparty democracy won’t change that.

Combined with this are perpetual complaints that Rhode Island voters are too unthinkingly partisan, pulling the master lever (metaphorically) the moment they see “Democratic Party”. We also have John Loughlin pointing out that Democrats like Arthur Corvese would be Republicans in any other state; essentially saying they can’t overcome Democratic inertia in the state. Likewise, there are plenty of Democratic voters who point out that Democratic success in RI has led to more than a few Democrats-In-Name-Only. I’m sure the accused Democrats would beg to differ.

Anyhow, if the RI GOP legitimately believes this is the case, I have a proposal for the Republicans: disband and become Democrats.

By adhering to this philosophy of entryism, Republicans would achieve all of their current aims. They would gain more power by being able to ally with conservative Democrats. They would gain the ability to check Democratic policy. They would functionally remove the master lever as a political evil. Essentially, they’d make the Democratic Party a nonpartisan political party. Yes, the primary would become the election, but it pretty much has been anyway, with the battle between the left and right wings of the Democratic Party.

Who knows, they might actually get one of their own made Speaker or Senate President.

Here’s the issue at heart: do Republicans care more about their party or more about their ideals? If they care more about their party, they’ll remain Republicans, essentially declaring tribal identity superior to principles. If they care more about their principles, they’ll do what it takes to win. They’ve tried the separate party thing, and it failed.

Liberals learned the same lesson in 2000. Since that point, liberals and progressives have eschewed third party politics in favor of primary battles for control of the Democratic Party. RI Republicans could use the same tactic.

Another way to look at this is as the “Andrew Jackson” strategy. RI Republicans could be described as ascribing to a “Rhody Reagan” strategy, in which a true conservative arrives to lead them to glory. But a Jackson strategy, forcing a split within the single dominant party based on ideology might be more successful; much as Andrew Jackson did with the Democratic-Republican Party, leading to the formation of the Democratic and Whig Parties.

At the end of the day, it’s about where you’d rather be in the political world: inside the tent pissing out, or outside the tent getting pissed on.

Rhode Island Republicans Want To Lose Elections


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

After the shellacking on November 6th, political voices across the ideological spectrum called on the Republican Party of Rhode Island to adapt or die. Words like “moderate,” “women,” and “Latinos” were thrown around, often with reckless disregard for their meanings. Appeal to these voters, so the story goes, and the Republicans will regain competitiveness.

Now, maybe the Republicans can swallow their revulsion towards immigrants, slap some lipstick on that elephant, and somehow pretend they’re alright with government helping people out and not mandating what can and cannot be done in the bedroom; but I really doubt it. That’s just too much change.

Americans got the Full Monty of Republican radicalism in 2012. And they straight up rejected it. Todd Akin’s “legitimate rape” comment wasn’t something new; Republican candidates have been using pseudo-science for years to justify their positions. Same with Mitt Romney’s 47% speech. One doesn’t have to look very far to find that kind of thinking; if you don’t watch Fox News, read the comments on the Providence Journal or GoLocalProv.

The other thing is that the RI GOP has a great hatred of Rhode Island and its people. Certainly, most of their candidates tend to know better than to express that outright. But I guarantee you the nativist comments on the Journal‘s site aren’t coming from Democrats. I’ve scrolled through enough comments to know that insulting Rhode Islanders’ intelligence is probably what passes for sport among these Republican commenters. That’s if they’re not actively encourage us to flee our homes.

“Surely Sam, these are the worst elements of the Party, on a medium with virtually no filters,” you might protest. That’s probably true, I’m sure most Republicans are good-hearted folks who just want the best for everyone. But here’s the problem: I’m not seeing those good-hearted folks. I’m reading horrible words written by really terrible people. That’s the Republican Party I see every day.

Not “moderate,” “women,” or “Latinos.” As if you can compete solely on those voters. “Blacks,” “the poor,” “young people.” All won by Democrats by significant margins, but ignored by Republicans. In fact, Republican commentator Travis Rowley asserts that Republicans don’t have to appeal to any of the former types of voters at all! Latino and women voters will magically fall in line with Republican values.

Could that be more delusional? Latinos have been in this country since Texas was annexed (probably before), and the Mexican-American War added thousands more. The point being, it’s been about 170 years. And women have been voting for nearly a century. You’d think they would’ve come around by now. You’d think Republicans would be gaining their votes, not shedding them.

Perhaps so few Republicans ran in RI because they felt that competing in the democratic process was beneath them. Those filthy, stupid citizens of this state get to vote? The nerve of them!

Kidding aside, Republicans have spent years denigrating community organizers and even longer denigrating union organizers. Those people don’t sit idly by every election. They take time off, and they go work for candidates who will help them. Their jobs are to organize some of the most difficult people to organize, and/or in the most hostile of conditions. They ain’t idiots when it comes to getting people to turnout for things. But since Republicans have written off unions, and organizing in general, they wouldn’t know that organizing really does matter.

What does the party of privilege know about organizing? What does a party so hostile to the very concept understand about it? The lessons of 2008 permeated nearly every campaign for every Democratic candidate across America. Look for 2012’s lessons to likewise be applied. Democratic campaigns are going to get more sophisticated.

But there conservatives go, telling themselves it was because Mr. Romney was too moderate. Or, laughably, it was because he was “progressive”. Or Democratic “lies”. Not that the GOP is becoming increasingly unpopular and increasingly outdone on the electoral ground game.

American conservatives are starting to parallel German conservatives in the 1920s; unable to fathom their loss in World War I, they made up excuses for how the German Empire could’ve been defeated rather than re-evaluating the ideals and policies that led to that defeat. Likewise, Republicans have a handy set of excuses for their defeats, born of the alternate reality they created during the campaign, and are showing an unwillingness to re-evaluate the ideals and policies that brought them to this mess.

I don’t think the RI GOP can change. I don’t think they have it in them. I think they’re content to lose.