Month: January 2018

President Trump didn’t respond to the so-called shutdown of the federal government in the way that the political class thought he should. He didn’t get personally involved in detailed negotiations to end the impasse and didn’t convey a sense of crisis to the American people.

When all was said and done, this skirmish showed the dangers of underestimating President Trump and his ability to connect with voters on issues the political elites ignore.  His approach worked because he instinctively understood the strategic situation far better than Senate Democrats, establishment Republicans, and his other beltway critics.

First, the president recognized that the term “shutdown” is a dramatic overstatement of what really was going on. It’s true that the budget dispute created stress for government employees who were to be furloughed, but the overwhelming majority of government services continued uninterrupted. In fact, outside of the DC area, nobody really noticed any impact.

If you “shut down the government” and nobody notices, that creates far bigger ideological problems for Democrats than Republicans. So, the president directed his Administration to minimize the impact of Congressional dysfunction on the American people.

Second, the president understood that the fate of the Dreamers is only one part of a much larger immigration issue. As Clinton pollster Mark Penn has noted, the American people want an immigration deal that protects the Dreamers but also includes serious border security measures. Voters reject the open border policy espoused by many Democrats.

If Chuck Schumer’s party wants to protect the Dreamers, all they have to do is accept a border wall and other security measures. If they don’t, the president will happily bring the dispute to voters in November and the Republicans will likely pick up a few Senate seats.

President Trump also understood the appeal of fighting back against politics as usual. Republican voters have varying degrees of discomfort with President Trump’s demeanor, but they love it when he fights the media and the political class.

Rather than cowering and seeking to appease the Washington Post and New York Times, the president brashly blamed the Democrats for whatever problems resulted. That attitude is something many Republican and independent voters can applaud. In practical terms, it’s likely to increase GOP enthusiasm as Election Day approaches.

I am not suggesting that President Trump has suddenly become popular with the American people. His approval ratings have rebounded a bit but remain low by historical standards. It is hard to imagine them moving significantly higher by November.

But it’s important to remember that most voters had an unfavorable view of the president on the day they elected him. A significant number didn’t believe he was qualified to be president but still thought he was preferable to Hillary Clinton.

That reality should haunt Democrats in the wake of the “shutdown” debacle. President Trump, deal maker in chief, broke all the political class rules about how to handle the situation. And, in so doing, he highlighted some of the least attractive features of his opponents’ position. If he is able to keep it up, the Democrats may be at risk of once again making Republicans the lesser of two evils.

It’s normal for the party out of power to gain ground in a midterm election. The big question in 2018 is whether the Democrats will gain enough ground to win a majority in the House of Representatives.

While the political winds currently favor the Democrats, 390 of the 435 House races are pretty well locked in for one party or the other. Only 45 races are even somewhat competitive.

Still, a race by race analysis on ScottRasmussen.com suggests that a normal midterm gain would get the Democrats very close to their goal.

The starting point is 187 races that are rated as either Strong or Likely Democratic and nine more tilting or leaning in that direction. With decent midterm turnout, the Democrats would win all of these races bringing their total to 196.

With a good midterm turnout, the Democrats could also win just about all of the toss-ups or races currently just tilting in the GOP direction. These are races like the open seat contest in Washington’s 8^th Congressional District. Republican incumbent Dave Reichert opted out of a re-election battle in a District where Hillary Clinton attracted more votes than Donald Trump. Barack Obama also carried the District in both 2008 and 2012.

While nothing is certain in politics, Washington-08 is the type of race Democrats should expect to win with a good mid-term performance. At ScottRasmussen.com, we place 17 races in this category. Winning them all would get the Democrats to 213 seats, still five votes short of a majority. To get over the top, the current minority party will need an electoral wave that washes out some seats that would remain in GOP hands during a normal election cycle.

At ScottRasmussen.com, we’ve identified 19 races that currently Lean Republican but could be at risk in a wave election. That means the best way to tell if a wave is coming is to follow these 19 races. If the Democrats do well in these campaigns, they will have a very good chance of winning a Congressional majority. On the other hand, if the GOP can solidify its position in these races, there will be no wave and the Republicans will preserve a narrow majority.

The nineteen wave watch districts are California-45 (Mimi Walters), Georgia-6 (Karen Handel), Illinois-6 (Peter Roskam), Illinois-12 (Michael Bost), Iowa-1 (Rodney Blum), Iowa-3 (David Young), Kansas-2 (Open), Kansas-3 (Open), Kentucky-6 (Garland Barr), Maine-2 (Bruce Poliquin), Minnesota-3 (Erik Paulsen), Michigan-8 (Mike Bishop), New Jersey-7 (Leonard Lance), New Jersey-11 (Rodney Frelinghuysen), Pennsylvania-7 (Patrick Meehan), Pennsylvania-8 (Brian Fitzpatrick), Pennsylvania-15 (Open), and Utah-4 (Mia Love).

Geographically, many of these districts should be friendly to Democratic challengers. Hillary Clinton won seven of the 19 districts and came very close in five more. Additionally, ten of the nineteen are from states Clinton won in her presidential bid. Four others are from Pennsylvania, a state that the president carried by less than a percentage point in 2016.

Obviously, it’s very early in the campaign season and a lot can change by November. But the Democratic path to a Congressional majority must almost certainly pass through these 19 Congressional Districts.

President Trump has perfected the art of antagonizing his opponents with provocative tweets. He demonstrated this skill recently in declaring that the tax reform act, by repealing the Obamacare mandate, had effectively repealed Obamacare.

This generated a number of stories from left leaning pundits pointing out that there’s a lot more to Obamacare than the mandate. Sarah Kliff, writing for Vox.com, noted that many Republican voters believed the president and hoped that would bring an end to efforts to undo the rest of Obamacare.

But, many Republicans in Congress seem intent on continuing to fight for repeal of the controversial law. A skeptical report in The Hill noted that the GOP had tried and failed to accomplish that goal in 2017. In their view, “nothing significant has changed since then that would now make the path easier. In fact, the obstacles appear even greater now that Democrat Doug Jones has been elected to the Senate from Alabama.”

It’s true that there is more to Obamacare than the mandate. It’s also true that, in a purely political sense, there’s little reason to believe that Republicans will be able to repeal Obamacare in 2018.

But the repeal of the Obamacare mandate fundamentally changes the political dynamics in the real world far from Washington, DC.

Last year, an estimated 15 million Americans would have dropped out of Obamacare if they could. Now they can. Another 6.5 million paid a fine rather than sign up for coverage. This means that more than 20 million people directly benefit from the repeal of the mandate.

Most of these people would prefer to buy insurance that meets their needs, but the Obamacare mandate did more than say that people had to buy insurance. It said they had to buy a very comprehensive and expensive set of benefits. Especially for young people, it was often far more insurance than they needed and far more costly than they could afford.

The reality is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to health insurance. Different people have different needs and preferences.

This reality will create a demand for a variety of insurance options to meet a variety of needs. Some people will prefer more comprehensive coverage and higher premiums. Others will opt for less coverage and lower premiums. All will be covered against catastrophic events but day to day coverage will vary.

Sooner or later, Congress will begin offering ideas to meet this demand. One proposal introduced last year would allow insurance companies to offer a variety of options so long as they offered at least one plan with the full Obamacare coverage. Once those plans are available, they will find plenty of eager buyers.

As younger Americans consider the alternatives, they will certainly take advantage of the fact that we live in an era of rapid technological innovation. Self-monitoring of their own health is leading millions to make better lifestyle choices. The ability to conduct EKG’s on your smartphone is already here and soon people will be taking x-rays on the mobile devices.

Whether or not these innovations technically repeal all of Obamacare is really beside the point. They will accomplish something far more important—bringing down the cost of health care while improving the health of the nation.