US midterms delivered strong popular vote to the Democrats

THE Democrats’ 12.5 million midterm voter advantage over the GOP is a very strong result when measured against the outcome just two years ago, writes Dennis Atkins.

President Donald Trump listens to a question during a news conference in the East Room of the White House.

THE Democratic Party in the United States had a big win this week while, at the same time, President Donald Trump consolidated his position because the Republicans increased their political power in the Senate.

These seemingly contradictory statements tell the story of the midterm elections where the Democrats are on track to pick up about 35 House of Representative seats – 12 more than they needed to take a majority – while Trump’s Republicans have turned their one seat Senate majority into a four seat advantage.

This happened because the Democrats won the popular vote in House seats from coast to coast. They polled about 12.5 million more votes in these districts than the Republicans.

This is significant for a few reasons. The House is a better barometer of where the mass of American voters are because it is a contest in local districts – 435 seats in the suburbs, the exurbs and the rural areas – which is a true reflection of how voters feel about Trump’s term so far.

President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference in the East Room at the White House in Washington.

This 12.5 million voter advantage over the Republicans is a strong – very strong – result when measured against the outcome just two years ago when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote over Trump by 3 million.

Clinton’s 3 million vote advantage didn’t matter because the US presidential election is won by the candidate who gets the most votes in the electoral college, a state-based tally that reflects how many Congressional districts there are.

When looking at the outcome in the House, there are serious take-outs which reflect what’s happening in America and what Australian politicians can learn from it.

The Democrats might have lost the Senate vote – which is naturally gerrymandered because it gives Vermont with just 624,000 people two senators, the same as California gets which has 37.25 million people – the real measure is the popular House vote described above.

A serious analysis of the outcome from the authoritative 538 website segmented all House seats into six group which ranged from “pure rural” to “pure urban” and used this data to worked out where the Democratic messages mattered most.

Voters in Kirkwood, Missouri on November 6.

“The two categories we’re most interested in are ‘Sparse Suburban’ and ‘Dense Suburban’,” said the 538 analysis.

“Sparse Suburban covers districts in outer-ring suburbs at the edge of major metropolitan areas, like the Virginia 10th, which sits outside of Washington, DC.

“Dense Suburban districts, on the other hand, are those where people are packed in more tightly in mostly inner-ring suburbs and some urban areas, like the California 25th, which falls in the Los Angeles metro area.

“Democrats are poised for a net gain of 27 seats from these two categories, which is four more than they needed to gain a majority.

“In other words, 75 per cent of Democrats’ gains came from these predominantly suburban districts.”

This is where the dichotomy is most stark. The Democrats are winning the suburbs – led by women and college-educated voters – while the Republicans under Trump are holding non-urban and rural districts.

It is clear this presents the Democrats with a high advantage going into the 2020 presidential contest, which effectively started just as the last votes were counted this week.

To have a 12.5 million vote advantage might not be unbeatable but it does place the Democrats in a formidable position.

These candidates were not just from the well heeled north east and the Florida Miami/Dade County district, they also came from rural and exurban Congressional seats in supposedly Trump-loving Kentucky, Missouri and other midwestern conservative strongholds.

These Democratic challengers fought on the two issues that, according to the best pre-election polling available, were top of mind when people went to vote: health care and the economy.

They made the contests very local, highlighting health care with a focus on how many people would lose insurance coverage (especially for those with pre-existing conditions).

This has been enormously successful, and highlights the value of staying with single issues and not being distracted.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison with LNP candidate for the seat of Herbert Phillip Thompson (right) and others in Townsville this week. Photo: AAP Image/Michael Chambers

This is perhaps the best lessons Australian politicians can take from the midterm results.

If the Government wants to catch and overtake the Labor Opposition they need to do two things – have a bullish message about the economy and a relentless compare and contrast story which pits Scott Morrison against Bill Shorten.

Labor meanwhile can benefit from watching how the Democrats didn’t deviate from healthcare as an issue – you’ll never lose votes saying we will take better care of you – and criticising the inequity in economic progress.

Dennis Atkins is The Courier-Mail’s national affairs editor