Democrat mid-term gains were not the telling result many hoped for

Mid-term results suggest that Trump’s brand of nationalistic populism may outlast him and recast US politics for a generation.

Donald Trump on the campaign trail in Chattanooga, Tennessee on November 4.

The most significant outcome of yesterday’s mid-term elections is that a giant Democrat blue wave failed to wash over America.

Even though the Democrats comfortably won control of the House of Representatives, the ­result was not the stinging rejection of Donald Trump’s unorthodox presidency that they had hoped for. In the Senate the ­Republicans actually increased their majority.

The result shows many Democrats are misguided in thinking that Trump’s 2016 election win was an aberration and that he will be ­firmly rejected two years from now.

If a national revulsion against Trump’s unique style of leadership exists, yesterday was the first and best chance for voters to show it.

It suggests that Trump’s brand of nationalistic populism is not a temporary fad that will pass ­quickly. Rather it is a movement that may outlast Trump and recast US politics for a generation.

Having said that, the election was not pain-free for the President. The loss of the house will undermine the effectiveness of Trump’s presidency and stymie his ability to implement his agenda over the next two years.

To place this in its historical context, since World War II the mid-term losses for the party of the president averaged 30 points, and much more when a commander-in-chief’s popularity was less than 50 per cent, as Trump’s has been since his inauguration.

Bill Clinton lost 54 seats in 1994 and in 2010 Barack Obama lost a whopping 63 seats, the most in a mid-term since 1946. The losses appeared to be directly related to the popularity of the president.

US presidents’ average approval rating during their first 21 months in power (in %)

Clinton had a 46 per cent ­approval rating at the time and Obama was on 45 per cent, both slightly higher than Trump’s ­approval rating, which sits in the low 40s, depending on the poll.

Yet Trump’s mid-term losses are fewer than both Clinton’s and Obama’s.

The mid-term outcomes were also more damaging for Clinton and Obama than for Trump ­because they lost both houses of congress, whereas Trump has saved the Senate, in part because of a favourable alignment of conservative seats that were up for election this year.

The bad news for the President is that losing the house means that he will be subjected to a ­series of congressional committee-­initiated investigations.

Democrats are expected to launch a raft of inquiries into Trump’s conduct. This includes a likely fresh investigation into his links with Russia, as well as a probe into his personal finances, his business interests and his tax returns.

These investigations will generate constant headlines and sap the energy of the administration.

Losing the house is also likely to lead to legislative gridlock for much of the next two years, given the highly partisan state of congress under Trump’s presidency.

The Democrat-controlled house will refuse to support any ­renewed attempt to repeal Obama’s Affordable Care Act, dubbed ObamaCare. It is also ­unlikely to agree to Trump’s promise of a further 10 per cent tax cut for voters, and it is difficult to see both parties reaching ­agreement on a way to finance the President’s ambitious infrastructure plans.

But the good news for Trump is that maintaining Republican control of the Senate still gives him the ability to make key appointments, such as Supreme Court judges.

It also guarantees that any ­attempt by the Democrat-controlled house to impeach Trump would be blocked in the Republican-run Senate, ensuring he ­remains President.

Trump admitted these mid-terms would be a referendum on himself. Rather than shy from this reality, he embraced it, holding ­rallies across the country where his ­endorsements of local candidates were almost an afterthought compared to his salesmanship of his own achievements.

“You know, the mid-term elections used to be, like, boring, didn’t they?” he said at a rally last week. “Do you even remember what they were? People say mid-terms, they say, ‘What is that? What is it?’, right? Now it’s like the hottest thing.”

Exit polls yesterday found two out of three voters said the President was a factor in their ballot.

Trump wrote his own playbook for these mid-terms. Most presidents would have campaigned ­primarily on the unusually strong US economy, with its almost 50-year low in unemployment, 3 per cent growth, and rising wages and job numbers.

But the President chose to promote illegal immigration above all other issues, hoping to stoke the concerns of his base and energise them to vote in the same way that he did so successfully in 2016.

He was helped by the appearance two weeks before the poll of the 7000-strong migrant caravan slowly moving through southern Mexico towards the US border.

But the caravan was still a long way from the US and would pose no threat ahead of the poll, if at all. So Trump had to work hard to promote the issue. He did so first by ordering 5200 US troops to the southern border, a number he then increased to up to 15,000. Although these troops are prohibited by law from detaining or deporting asylum-seekers, they can play a role in helping border agents.

Trump then claimed he would end the process whereby a child of an illegal immigrant is auto­matically granted US citizenship. ­Although the legality of such a move, without legislation, was ­debated, Trump argued the reform was needed and would be welcomed by his base.

And finally, in a blizzard of campaigns across the country in recent weeks, Trump stepped up his rhetoric against the caravan, warning it was filled with dan­gerous men who would threaten the safety and security of all ­Americans.

“If you want more caravans, if you want more crime, vote Democrat,” he said in stump speeches over the past week. “They want America to be a giant sanctuary city for drug dealers, predators and bloodthirsty MS-13 killers.”

Trump’s final campaign ad — which showed Central Americans trying to push through a gate and also showed the case of an ­undoc­umented immigrant who killed two deputy sheriffs in 2014 — was considered offensive by networks, which refused to screen it.

These networks included not only the Left-leaning CNN and NBC but also the conservative Fox News and Fox Business Network.

Trump’s decision to push the issue of illegal immigration so hard was a gamble. While it no doubt played well to his most loyal supporters, it ran the risk of alienating more moderate Republicans. But exit polls yesterday suggested Trump may once again have read the immigration issue better than his critics.

The polls found that 47 per cent believe his immigration policies were too tough, while 48 per cent felt they were either about right or not tough enough.

They also suggested the controversy over the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh largely split voters, with 48 per cent opposing his nomination and 43 per cent supporting it.

The polls do show that the backlash against Trump was led by women.

They suggest the rejection of the President was largely driven by female voters in the suburbs. This is the group of traditionally conservative voters who have turned against the President in a way that conservative men have not.

According to AP VoteCast, women voted Democrat by a hefty 56 per cent to 38 per cent margin while men voted Republicans by a 48 per cent to 46 per cent margin.

Democrats chose to campaign on Trump’s leadership style, hoping it would win over moderate Republicans, especially women.

Prominent Democrats like former president Barack Obama urged voters to float above the rhetoric and cast their vote on Trump’s style.

“Because while they are trying to distract you with all this stuff, they are robbing you blind. They’ll be like: Look, look, look — caravan, caravan. Then they’re giving tax cuts to their billionaire friends. Look, look, look. Whatever is the thing scary. And then they’re sabotaging your healthcare. You can’t fall for it,” Obama said.

Democrats like Obama gambled that Trump’s take-no-­prisoners style would be a vote winner for the progressive party.

“The character of this country is on the ballot,” Obama said. “What kind of politics we expect is on the ballot. How we conduct ourselves in public life is on the ballot. How we treat each other is on the ballot.”

But with the US economy humming, unemployment down and new jobs being created, the desire to punish this unorthodox president was only a powerful sentiment in parts of the country. While Trump continues to polarise Americans, enough of his supporters voted to prevent the Democrats from sweeping the congress.

While the loss of the house will cause headaches for Trump, the big picture of his presidency will not necessarily be tarnished.

It will allow Trump to blame the Democrats, and especially their leader, Nancy Pelosi, for blocking his ability to pass legislation and implement his agenda.

And history shows that losing at least one house of congress in the mid-terms is no impediment to re-election.

Clinton and Obama emerged from their landslide mid-term losses with second terms. For Trump there is more upside than downside in yesterday’s result.

Cameron Stewart is also US contributor for Sky News Australia.