Contradictions arise from how voters in many states voted on ballot initiatives versus how they voted for elected officials.
Don’t get too optimistic.
As many Republicans awoke today hungover from a midterm election victory high, few paid any attention to the results of the numerous state ballot initiatives that were decided along with gubernatorial, Senate, and House elections yesterday.
Basically, some ballot initiatives ended positively and others not so well. In my estimate, there were more poor decisions than good ones, which contradicts the narrative of a Republican wave yesterday. There certainly was a wave, tsunami, shellacking (take your pick) on the national level and in state capitols, but when, for example, voters in Arkansas replace their Democrat senator with a Republican yet also vote for a state increase in the minimum wage, something seems amiss. Alaska and South Dakota—two other flip Republican victories in the Senate—also approved minimum wage increase measures.
Of course, it certainly is better for states, rather than the federal government, to be setting minimum wage laws. Ideally, though, one would expect voters fed up with Democrat Senators would also see through the sham-economics and rhetoric of minimum wage hikes.
In liberal Massachusetts, where Republican Charlie Baker defeated Democrat Martha Coakley, voters did reject a repeal of a 2011 law that permitted the expansion of casinos, but they voted to approve a measure that allows workers to accrue 40 hours per year–the highest in the nation. With Baker running on pledges to cut regulations, taxes, and foster a pro-business environment, how do Massachusetts voters then go on to allow their state government tamper in free markets even further with another regulation? Sure, paid sick leave is a good thing, but let private companies set their own policies. Competition among employers and employees serving their rational self-interests—not a government mandate crafted by bureaucrats, academia, and paper-pushers in Boston—will dictate the optimal paid sick leave policy.
In Washington state, voters approved measures to expand universal background checks on all gun purchases. Missouri voters bowed to teacher union pressure and failed to approve a measure that would have tied teacher pay to performance.
The marijuana legalization initiatives met mixed results. Oregon, Alaska, and D.C. approved recreational marijuana, while Florida voters rejected it. This is an issue that is increasingly splintering the GOP, so not much can be said about it in terms of contradicting the notion of a Republican wave.
This short analysis leaves me pondering: who are the voters are who vote for Republicans, but then go on to vote for un-conservative, un-Republican ballot initiatives? It seems to me there is a brewing contradiction in the ranks of so-called conservative and Republican voters that needs to be sorted out rather quickly—before 2016.
You make an excellent point. I was struck by that discrepancy also. But then look at the NY-23 race, as an example. Tom Reed won easily . He votes with the Tea Party 75% of the time. He voted to privatize Social Security. Yet, in his campaign he never mentioned his Tea Party voting record. He sent out numerous flyers claiming he supported Social Security. He supported the Ryan tax plan which would have raised taxes on workers and given breaks to the wealthiest. He never mentioned it. In other words, he did not run from the right.
I suspect the same was true in many of the races won by the GOP. The candidates did not come out as wacky right wingers, they tried to come across as moderates and avoided a full discussion of issues like abortion, minimum wage, unemployment compensation, personhood amendment, privatizing Social Security, etc. A good strategy for them since their ideology, if openly expressed, would be at odds with the typical voter.
It will be interesting to see how they decide among themselves what issues to follow up on and which ones to ignore.
Seems like we’re recognizing two different things here, but I’m glad you still agree with me.