FILE - In this July 21, 2010, file photo, Elizabeth Warren, head of the Congressional Oversight Panel testifies before a Senate Finance Committee hearing to examine the Troubled Asset Relief Program in Washington. Obama will appoint Wall Street critic Elizabeth Warren as a special adviser to oversee the creation of a new consumer protection bureau, a Democratic official said Wednesday, Sept. 15, 2010. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File)

Forget 2020, New Poll Has Warren In Trouble In 2018

Based on the public reaction, this weekend’s Women’s March in Washington, DC and other cities has to some degree consoled American leftists in the wake of Donald Trump’s inauguration. Further emboldened by the comparatively small crowd size at President Trump’s inauguration, the Left has gone from utter despair to a slightly more hopeful demeanor.

But perhaps not all is as it seems. As my colleague Darrick Johnson here at The Resurgent wrote on Monday, the crowd size at the inauguration should give Democrats pause, not boldness. As Darrick writes:

What should terrify Democrats is [] that with all of President Trump’s baggage, and a divided Republican Party, he still won. [ . . . ] Leaked emails revealed that Democrat leadership thought (understandably) that Trump would be the easiest opponent for them in the fall.   Friday’s small crowd showed that they were probably right. If I were a Democrat, that would be a terrifying thought.”

Then there was this from the sultan of statistics, Nate Silver. On Monday, Silver took to his FiveThirtyEight website to remind democrats that although the Women’s March was “among the largest mass protests in American history,” the:

[G]eographic distribution of the marches also echoed November’s election results, in which Hillary Clinton lost the Electoral College despite receiving almost 3 million more votes than Trump nationwide. About 80 percent of march attendees were in states Clinton won, and a disproportionate amount were in major cities. So if the marches were a reminder of the depth of opposition to Trump—unprecedented for a president so early in his term—they also reflected Democrats’ need to expand the breadth of their coalition if they are to make a comeback in 2018 and 2020.”

The lesson being offered to Democrats in the statistics, for Silver, is that “[t]he Democratic Party needs broader geographic appeal than what it has right now.”

But Democrats’ problems may go even deeper than broadening geographic appeal. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA), one of the heroes of the progressive wing of the Party, may be in trouble in her senatorial re-election bid in 2018. RedSate reports on a telephone survey published by WBUR in Boston that found that only 44 percent thought Warren “deserved reelection,” while 46 percent thought voters should “give someone else a chance.”

Worse for Warren, WBUR found that only 29 percent thought someone other than incumbent Governor Charlie Baker (R) should get a chance at the governor’s office. Warren also enjoys a favorable view among only 12 percent of Republicans, while Baker commands a favorable view among 60 percent of Democrats. As RedState points out, Warren’s problem appears to be less about incumbency, and more about her and her party. All of this in the urban, coastal Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

The lackluster response to the inauguration, the geographic concentration of the Women’s March in leftist strongholds, and Senator Warren’s trouble in the polls should have Democrats worried, introspective, and considering significant changes in course. The fact that the Democrats are none of these things, but instead are doubling down on the same policies and practices that led them to this point should have Republicans encouraged and emboldened.

About the author

Davis Bishop

View all posts