Generally speaking, incumbent Senators, especially ones that have been re-elected to at least a second term, are extremely difficult to dislodge. They have solid name recognition, loads of political and fundraising connections, and enough friends to survive even a high-profile challenge.
Sometimes, though, they start reminding voters of what they don’t want to see in politicians. The idea of a “toxic” Senator isn’t about scandal — which can take down even the most entrenched incumbent — but about a Senator whose constituents simply no longer believe he represents them.
Enter Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. While Reid’s troubles are often compared to those of former Senate Majority Leader Daschle, since they were both Democratic leaders in the Senate from red-leaning states, their situations are quite different in many other ways. A better example that compares with Reid’s troubles are those of former Republican Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who got crushed in his re-election bid by State Treasurer Bob Casey Jr. in 2006, receiving only 41% of the vote to Casey’s 59%.
On paper, Santorum looked unbeatable. He beat an incumbent Democrat to win a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1990, a bad year for Republicans, and was easily re-elected in 1992, another bad year for Republicans, even while Clinton won his district. In 1994, he beat an incumbent Senator who had just beaten a former Governor of Pennsylvania to win the seat. In 2000, a bad year for Republicans in the Senate, he was re-elected easily over a well-funded Democratic Congressman even while George Bush lost to Al Gore in Pennsylvania by 5 points. In short, he should have lost all 4 races, but won all 4. It would stand to reason based only on this, that he has now entrenched himself and isn’t likely to lose anytime soon.
But by the time late 2005 rolled around, Santorum’s approval numbers were mired in the mid-to-high 30s. After a series of controversial statements regarding gay issues, family issues and other social issues, and unwavering support for the increasingly unpopular President Bush on things ranging from the war in Iraq to taxes, Santorum’s image had been irrevocably changed in the eyes of Pennsylvanians. Fair or unfair, he was seen as the poster-child for failed Republican leadership in Washington. Santorum raised a ton of money and waged a relentless campaign against who could only charitably be called a charisma challenged opponent and got crushed.
Harry Reid’s situation isn’t identical, but it’s similar. Unlike Santorum, Reid’s record of past victories was not impressive. He lost his first race for the Senate, lost a race for Mayor of Las Vegas, and, after later being elected to the Senate, only won re-election in 1998 by a few hundred votes. Like Santorum, however, Reid’s favorability numbers have never been particularly high, and his state is in general friendlier to the opposition party.
Whether Reid will ultimately meet Santorum’s fate remains to be seen. However, the warning signs are there. His approval rating is mired in the mid 30’. He’s been prone to gaffes on everything from the Iraq War to “joking” about an unfriendly newspaper to the effect of he wished it would go out of business. He’s tied to an unpopular Congress, particularly House Speaker Pelosi, and an increasingly unpopular President. What’s even worse is he seems to be trailing anybody the Republicans put up against him. Sue Lowden, the Republican Party Chairwoman, would not generally be considered an A-list candidate, but she’s leading him in the polls. So is two-time loser businessman Danny Tarkanian, whose only claim to fame is losing races for State Senate and Secretary of State.
Reid appears to be reaching the level of becoming a “toxic” incumbent who represents the worst impulses of an overreaching Congress and a battered President while forgetting his home state of Nevada. Unless something happens to turn the situation around, Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and a Goliath like giant in Nevada politics, will be toppled by any David the Republicans end up putting against him.
Clifford Smith is a law student at the Catholic University School of Law and a regular contributor to The D.C. Writeup.
Loading ...
September 11th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Interesting points, Cliff, although I’d argue that my read of Nevada’s a bit different. Don’t get me wrong–Reid’s in deep trouble. But I wouldn’t say it’s for exactly the reasons you identify. His association with Obama may hurt him with some voters, but Reid’s Favorable-Unfavorable split of 36-52 looks _very_ different than the same Research2000 Nevada poll numbers on the President’s Fav-Unfav split (48-41). Reid’s approval numbers, low as they are, are astronomical compared with Ensign’s 28-53 split and Republican governor Gibbons’ 17-61 split. It looks to me as though Nevada is fed up with incumbents in general….at least, it strikes me as odd if it’s a sheer coincidence that they are this angry at three such different politicians. Ensign we can explain, I suppose, and I don’t know enough about Gibbons….maybe he’s incompetent. But the polls don’t paint a “he’s too liberal for his state” picture for me, even though Reid may well be.
The other thing us political junkies have to remember is that it’s more than a year to the election. At this time in 2007, the number of wrong guesses we would have made about the 2008 election are fairly considerable (even though we would have correctly seen writing on the wall for a number of people as well). Reid’s got a lot of time to play catch-up: the very thing his opponents have going for them (beating Reid right now with such _low_ name ID) is also an electoral problem (people don’t know them yet, and in politics, that means your reputation is still a jump ball between you and your opponent). If I was a betting man, I don’t think I’d put $5 on Reid to win it, right now, but I don’t think I’d be setting money down on the other side either.
Still, interesting ideas–thanks for sharing them!
[Reply to this Comment]
September 12th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Reid, Ensign and Gibbons are all unpopular for different reasons.
Gibbons is indeed incompetent, and has managed to alienate virtually everybody in the state. That on top of an extremely messy public divorce and a notoriously prickly personality. Gibbons certainly IS the kind of toxic politician that Reid only might be.
Ensign is unpopular for obvious reasons. Before his affair/alleged payoff became public, his approval was well over 50%. He was the most popular elected official in Nevada.
As far as Reid, I’m not arguing so much that he’s too liberal for the state, or that he’s being hurt by being tied to Obama. Both things are potentially problematic, but they are only small parts of it. Instead, I think Reid represents to too many people right now everything they don’t like about the Democratic Congress, that he’s never been particularly popular in Nevada, and that he’s no longer going to be kept afloat by Obama’s popularity, which is sinking.
You’re right that the election is a long way off, which is why I say he “appears” to be becoming toxic, and “unless something changes” he’ll be defeated. But a lot can indeed change in 14 months.
[Reply to this Comment]