http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/11/05/obama-democrats-post-election-2016-editorials-debates/18491177/What the Democrats lost: Our view
The Editorial Board, 2:08 a.m. EST November 5, 2014
President Obama was hardly the only factor in Tuesday's results.
You could see Tuesday's midterm election losses for Democrats coming a long way out, and not just because of the traditional problem presidents face in the middle of their second terms, when voters get tired of the guy in the White House and take it out on his party.
One of the biggest reasons voters whacked Democrats and gave control of the Senate to Republicans was the president himself. In the two years since he decisively won a second term, President Obama has often seemed smaller than the job in ways that rattled Americans and drove down his approval ratings.
If you're going to govern as a vigorous advocate of a large and activist government, which Obama is, then the government has to be seen as helpful and competent, which it isn't.
OUR VIEW: GOP wins don't alter 2016 math
OUR VIEW: Divided government doesn't have to be dysfunctional
Exhibit A was last fall's disastrous rollout of the federal health care exchanges, a blunder for which Obama justifiably gets the blame. There's just no excuse for a chief executive who doesn't stay on top of his single most important initiative.
Other failures weren't solely Obama's fault, but they added to the impression of a president who couldn't handle the day-to-day job of managing the bureaucracy, or didn't care: lost e-mails and political targeting at the IRS, outrageous wait times Veterans Affairs facilities, bumbling on Ebola by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Secret Service allowing a deranged man to get deep inside the White House.
Obama also shook public confidence by making bold declarations but later backing down. He warned that use of chemical weapons in Syria would be a "red line" but failed to act when that happened, then set himself up for embarrassment by saying he'd ask an unwilling Congress for permission. This year he said he'd act by the end of the summer to liberalize immigration policy, then punted when endangered Democrats begged him to wait until after the elections.
But the president was hardly the only factor in Tuesday's results. Congressional Democrats often looked feckless in the face of sustained attacks by the GOP. Their messaging was weak, even when they had a good story to tell about an economy that has recovered much better than any in Europe, where the unemployment rate is still almost double what it is in the USA.
So where do the Democrats go from here?
One of the ironies of the election is that the Republicans succeeded in blaming Obama for Washington paralysis that they largely caused by giving their extreme Tea Party wing a veto. The unmistakable lesson is that demonization and obstruction can work, so it would be no surprise if Democrats adopt the same tactics, if not now then when there is a Republican president.
But that won't get them past their biggest obstacle: convincing voters who are plainly hostile to Washington that Washington is the answer their problems. That's a tall order that in the current political context requires working with Republicans to build a record of accomplishment.
Come 2016, Democrats can make their case again, when they appear to have a decent chance of holding the White House and the election map will favor them as much as it favored Republicans on Tuesday. They will be defending 10 Senate seats vs. 24 for the GOP.
The most obvious way for Obama and his party to compete is to display more competence in governing. A good way to start would be by making sure the second rollout of the health exchanges, which begins Nov. 15, goes smoothly.
Polls point out two other weak spots Democrats have to fix if they expect to win close elections. A Pew Research survey last month showed that Republicans lead Democrats by 17 points in dealing with the terrorist threat and 15 points in dealing with the deficit.
Democrats also need a better ground game and farm team. They seem to be able to turn out their supporters in presidential election years but fall short in midterms. Overall, turnout for midterms drops by roughly a third from presidential elections, and — as the GOP proved again this year — Republicans tend to do a better job of getting their voters fired up and to the polls in non-presidential elections.
That requires a clear, consistent, inspiring message — the kind Obama had in 2008 but lost along the way to Tuesday's debacle.
