Top 10 Reasons Democrats Will Dominate This Next Election


Typically, elections are referendums on recent history. A President’s first election is usually a referendum on the previous President. If the previous Prez was good, then a person from the same party will be elected. If not, then parties will switch. Midterm elections are often considered referendums on the sitting President, and typically aren’t good news for them, unless they’re incredibly popular or if Americans are sick of the opposing party.

Knowing this, with the 2014 midterm election coming up, let’s begin delving into exactly why the Democratic Party is poised to win big.

10. Shifting Demographics


America is changing, a lot. The shift over the past 50 years has begun to favor ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants from more liberal countries, all of whom tend to favor Democrats over Republicans. While we’re not going to buy into the belief that the Republican is the old, white, Christian, men’s party, the perception is there and it’s an important perception in a field where day-to-day life is very much an us-against-them mentality. And if you think we’re overstepping things here … Republicans think the exact same thing, and are struggling to change that perception. Simply put: they will not have time by 2014 to make that shift happen.

9. Pure Stubbornness


Stubbornness can be a good thing and a bad thing. When you hold onto the hard line no matter what, you can risk being seen as obstinate and clueless. But sometimes, you can also be seen – especially by your supporters – as principled and leader-like. The jury is still out on how the Democrats holding the hard line in the Senate will play out following the recent shutdown. Historically though, they’ve done very well at keeping criticism at bay, which explains why Americans are more likely to blame the Republicans than Democrats for the shutdown.

8. The Tea Party


Like it or not, the Tea Party movement has been losing supporters for some time now, and it’s not likely to change. In 2010, the Tea Party’s sharp balance of Obama’s left-wing agenda created an opportunity for him to look moderate going into the 2012 election, their own hard-line right-wing stance has also served to divide the Republican Party. For the GOP, the math simply is not there to support a divided right-wing party that’s more dependent than the Democrats on moderates to win national elections. It also doesn’t help the overall party that, while traditional Republicans are willing to negotiate in order to get things done, the Tea Party’s my-way-or-the-highway attitude has only served to isolate the two major factions of the Republican Party. That’s not to say that the Democrats don’t have factions, but they also have a single leader they can unite behind – something the Republicans sorely lack.

7. The Economy


The economy hit rock bottom in late 2009. Since then, there has been a slow, but steady increase in private money available for spending, and a slow decrease in unemployment. However these numbers happened and however small the improvement is and whatever other important numbers are being glossed over, improvement is still improvement and that’s exactly how the Democrats are going to market it. Generating positive feelings about their party’s efforts in recovering from the crash of September 2008 is going to be a key in getting them elected in 2014, and any further improvement is going to be marketed aggressively.

6. Limited Impacts of the Affordable Care Act


Republicans have been predicting disaster for the American people because of the Affordable Care Act. In 2014, the ACA will come into full play and people are now either signing up for the plans or preparing to pay the penalties. Currently, sign-ups for Obamacare have been running far below estimates and people have been more than happy to shell out the $95 (or 1% of their income – whichever is greater) for 2014 to not sign up for government health insurance. The bigger penalties – $395 (2%) for 2015, $695 (2.5%) for 2016 and beyond – don’t hit until after the 2014 election, which gives Democrats a great opportunity to duck around this unpopular law loaded with other, hidden taxes. Don’t expect Democrats to promote their healthcare victory as much as you can expect them to quietly play up how little it’s costing people – for now.

5. Obama


For a President who’s brought us a heavily-disliked health insurance law, domestic spying, failed international interventions, and more divisiveness than any President in recent memory, whose “direction of the country” ratings have peaked in the 35% range, and who’s sat over an entire administration of 7%+ unemployment, Obama remains extremely popular among his supporters. He has a very keen ability to move the national discussion and his mastery of the media has been unlike any President in recent memory. While he may not gain any support among conservatives, Democrats and liberals love him and he will likely use his popularity and Congress’ unpopularity to push for his party to gain seats in Congress.

4. Unions


If there is one consistent source of money for Democrat candidates, it’s from union donations and support. While the only union chief ever to have been President was a Republican (Reagan was President of the Screen Actors Guild), Unions have been faithful Democrat supporters for decades and that’s not about to stop now, especially in states like Wisconsin where two straight defeats for the governor’s seat (an election and a recall election) were union-backed, and the unions have not forgotten, nor forgiven the sharp turn right in that state or many others where union involvement was tightened following the 2010 and 2012 elections. In a world where the candidate with the most money often wins, expect the unions to pour a LOT of money into these races. In fact, they already have – six of the top 10 donors to the 2014 election so far have been unions and only one of them has given less than 80% to Democrat candidates.

3. The Media Machine


Let’s be honest: the mainstream news bends to the left. Even with Fox News, a populist news outlet often accused of being conservative, the Democrats still maintain a stranglehold on most news sources, and are not shy about using their influence to push their agenda. They used it very well in 2008 and 2012 to push Obama into the White House and they have every intent of using their friends in the news media to push the belief that Republicans are extremist, scary, and dumb.

2. Controversial Moves By State-Level GOP


The GOP gained control of many state legislatures and governorships between 2010 and 2012, and as any party would do when they have that much success, they did exactly what the Democrats did in Congress from 2006-2010: they pushed their party’s agenda. The result has been attacks on social issues that Democrats hold dear like abortion and that Republicans don’t have the poll numbers to back up. Further issues like education are providing Democrats with plenty of ammunition to attack the GOP in what will likely be an all-out ideological war.

1. Incumbent Dissatisfaction

Right now, people hate their sitting politicians, and since the Republicans hold the House of Representatives, they have the most to lose. Because they’ve been so visible during the shutdown discussions, the GOP has taken it on the chin, and are very likely to lose some big seats in the House in 2014.

Such a scenario has happened before, and not that long ago. The result ended up being four years of powerful Democratic control of Congress, two of those years with a Democrat president, during which they were able to accomplish much of their agenda. All signs point to this soon becoming the case once again.

Other Articles you Might Like
Liked it? Take a second to support on Patreon!


  1. Whatever at this point, the dollar will crash and well all be screwed no matter who we vote for, we cant sustain it any longer in the near future

    • I did both this list and the accompanying “Republicans Will Dominate” list after the rollout. The rollout of a website will be old news and won’t have much of an effect on an election in a year.

  2. It’s sad that so many people demonize the Tea Party. To me, a moderate Republican voter, all the TP wants is smaller government (less intrusion into our lives), balancing budgets (was done in the 90s, can be done again), lower taxes, and running the government by The Constitution.

    Can anyone HONESTLY argue that ANY of those are BAD ideas?

    I don’t think so.

    • It’s less about the ideas and more about the popular (aka “voters'”) perception. The Tea Party is viewed very negatively by the public for various reasons.

  3. “Obama’s left-wing agenda created an opportunity for him to look moderate”?!?!?!?!

    The guy is more right wing than Nixon and Reagan combined!

      • Surveillance of every US citizen, indefinite detention without trial, suspension of habeus corpus, permanent war, drone strikes, no prosecution of corporate criminals, etc. etc. etc.

        Nixon was lambasted for spying on a handful of individuals; Reagan was called a warmonger for Granada and his Central American hijinks. Civil liberties and corporate control have never been stronger under Obama, the most unliberal ever. We’re on the fast tack to fascism, and that’s WAY to the right of Reagan and Nixon. Put THAT in your (Iran/Contra) crackpipe and smoke it!

        • Uhh ….no. Sorry, but you are terribly misinformed.

          Fascism and Socialism/Communism are ALL left-wing phenomena. The people who told you differently were all Socialists or Communists, riding the tide of anti-Nazi sentiment following WWII. The Fascists and the Communists hated one another because they did not find common cause: the Fascists wished to unite workers within one state, and the Communists across borders. Everything else was minutiae.

          The fact is, anything that reduces the freedom of the individual – mandatory health insurances purchases, mandatory seat belt laws, the erection of a surveillance state – are ALL left-wing policies. Those that seek to break them down are not.

          The notion that Obama is protecting civil liberties in any meaningful way is utterly ludicrous, when it forces the Catholic church to pay for insurance plans that pay for abortions — and that’s just the EASY one for me to cite.

          Furthermore, the “corporate criminals” you cite are functions of crony capitalism, which isn’t right-wing either. That is a left-wing government cajoling or coercing business figures to (a) do their bidding or (b) passing out favors. The last three sentences of your post are non sequiturs, so it’s hard to rebut nonsense.

        • Well, every dictionary I’ve seen says fascism is right-wing; I guess all those editors must be part of some vast communist conspiracy. Look, man, you’re just supposed to drink the Koolaid, not bathe in it!

          form Wikipedia:
          According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics…Right-wing parties include conservatives…and, on the far Right, racists and fascists.

          The terms far right, or extreme right, describe the broad range of political groups and ideologies usually taken to be further to the right of the mainstream center-right on the traditional left-right spectrum. Far right politics commonly involves support for social inequality and social hierarchy, elements of social conservatism and opposition to most forms of liberalism and socialism. Both terms are also used to describe Nazi and fascist movements…


          2. any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc, that may be characterized as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc

          an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
          (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
          The term Fascism was first used of the totalitarian right-wing nationalist regime of Mussolini in Italy

        • From Wikipedia? You can do better than that.

          Why would two so very similar ideologies be at opposite ends of the political continuum? Fascism is militant and nationalist, Communism not necessarily so. Each denies freedom to individuals and compels them to become a part of a larger unit. Don’t quote me chapter and verse — think about it.

        • These definitions have little to do with political reality.

          Fascism isn’t really part of the same political axis as the left-right argument. If we talk about left-right in terms of economics, then the up and down would be between anarchy and fascism – in other words: how much control does the government maintain over its individuals or businesses?

          There are right-fascists, e.g. people who want to control every aspect of people’s lives so that they live in a manner they perceive to be “moral”. While it’s not true of all or most evangelical conservatives, there are certainly some who’d like to use government authority to ban certain sexual behaviors and force people to go to church.

          Left-fascism works in similar ways, such as when people cry for more government control of economics and personal finances. There is a reasonable argument made that Soviet communism is a form of left-fascism.

          Benito Mussolini is an interesting example of both. A former socialist who turned to fascism because of the socialist party’s neutrality in WW1, his party’s positions were heavily nationalist (a nonpartisan description), racist (again, nonpartisan), and totalitarian (again, nonpartisan). It did have moral beliefs in terms of gender roles and sexuality that were on par with traditional Roman Catholic values that one could find among modern conservatives. But they also promoted a fairly strong relationship between government and business that sounds capitalistic, but ultimately was about full government control of the corporate world and their entire purpose and utilization being to serve that government – a concept found far and wide among socialist and communist countries.

          In short: fascism is neither left nor right, just like anarchy is neither.

        • Those are not conservative issues. They are civil liberty issues which, while they can paint a particular picture, really don’t either party or political ideology behind them.

          When you look at things in terms of economics and domestic relations, Obama is not only leftist, he’s probably the most left-wing President since Wilson.

        • You’re the one who keeps saying “conservative”… I never even used the term. But now that you mention it, Obama’s lack of support for unions and his laissez faire attitude toward big business IS downright conservative.

        • Obama’s lack of support of unions? Obama has been the biggest supporter of unions in the White House since FDR.

          Laissez-faire attitude towards big business? I think you’re mistaking what laissez-faire means. Obama has been aggressively manipulating business with government since nearly day 1 in office with government buyouts of businesses like GM and installing his own people in leadership positions. That’s not conservative – that’s a mix of both pure socialism and crony capitalism.

        • Also, conservative is right-wing in the United States. It’s a bit backwards from places like Australia where the Liberal Party would be the equivalent of the middle-right-wing Republican Party here in the US.

  4. The media is liberal?

    Good one.

    A liberal media would have prevented the invasion of Iraq. A liberal media would not feature John McCain on every Sunday news show since he lost an election five years ago. A liberal media would have invited somebody on the winning team.

    • Not true, actually. McCain is on every Sunday talk show in the liberal media precisely because he sticks his thumbs in the eyes of his own party, and that’s why they like him. The idea that there isn’t a strong leftward bias in those media outlets found in that graphic is ludicrous.

    • “The media is liberal?”

      Most studies indicate a left-bias for the American media.

      “A liberal media would have prevented the invasion of Iraq.”

      The media cannot prevent war.

      ” A liberal media would not feature John McCain on every Sunday news show since he lost an election five years ago.”

      John McCain is not a conservative. He is a solid moderate.

      ” A liberal media would have invited somebody on the winning team.”

      Studies indicate that most coverage of Democrats has been resoundingly positive.

  5. I hope that tea party extremists lose their seats in the House in 2014, but unfortunately most are in gerrymandered districts where they win with 70% of the vote or more so it will be very hard to get rid of them.

    • Gerrymandering happens on both sides of the aisle. That’s why Democrat tend to win races in Northeastern and Pacific coast states and Republicans tend to dominate in the South and Midwest. Having said that, looking at Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, there really aren’t any of the 46 members of the Tea Party Caucus that are in trouble for 2014.

      Then again, I’m sure there are plenty of people who’d like to see every single member of the Progressive Caucus lose their elections, too.

  6. Much to republican biased for me. It appears the list was written by a staunch Republican that was being passively aggressive toward the Democrat party. They don’t try to appear biased, but you can tell in the way they write.

    • I make no qualms about my partisan status. I also make no qualms about the fact that I try to do these lists in a very unbiased fashion. When I do political analysis, I point fingers exactly where they belong, which means I’m happy to criticize both Democrats and Republicans.

  7. A year is an eternity in politics, so anything can still happen. However:

    9 – Interesting how anyone can think Harry Reid was being principled while Ted Cruz was stubborn. Since he’s one of two guys who said they’d “never negotiate,” there’s no logic to that, yet somehow it’ll stick with some people.

    8 – This one fundamentally misunderstands what the Tea Party is. It is otherwise unpolitical people suddenly becoming involved. It is not “my-way-or-the-highway” — it is the only voice of opposition in elective office. The characterizations by media figures border on the criminal.

    7 – There IS no economic growth. College graduates live with their parents. Unemployment is far above 10%, yet we keep getting our figures from the government, which has a vested interest in finagling the numbers.

    4 – The union thing is nothing more than legalized extortion for campaign contributions, and always was.

    If this list proves accurate, I can say this:

    (a) It will have been first and foremost because the GOP fielded weak, “mee-too” types instead of making any sort of principled, meaningful contrast.

    (b) The power of stupid people voting themselves money out of other people’s pockets really cannot be overcome, and the growth we experienced in the 1920s, ’50s, ’60s, ’80s, ’90s, and mid ’00s will never be seen again in our lifetimes.

    • Keep in mind – I’m not really replying with any bias to one side or the other. Just running with the facts.

      9 – I’m talking about how things came across to average voters, not reality. Voters and reality rarely connect.

      8. That was the initial idea behind the party, but now that they’ve got politicians elected, it’s a caucus. A caucus with votes – and consequences.

      7. There are indicators of some slow growth in certain sectors and locations. The question will be: will the growth expand, continue, or contract in the next year.

      a) The GOP is ultimately its own worst enemy. The traditional party fields milquetoast candidates and the Tea Party fields any yahoo who signs a no-tax pledge. Neither side wants to negotiate with the other and the result is 8 years of Obama.

      b) The same argument was made when social security and medicare and medicaid were set up. The only thing I’ll say here is: times change.

      • Good points well stated.

        8. They have a few elected, a few that are the only elected figures keeping their party from disappearing into irrelevant oblivion, so unwilling is the party leadership to function as an actual opposition party.

        7. Really, when it comes right down to it, there is no growth to speak of anywhere. The Dow is at 15K because the Fed is pumping funny money into it, and everyone in the market hopes to time his ejector seat for the day before that stops. Notice how growth is “unexpectedly” revised downward, quarter after quarter, year after year, to under 2% nearly every time? That’s zero growth, effectively, because population and inflation are cancelling it out.

        (a) What’s there to be negotiated on? The Democrat party is working hard to see that every American looks to the government for his very sustenance, and to see that the value of the dollar is utterly destroyed, and have been doing so for 75 years. The informed American doesn’t want to see the country thus destroyed. There’s no common ground there. The GOP are milquetoast, yes; I’ll vote for anyone who understands and wishes to see the Constitution properly applied; nothing else should be this important.

        (b) So they are, and so they are millstones around our economic necks. What happens when every American is forced onto the equivalent of Medicaid? Times may change — the laws of economics do not.

  8. I really agree with #2. This has happened in NC, with a Republican led government that is making sweeping changes to legislature that, in my humble opinion, is going to backfire on them. Bby steps should have been taken. Further, the GOP should have taken the opportunity to perhaps sway over some fence riders by not taking such a harsh conservative approach to lawmaking.

    • The GOP in North Carolina is behaving like the Democrats did on the Federal level from 2009-2010. The difference is that the GOP in North Carolina got to redra…

      Ah, but that may be a little too soon. 🙂