Will Democrats Retake Congress? Thoughts On New York's Special Election
Special elections during a Presidential year are test markers for how the rest of the country may swing, depending on the demographics of the district. But mostly, they are propaganda tools.
In the wake of recent special elections in the United States, political analysts and voters alike are keen to decipher what these results might indicate for the broader electoral landscape as we edge closer to the 2024 general elections. Notably, the outcomes of elections in New York's CD-3 and HD-140 in Pennsylvania have sparked considerable discussion regarding their potential as bellwethers for the upcoming Trump-Biden showdown.
In both elections the Democrat won, allowing the media to project further wins in 2024. However, digging into the details, the Democratic wins aren’t as significant as they seem.
The Significance of Special Elections
Special elections often serve as a litmus test for the national political mood, providing insights into voter sentiments and strategic shifts within major political parties.
However, their predictive value is not absolute. While they can reflect underlying trends, the specific circumstances surrounding each election—such as candidate profiles, local issues, and voter turnout—mean that their outcomes cannot always be extrapolated to forecast general election results.
More often then not, they just become propaganda tools.
A Closer Look at New York's Third District
The New York third district special election, triggered by George Santos's resignation amid accusations of fraud, has garnered particular attention. Santos, a figure who generated significant controversy, had nonetheless succeeded in flipping a historically Democratic district to Republican control.
Santos victory, by a large margin, underscored not only his personal appeal but also the complex political dynamics at play within the district.
Santos's pro-Trump stance, coupled with his ability to connect with a diverse electorate, including significant Hispanic and Asian populations, raises questions about the broader implications for Republican strategy in the area.
The subsequent special election to fill his seat, characterized by low voter turnout and a lackluster performance by the Republican candidate Mazi Pilip seeking to succeed him, suggests that the GOP faces challenges in maintaining its grip on the district.
Or so it would seem, but Pilip would not tie herself to Trump. She actually did everything she could to stay away from discussing the former President. That fact, combined with lower voter turnout, killed her campaign.
It is no surprise then, that Trump went after her on Truth Social.
What you are seeing in the media is the following: Republicans lost because of issue’s A, B, and C. That message is then amplified. Then Trump is portrayed as lashing out at Pilip for losing, with the pretext that Trump caused the loss, and is now blaming Pilip.
But the fact stands that George Santos was an outspoken Trump supporter and won the district handily. Further, Santos remained right of center on plenty of social issues. You can draw your own conclusions.
Pennsylvania's Political Landscape
Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, a special election in a traditionally Democratic district did not deliver surprises in terms of the outcome but did highlight issues of voter engagement and the strategic focus of the Democratic Party.
With abortion rights taking center stage in Democratic campaigns, the effectiveness of this strategy remains subject to debate, especially in light of the low turnout observed in the election.
The race of Pennsylvanians HD 140 was viewed as another bell weather, with Biden even congratulating the winner Jim Prokopiak. The promotion after the election was the same: The Republican party is going to lose as long as it is tied to Trump. Democrats are looking strong in November.
However, this is once again not an accurate depiction.
First, PA HD 140 was recently redrawn.
Second, the district was so heavily blue in 2022 that no Republican ran against the incumbent, John Galloway.
Without the need for anyone to vote for him, Galloway got more votes then both special election candidates combined:
So, can you really say this race proved any broad over reaching message for November?
Looking Ahead
As we analyze these special elections, it's crucial to recognize their nuanced implications. While they offer valuable snapshots of the current political climate, their predictive power for the 2024 general elections is limited by their unique contexts.
The popularity of George Santos, and his large winning margin, puts a new spin on why some Republican did not want him to leave Congress (even with his possible criminal case hanging over him)
Santos was very Pro-Trump, and won his race handily. Pilip shied away from Trump, and lost almost the same margin Santos won by. The political message should be clear for NY-D3: if you are a Republican, Trump works in your favor.
The PA HD140 special election, although important, in no way indicates how November might turn out. Low turn out, in a solid blue district, if anything would point to Democratic weaknesses not Republican ones.
In reality, these special elections are more useful as tools of propaganda, then for future election prediction. How media can spin the narrative around a special election can often matter more then the election itself.
It still seems to be true that perception of reality is more important then reality itself. New York’s and Pennsylvania’s special elections are a good example of that.