For what it’s worth, my presidential prediction for 2020 will probably turn out to be more accurate than my presidential prediction for 2016.
But I doubt anyone cares about that. Let’s instead look at what happened last night (and, in some cases, what is still happening).
President
It appears that Biden will prevail in the battle for the White House when the dust settles, but you can see from this Washington Post map that the race was much closer than most people expected (Pennsylvania is expected to shift to Biden as mail-in votes are counted, and perhaps Georgia as well).
If that’s the final result, here are two obvious takeaways based on where a president has a lot of unilateral power.
- Trade policy will move in the right direction.
- Regulatory policy will move in the wrong direction.
Other policy areas generally require agreement between the executive branch and the legislative branch, so we can’t know the impact of a Biden presidency without perusing congressional results.
Senate
In my humble opinion, the big news of the night is that Republicans appear to have retained control of the Senate.
If true, that means some left-wing goals are now very unlikely.
There won’t be any court packing. There won’t be any serious effort to increase the number of Democratic senators by granting statehood to Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico.
But let’s focus on the economic issues. Here are some quick takeaways.
- There will be another “stimulus,” but it won’t be nearly as profligate as would have been the case if Democrats had total control of Congress and the White House.
- There won’t be any serious effort for forced unionization in right-to-work states.
- Biden’s class-warfare tax increases won’t happen.
- The state and local tax deduction will remain capped.
- The corporate tax rate will stay 21 percent (the best fiscal achievement of Trump’s presidency).
House of Representatives
It appears that Republicans will gain seats, which is contrary to all expectations.
That being said, there’s zero possibility of a GOP takeover, so Nancy Pelosi will remain in charge.
Ballot Initiatives
I wrote two weeks ago about this election’s six most important ballot initiatives.
The great news is that taxpayers scored a big victory by defeating the effort to get rid of the flat tax in Illinois an replace it with a so-called progressive tax. Winning that battle probably won’t rescue the Prairie State, but at least it will slow down its march to bankruptcy.
The other five battles mostly were decided correctly – at least based on the latest vote margins.
- California voters rejected an initiative that would allow the state to engage in racial discrimination.
- The California initiative to weaken limits on property taxes is trailing.
- The Colorado initiative to lower the state’s flat tax appears prevailed.
- The Colorado initiative to strengthen TABOR (the state’s spending cap) is leading.
- The one clear piece of bad news is that an Arizona initiative to impose a big increase in the top income tax rate appears likely to prevail.
What’s the future for Trump and Trumpism?
Regular readers know I want the GOP to be the Party of Reagan rather than the Party of Trump.
So I will be very interested to see whether Trump’s apparent defeat means Republicans go back to (at least pretending to favor) conventional small-government conservatism.
That will have the be the topic of a future column.
A Silver Lining for Republicans
The party controlling the White House usually loses mid-term elections. For recent examples, Democrats won the House in 2018 and there were big victories for the GOP in 2010 and 2014 during the Obama years.
In all likelihood, Republicans will now do much better in the 2022 midterm election with Biden in the White House instead of Trump.
A Silver Lining for Taxpayers
It’s not something that can be quantified, but congressional Republicans will now become much better on spending issues. They’ll no longer face pressure to go along with Trump’s profligacy and they’ll have a partisan incentive to oppose Biden’s profligate agenda.
P.S. Whether you’re happy or sad about the election results, remember that it’s always appropriate to laugh at the clowns and crooks in Washington.
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] day after the election, I wrote that “left-wing goals are now very unlikely” because Republicans almost certainly will […]
[…] day after the election, I wrote that “left-wing goals are now very unlikely” because Republicans almost certainly will […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] Death of (the horribly misnamed) Build Back Better – President Biden somehow decided a very narrow victory over a very unpopular incumbent meant that he had a mandate for a radical expansion of […]
[…] Death of (the horribly misnamed) Build Back Better – President Biden somehow decided a very narrow victory over a very unpopular incumbent meant that he had a mandate for a radical expansion of the welfare […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] day after the election, I wrote that “left-wing goals are now very unlikely” because Republicans almost certainly will […]
[…] — Interpreting the Election Results […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] Interpreting the Election Results […]
[…] those still fixated on last week’s election, my analysis can be found here, here, here, here, and […]
[…] as part of my post-election analysis (see here, here, here, and here), let’s explore whether the GOP will be (or should) a Trump […]
[…] It appears Republicans will hold the Senate, which presumably (hopefully?) means that any radical proposals would be dead on arrival, regardless of whether they’re […]
[…] day after the election, I wrote that “left-wing goals are now very unlikely” because Republicans almost certainly will […]
[…] day after the election, I wrote that “left-wing goals are now very unlikely” because Republicans almost certainly will […]
[…] Interpreting the Election Results […]
[…] Interpreting the Election Results […]
With all the rare, strange, loops this has taken, the irregularities, the system has failed. Many countries have tried the mail and email votes demonstrating the possible atrocities, the frauds and abuse, the potical forecast are over and the political analisis are over.
Dan,
Colorado had some good news as you noted. However, the new TABOR protections, which require voter approval for any fee increase that generates $100 million, can be easily bypassed. We’ll end up with more fees capped just below the $100 million limit.
Unfortunately Colorado voters approved Colorado Proposition 118, the Paid Medical and Family Leave Initiative tax increase. Groan!
[…] « Interpreting the Election Results […]
deregulation is only desirable when consumer sovereignty reigns not producer sovereignty. Guess what occurred under Trump.
no property developer likes market forces which is why he detests rules based trading systems.
[…] Interpreting the Election Results […]
Listening to any Republican or Conservative use the word “profligate” after 4 years of the biggest fiscal ORGY in recent history is just nauseating. All you are saying here is that there will NO Biden program implemented. Or judges confirmed. Period. That suddenly the entire deficit must be paid up during Biden’s term (hyperbole, but you get my drift). Because that’s just the way it is.
If the WaPo map above is accurate, and all the states shown as leaning (and individual seats in NE and ME) are called in the direction they’re leaning, then I see Trump winning 270-268. Of course, the actual result will more likely come from PA authorities inserting bogus ballots into the count, in which case we have to hope that the Supreme Court will do the needful.
California ballot measures you didn’t mention: Prop 22 (to allow Uber and delivery drivers to stay independent contractors) passed with 59%. The measure to allow more cities to have rent control failed. A measure to give seniors a discount on property taxes passed.
I don’t really buy this interpretation – BHO did A LOT of damage in his 8 years in spite of getting only 1 piece of legislation passed – the ACA – and that used all his political capital. . However, he managed to fill up executive agencies with loyal collectivists and left a cabal of criminals in place to undermine the following administration. The cultural institutional damage we could expect is arguably worse than the fiscal damage that Trump has done.