Voters Reject the Slog

by John Lindstrom
Gongwer News Service
August 6, 2010

Well, now, wasn’t that interesting?

The primary election showed once again that the only thing really predictable is the unpredictability of people. Though one can easily and safely predict that by November 2 people all across the state will be tired of hearing about the tough nerd versus America’s angriest mayor.

But the voters’ selection of Democrat Virg Bernero and Republican Rick Snyder, along with their other decisions up and down the line on Tuesday, indicate a number of factors that, if intuited correctly, could mean major changes in how the state conducts itself in the next several years.

For all the hackneyed and shopworn calls to “change” that politicians persistently pronounce, the results do, in fact, indicate on one level a desire for change. Yet, on another level, the results indicate the public wants things as they are, or perhaps as they were. That second indication is itself a type of change, away from the call for change.

Of course, one has to be careful not to draw too many conclusions from the voted results of not quite 15 percent of the state’s total population. Plenty of people are not happy with the results from the election, as evidenced at a minimum by the Internet grumblings and warnings of divine damnation that many conservative Republicans have posted since Mr. Snyder’s win.

While the results were in many respects stunning and may be indicative of a major alteration in public activity in the near future, those who have toiled in the policy dungeons also know that change is an ordeal few are really willing to bear, and Michigan may still yet flounder for years to come.

With that caveat firmly in mind, what the voters did in the primary is a multi-layered and nuanced series of actions that has to be considered much as one assesses the brushstrokes on a canvas.

To begin with, the voters actually did something the tea party types call for. No, the somewhat confusing and cross-purposed tea party platform itself did not fare particularly well in the election. Candidates who tried to identify themselves with tea party types didn’t overwhelm the final results with victories.

But the anti-incumbent urge that the tea partiers impel did make itself significantly felt, especially at the top of the ticket. Because if there is one characteristic both Mr. Snyder and Mr. Bernero share, it is that neither of them is related to the ongoing slog in either Lansing or Washington, D.C.

Think of it: in both parties’ voters could have chosen candidates who are involved in one way or another in the continuing struggles government is engaged in. That they did not, that they rejected House Speaker Andy Dillon (D-Redford Twp.) and Attorney General Mike Cox and U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Holland), certainly indicates in part a frustration with the continuing partisan standoffs and a desire for something totally new in hopes that will help the state recover itself.

This is not to say issues did not play a role in the decisions, especially on the Democratic side, where the question of abortion rights played heavily in the last several days of the campaign.

Still, the idea of bringing in fresh faces in hopes of fresh ideas and new actions played a big role in the final outcome. Even if that meant searching outside one’s party to find said fresh ideas.

Mr. Snyder was clearly helped by a crossover vote of Democrats who either decided to support him early on or went over to the GOP ballot when it appeared likely Mr. Bernero would win. In doing that they played a role in helping define the size of Mr. Snyder’s victory, which was impressive in a five-person race. But the call by Republican conservatives to close their primary belies the fact that he would have won even if Democrats had been kept out.

Just look at where he won and the lesson gleaned from that is staggering. He won in Livonia, Mr. Cox’s hometown. He won in Birmingham, where Mr. Bouchard holsters his Glock every night. He won in big counties and small, university towns and farm country. He won in places where Democrats are museum pieces. Clearly, voters were sending a message to other Republicans in electing him their standard bearer for November, and it was a message that is probably unprintable.

Which leads to the next point, in that a week ago this question was posed here: what if the voters decided they wanted folks who played nice? The answer to that question is: mostly they did.

Across the board, up and down, the candidates who tended to go negative the most will spend the night of November 2 watching the returns on television. In only a few exceptions did negative campaigns win in this election.

For years voters have said they did not like negative campaigning, but negative campaigning was de rigueur because it worked. This year it did not. In most local races and congressional races and the gubernatorial race, going negative had a negative effect on the negating candidate.

In the 11th Senate race, Rep. Kim Meltzer (R-Clinton Twp.) launched an imbecilic charge that one of her opponents was advocating that gays be allowed to have sex in public — and was rewarded with losing.

In the 105th House race, Republican candidate Dennis Lennox put up television ads claiming his opponent had sexually abused his son — and reaped last place in the balloting.

And in the gubernatorial race, the candidate that was most aggressively negative, Mr. Cox, ended up third.

In fact, it is interesting to note that Mr. Snyder went out of his way to avoid negativity. In one of his television ads he praised Mr. Hoekstra, who had been getting slammed by Mr. Cox.

More dramatically, after getting bruised badly by Mr. Cox in the first GOP debate, Mr. Snyder took the astonishing risk by taking himself out of the remaining GOP debates, thus allowing himself the luxury of both not being a target and not being forced to respond in kind. It was a move that at the time signaled to some observers that he had no hope of winning, because he was not willing to engage with the big boys.

But perhaps this primary election indicated that the voters are getting worn out by negative campaigning. There was a clear hint of that in June at the Mackinac Island meeting of the Detroit Regional Chamber. During the debate held there with all seven candidates, it was very clear that many in the audience were disturbed by the bitter tone and charges the candidates hurled at one another.

That does not mean the gubernatorial general election will be free of negativity. Immediately after the results were clear, Democrats fired the first shot attacking Mr. Snyder for his jobs record. So far, Mr. Snyder has not returned fire, and he might have the luxury of not doing so, since the Republican Party will certainly be happy to take on that role. It has, in fact, already done so.

Finally, looking down the line on the ballots, looking at local tax issues, the results seemed to say voters are tired of cutting spending. Given the chance to save money and cut spending, which is the message that for years politicians claim the public has sent them, the public surprisingly acted like it somehow wasn’t listening to itself.

It was a mixed bag to be sure. Tax renewals fared better overall than tax increases, though some increases were approved. But given the economy, given the fact that homeowner values have declined, given the number of people out of work, given the restraints on income, and given the anti-tax attitude that supposedly has taken over the public, it is a bit astonishing that any tax proposals passed at all. Yet proposals on public transit passed, on parks passed, on schools, on fixing public buildings. In other words, proposals that deal with essential quality of life issues in those communities passed. Further, they were proposals that if passed promised less need to change, offered, in fact, the idea that the services people have said they needed and want will not change.

Again, it is foolish to read too much into these voted approvals. But it is not too much to suggest voters are getting tired of the threat of cuts and of actual cuts. They are willing to shoulder sacrifice and accept reductions, but are they now getting fed up with losing services altogether? If they are, what message does that send to the legislature and the executive office as they try to resolve both the current budget problem and the upcoming one for 2010-11?

As was said earlier, predicting anything is unpredictable. But given the results of Tuesday’s elections, may one predict that at least some politicians will begin to question whether they have gauged the public correctly?

John Lindstrom is publisher of Gongwer News Service. For nearly 50 years in Michigan, Gongwer News Service has provided independent, comprehensive, accurate and timely coverage of issues in and around Michigan’s government and political systems. For subscription information, including a free trial, visit Gongwer online.