I Don’t Quite Buy the DeSantis Narrative, and Other Midterm Thoughts

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: Ezra Klein and Aaron Reddick assess the 2022 midterms as a surprisingly stable election: Democrats overperformed expectations despite inflation and low Biden approval, while Republicans underperformed except for Ron DeSantis. They argue polarization, parity, candidate quality, and fear of GOP extremism mattered more than economic conditions, and that the results reshape 2024 by intensifying Trump-DeSantis conflict while likely strengthening Biden's governing position.

Main Topics: DeSantis’s Florida win and the narrative around his future (Priority: 5/5): Klein argues DeSantis’s large victory was strong but not uniquely historic compared with other governors’ wins, and that the press may be overreading it as proof he is the singular future of the Republican Party. Trump vs. DeSantis and the 2024 Republican field (Priority: 5/5): The conversation centers on how DeSantis’s rise could provoke Trump, potentially splitting the anti-establishment lane and creating space for other Republicans like Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, or Glenn Youngkin. Why inflation and Biden’s approval didn’t produce a red wave (Priority: 5/5): They examine why high inflation and weak presidential approval did not translate into a major Democratic collapse, pointing to calcification, parity, weak Republican messaging, and fear of GOP control. Calcification, parity, and the structure of modern elections (Priority: 5/5): Klein emphasizes that voters have become entrenched and party coalitions highly sorted, while elections are decided by very small margins because the parties are closely matched in power. Candidate quality, aesthetics, and the Fetterman lesson (Priority: 4/5): The discussion contrasts John Fetterman and Tim Ryan, arguing that candidacy, vibe, and perceived authenticity can matter more than policy language or issue positioning. Democracy, fear, and the strategy of elevating weaker GOP nominees (Priority: 4/5): They debate the morality and practicality of Democrats boosting election-denying or extreme Republicans in primaries, concluding that the tactic is consequentialist hardball rather than hypocrisy. Biden’s strategic position and age question (Priority: 4/5): Klein argues Democrats’ strong showing likely makes Biden more secure for 2024, but it also delays a necessary conversation about his age and the party’s future leadership.

Key Arguments: DeSantis’s Florida margin was a strong incumbent-style victory, but comparable wins by governors like Mike DeWine and Jared Polis suggest it may not be the singular breakthrough narrative many are making it. Florida may now be redder than analysts assume, which would make DeSantis’s performance less transformative than it appears if viewed through a swing-state lens. Trump is unlikely to process elections through objective analysis; he will instead see DeSantis’s media coverage as a personal threat and likely intensify conflict with him. Republicans did not craft a coherent anti-inflation governing message comparable to 2010’s deficit politics, so inflation alone could not drive a wave. Democratic turnout held up because voters were motivated less by enthusiasm for Biden than by fear of Republican control, especially on abortion, elections, and democratic norms. Political calcification means people rarely switch sides, but parity means small shifts can still decide control of institutions; that combination makes elections highly stable yet highly consequential. Fetterman’s authentic working-class aesthetic and embodied style may have mattered as much as, or more than, his policy profile in making him viable to voters. Democrats’ tactic of boosting extreme Republican opponents is defensible under a consequentialist view if it improves the chance of winning seats and keeping election deniers out of power. Biden’s unexpected strength in the midterms likely reduces pressure for an open Democratic primary, even though questions about his age and fitness remain politically and substantively important. Republican strategists have limited control over the party’s base, so the strategic center of gravity is likely to settle around DeSantis as the most viable Trump alternative.

Data Points: Florida governor margin: around 20 points - DeSantis’s victory over Charlie Crist was described as a very large win, roughly 20 points or a bit less. Ohio governor margin: about 25 points - Mike DeWine’s gubernatorial victory was cited as larger than DeSantis’s, to suggest DeSantis’s win may not be exceptional by incumbent-governor standards. Colorado governor margin: 15–17 points - Jared Polis’s lead in Colorado was used as another example of a strong gubernatorial performance. Colorado reporting level: about 80% reported - Klein noted this margin while cautioning results could still shift slightly. House control: likely Republican - At the time of recording, the House was expected to flip, though less decisively than anticipated. Senate control: lean Democratic - The New York Times needle had stopped at lean Democratic, with a possible Georgia runoff still in play. Potential election-crisis probability: about 15% over 15 years - Klein offered this as a rough sense of the chance of a serious democratic crisis in the near term. U.S. COVID death toll: more than 1 million - Used as an example of a huge event with surprisingly limited short-term political realignment. Potentially decisive voter shift: well fewer than 100,000 voters - Klein noted that the 2016 and 2020 presidential results could have flipped with relatively small vote changes.

Pivotal Quotes: "The election looks like the election the polls promised us: an election where Democrats did a lot better than you would think they would do for a midterm with inflation high and Joe Biden's approval ratings low." — Ezra Klein: Opening framing of the midterm results as unexpectedly stable rather than a sweeping partisan wave. "Voting is also very much an act of fear." — Ezra Klein: Explaining why Democrats may have held up despite poor economic conditions and low Biden approval. "The lesson of the election for Democrats is that the motivating force for Democrats is Republicans." — Ezra Klein: Strategic takeaway that opposition to GOP extremism, rather than a positive agenda alone, drove Democratic performance.

Implications: The midterms reinforce a politics of narrow margins, fear-based turnout, and personality-driven coalitions. For 2024, Trump-DeSantis conflict may define the GOP, while Democrats likely rally around Biden unless his age becomes unavoidable.