Landslide with Limited Consequences

The outcry of the Americans is loud and clear: It cannot go on like this in Washington. However, for the time being, very little will change there.

With a burning appeal to overcome the divisions in American society, a previously unknown politician from Chicago made a furor almost exactly a decade ago. The speech at the American Democratic National Convention in the summer of 2004 abruptly transformed the man with the odd name, Barack Obama, into a national celebrity. Obama turned against the tendency to always place division in the foreground and to divide the country into “red” (Republican) and “blue” (Democratic) states. “There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America,” he said. Ten years later it is clear that the vision of a land where everyone pulls together was only a lovely illusion. The no-punches-pulled battle for power in Congress highlighted the strong contrast between the parties and their ideas. However, that is normal and an expression of every living democracy.

Deepened Divide

It is also normal that the pendulum of politics sometimes swings the other way. When one party holds the White House for more than four years, weariness typically grows in the American public. However, the slap in the face with the midterm elections this year turned out to be extremely severe: Democrats lost eight or nine seats in the Senate and with them their majority in the smaller Congressional chamber. Republicans have additionally built up their position of power in the House of Representatives and defended important gubernatorial seats in the states, for which epic battles were fought. The division into “red” and “blue,” which Obama complained of in his time has in a certain sense become more striking: As the voting out of probably three senators from the South shows, it will constantly become more difficult for the Democrats to still occupy at least a part of the political terrain in these Republican strongholds. The Midwest has also become distinctly “redder” again; many successes that the Democrats gained there at the beginning of Obama’s era have now been erased in one stroke.

The Republicans’ victory has altogether turned out to be more considerable than even most experts had assumed, and comes close to a political landslide. The causes are multilayered, but have a common denominator, however: Obama. Although his name did not stand anywhere on a ballot, the campaigns revolved around him for the most part. His opponents managed to repurpose the elections into a referendum on the unpopular president. Since his re-election two years ago, lack of political success and the only tentative rebound of the economy have gnawed away at his popularity. His behavior in foreign policy crises, such as that against the terrorist group the Islamic State, but also the series of errors with the introduction of the new health insurance system, or the chaotic reaction to Ebola cases in the U.S., formed an image of a president who rarely acts with foresight, and who does not have government affairs in hand. Because of this, Obama became a heavy burden for the candidates of his party, who tried in vain to distance themselves from him.

On Tuesday, the voters unmistakably called for a change. However, for the time being, nothing of the kind will happen. The Republicans’ coming into power in the Senate will not end the paralysis in Washington, but instead, will only transfer it to a new level: As controversial Republican legislative initiatives were until now blocked in the Senate, from now on, they will be stopped at the latest on the president’s desk via a veto. What remains open is which side will act with more tactical skill in this situation. In the campaign, Republicans had a simple game — they only needed to flail at Obama. They did not give away how they will use their newly found power. Now, they can attempt to put popular initiatives on track, and then brand Democrats as roadblocks. However, the likelihood is also high that in the exuberance of its victory, the party will make extreme demands, and with that, repel a portion of the protest voters they won.

The Dwindling Power of the President

A new factor will soon eclipse the tactical maneuvers of the parties — the race for Obama’s successor, which will gain momentum on both sides in the next months. After the debacle on Tuesday, it is clear for the Democratic candidates that the incumbent will be more of a dead weight than a trump card. Especially for Hillary Clinton, who belonged to the Obama administration for four years, it will mean a tricky balancing act. Out of precaution, she has already, however, distanced herself from the president on many issues, and portrayed herself as a foreign affairs politician who would have negotiated more convincingly in Iraq and Syria.

With that, Obama remains the central point of reference in American politics, for friend and foe. However, he is politically used up and abused as a scapegoat, and the reigns in Washington will increasingly slip from his hands. He is most likely to retain freedom of action in foreign policy, where successes in the “war on terror” and in the nuclear fight with Iran still remain within reach, but after all the domestic policy setbacks, it will likely also become harder for him personally to trust in his own message of yore: to hope and not to lapse into cynicism.