I’m at the stage right before an election when I stop paying close attention to polls. People are already voting — millions, in fact, have already voted — and there isn’t much left to learn from new polls. Instead, I’ve turned my attention to a handful of races I think are interesting, both as potential bellwethers and as stories in their own right.
Virginia’s 5th Congressional District
The first of these is close to home. The 5th District includes Lynchburg, Danville and Charlottesville, where I live. It covers most of central Virginia, touching the Richmond suburbs in the east, the Shenandoah Valley in the west and the majority of rural Southside, reaching the North Carolina border.
Most years, the 5th is solidly Republican. But there is precedent for a Democratic victory. In 2008, Tom Perriello — who, I should say, I know personally — won the seat. He lost in the 2010 Republican wave on account of his votes for the Affordable Care Act and a climate change bill. Perriello is back this year, hoping to unseat the incumbent Republican, John McGuire.
I think Perriello is running a strong and vigorous race — the kind of campaign that can make the difference in an exceptionally close contest. But I still think the final result will hinge on overall national conditions. If we’re looking at a double-digit swing toward Democrats, Perriello wins. If it’s something more modest, I think he falls short.
South Carolina Senate
The next race I am watching is further South. Darline Graham is running to replace her brother, Lindsey Graham, in the Senate. She is a novice politician, relying on name recognition and the full support of President Trump. One would think that in a state as deeply red as South Carolina, this would be enough. But you would be wrong.
Graham has quite a few disadvantages beyond her lack of experience. Not only do place-holder candidates tend to suffer compared with those who have been elected to the seats they hold, but Graham had a bitter primary battle that left South Carolina Republicans divided. Rather than play for unity, her former opponent Ralph Norman has been an open critic, exacerbating the split. There are also conservative third-party candidates on the ballot who have eaten into Graham’s support.
It has been clear since the summer that this race is more competitive than it initially looked, and in the most recent New York Times survey, Graham is in a statistical dead heat with her Democratic opponent, Annie Andrews.
There’s every reason to think Graham will eek out a win — this is South Carolina, after all. (And I spend enough time there every year visiting family to get a good sense of its deeply-rooted conservatism.) But thanks to a surge in Black turnout and potential crossover voting among Republican-leaning independents, there is a real chance of a Democratic upset.
As for Andrews? She has been on the ground for nearly two years, trying to build support and name recognition. She has been hustling, and in politics as in most areas of life, hustle can mean the difference between victory and defeat.
Mississippi Senate
The last race I’m paying close attention to is in another place that is far more competitive than you would think: Mississippi. According to many polls, the incumbent senator, Cindy Hyde-Smith, appears to be just ahead of her Democratic challenger, Scott Colom.
There’s a familiar dynamic here. Hyde-Smith is what you might call a replacement-level candidate — no better and no worse than a generic Republican. And why would she need to be? The stark racial polarization of Mississippi voters means that as long as Hyde-Smith can attract the vast majority of white voters, she is in good shape come Election Day.
But what happens if there is a slight decline in racially polarized voting among whites? What happens if there is an explosion of Black turnout — thanks to the Supreme Court’s unpopular decision in Louisiana v. Callais — in a state where Black Americans make up close to 40 percent of the population? And what happens if the candidate leading the charge for Democrats is smart and talented with a record of winning in a seemingly inhospitable environment?
In that case, you have another potential upset in a state that for decades has been written off by Democrats and taken for granted by Republicans.
Beyond the immediate politics, it is difficult to overstate the larger historical significance of liberal Democratic wins in Mississippi or South Carolina. Both states are virtual bywords for American reaction; South Carolina was the hotbed of nullification, secession and Redemption, as well as the staging ground for the 1948 Dixiecrat rebellion. Mississippi had the South’s first Jim Crow state constitution and produced a stream of racist demagogues from Theodore Bilbo to James Eastland.
Democratic victories would shake up the political landscapes in both states. They might also work as proof of concept for further investment below the Mason-Dixon line.
The South overall is a fast-growing and dynamic part of the country, with a rapidly diversifying population of white and Black Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans. It is a hub for new immigrants and a destination for Americans from across the country. It has also been a laboratory for democratic backsliding — a place where reactionary lawmakers have done their best to limit the scope of democratic participation and impose their preferred social order.
But there’s a clear tension here between dynamism and tradition. And in the fastest-growing states of the South, economic and social dynamics have begun to produce renewed partisan competition, as new coalitions emerge to contest power.
A Democratic Party that can contest and win in both the Deep and the Upper South — Georgia, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi, in addition to Virginia and North Carolina — is a Democratic Party with far more paths to national victory than it has had over the last decade.
Which is all to say that I’m not just paying attention to Virginia, South Carolina and Mississippi because I am a Southerner with roots in and connections to those states, but because I’m convinced that the future of both parties, to say nothing of the future of the nation, goes through the South.
What I Wrote
My column this week was on President Trump’s corrupt use of the pardon power, the rule of law and the future of American democracy.
Donald Trump is not the first president to break the law. He is not the first president to disregard the law. He is not even the first president to insist that his actions cannot, on some deep ontological level, be illegal. But he may be the first president to abandon the pretense that the law matters at all.
I joined E.J. Dionne and Robert Siegel on an episode of The Opinions. In the latest episode of my movie podcast with John Ganz, we covered John Frankenheimer’s 1998 film “Ronin.” And if you are reading this in New York City, I’ll be speaking on citizenship and the Constitution at N.Y.U. on Nov. 11. You can register for the event here.
Now Reading
President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s victory speech, delivered after his comeback victory over Flavio Bolsonaro in the recent election in Brazil.
Dana El Kurd on the Palestinian Authority for Dissent.
Quinta Jurecic on the limits of Trump’s efforts to subvert the midterm elections, for The Atlantic.
William H. McRaven on American power for Foreign Affairs magazine.
Nahal Toosi on the world’s struggle to understand, and contain, Trump, for Politico magazine.
Photo of the Week
The final resting place of Frederick Douglass in Rochester, N.Y. I took this during a visit over the summer.
Now Eating: Carrot-Orange Olive Oil Cake
I made this cake last weekend for a get-together, and it was a big hit. It is extremely easy to put together, and you might already have all the ingredients you need. A few recommendations. If you can, grind whole cardamom for a stronger flavor and aroma. The recipe doesn’t call for it, but you should steam the carrots before blending them; that way you won’t need a high-powered blender to get a smooth mixture. And as always for a cake like this, you’ll want to use the best olive oil you can get your hands on. Recipe from NYT Cooking.
Ingredients
-
Nonstick cooking spray or butter, for greasing
-
1 ⅓ cups/175 grams all-purpose flour
-
1 tablespoon baking powder
-
1 teaspoon ground cardamom
-
1 teaspoon kosher salt (such as Diamond Crystal)
-
¼ teaspoon baking soda
-
5 medium carrots (about 10 ounces/300 grams), peeled and roughly chopped (about 2 cups)
-
1 cup/210 grams extra-virgin olive oil
-
1 cup/200 grams granulated sugar
-
2 large eggs, at room temperature
-
1 orange, zested and juiced (¼ cup juice)
-
Powdered sugar, to serve
Directions
Arrange a rack in the center of the oven. Heat the oven to 375 degrees. Grease a 9-inch springform pan, cake pan or cast-iron skillet with nonstick spray or butter, and line the bottom and sides with parchment paper.
In a large bowl, whisk the flour, baking powder, cardamom, salt and baking soda together. Make a well in the middle and set aside.
In a blender, combine the carrots, olive oil, granulated sugar, eggs, orange zest and orange juice; blend until smooth. Pour into the middle of the well of the dry ingredients. Starting in the center, use a whisk to slowly incorporate the flour mixture until there is no visible flour.
Pour the batter into the prepared pan. Lower the oven temperature to 350 degrees and immediately place the cake onto the middle rack. Bake for 35 to 45 minutes, until the center comes out clean when tested with a toothpick.
Let the cake cool on a wire rack for about 1 hour, then remove from the pan. Before serving, dust with powdered sugar.
The post Three Races I am Watching Closely appeared first on New York Times.
