Home Social Sciences The Republican Wave of 2014: The Continuity of the 2012 and 2014 Elections
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The Republican Wave of 2014: The Continuity of the 2012 and 2014 Elections

  • James E. Campbell

    James E. Campbell is a UB Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. He is the author of three books, including The American Campaign: US Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote, and more than 80 journal articles and book chapters. His election analyses have appeared in The Forum since the 2004 presidential election.

     EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 28, 2015
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Author Information Explore this Subject
The Forum
From the journal The Forum Volume 12 Issue 4

Abstract

This article examines the influences on the 2014 midterm congressional elections. The election was a decisive victory for the Republican Party. Republicans picked up nine Senate seats and with them control of the Senate. They also gained thirteen House seats, extending their House majority to its largest size in over 80 years. Although Republican seat gains can be explained at one level by the normal processes of surge and decline plus the midterm as a referendum on the performance of the presidential party, this does not explain why the midterm referendum was so lopsidedly against the Democrats that it created a Republican wave in the election. This analysis traces the reasons for the Democrats’ “shellacking” to the 2012 presidential election. The reason for President Obama’s reelection in 2012 has been misinterpreted as an ideological triumph or as a positive referendum on the president’s job performance. Neither was the case. As a first party-term incumbent, President Obama was given additional time to revive the weak economy that he inherited from President Bush. The 2012 referendum on the president’s performance was a suspended referendum, not a vote of confidence. The analysis shows that the economy was weak by historical standards in 2012 and remained so in 2014 and that voters realized that the economy was weak in 2012 and continued to believe so in 2014. The crucial political difference was that voters blamed former President Bush in 2012, but held the Democrats responsible in 2014.

Corresponding author: James E. Campbell, Department of Political Science, 520 Park Hall, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, NY 14260-4120, USA, e-mail:

About the author

James E. Campbell

James E. Campbell is a UB Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. He is the author of three books, including The American Campaign: US Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote, and more than 80 journal articles and book chapters. His election analyses have appeared in The Forum since the 2004 presidential election.

References

ABC News. 2014. “2014 Midterm Election Results.” Accessed, November 6, 2014. http://abcnews.go.com/politics/elections/National/exitpolls.Search in Google Scholar

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2013. “Voting in a Time of Polarization: Why Obama Won and What It Means.” In Barack Obama and the New America: The 2012 Election and the Changing Face of Politics, edited by Larry J. Sabato, 45–58. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2014. “Forecasting the 2014 Midterm Elections with the Generic Ballot Model.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (4): 772–774.10.1017/S1049096514001231Search in Google Scholar

Bean, Louis H. 1950. The Mid-Term Battle. Washington, D.C.: Cantillion Books.Search in Google Scholar

Best, Samuel J., and Brian S. Krueger. 2012. Exit Polls: Surveying the American Electorate, 1972-2010. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.10.4135/9781452234410Search in Google Scholar

Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2014. “Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Percent Change from Preceding Period.” Accessed October 30, 2014. http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm=gdp.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, Angus. 1960. “Surge and Decline: A Study of Electoral Change.” Public Opinion Quarterly 24 (3)(Autumn): 397–418.10.1086/266960Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 1985. “Explaining Presidential Losses in Midterm Congressional Elections.” The Journal of Politics 47 (1): 1140–57.10.2307/2130810Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 1987. “The Revised Theory of Surge and Decline.” American Journal of Political Science 31 (4): 965–979.10.2307/2111231Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 1997. The Presidential Pulse of Congressional Elections. 2nd ed. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 2008. “An Exceptional Election: Performance, Values, and Crisis in the 2008 Presidential Election.” The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics, 6 (4): article 7 1–20.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 2013a. “The Miserable Presidential Election of 2012: A First Party-Term Incumbent Survives.” The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics 10 (4): 20–28.10.1515/forum-2013-0003Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 2013b. “A First Party-Term Incumbent Survives: The Fundamentals of 2012.” In Barack Obama and the New America: The 2012 Election and the Changing Face of Politics, edited by Larry J. Sabato, 59–73. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 2014a. “Introduction: The 2014 Midterm Election Forecasts.” PS: Political Science & Politics 45 (4): 769–771.10.1017/S104909651400122XSearch in Google Scholar

Campbell, James E. 2014b. “The Seats-in-Trouble Forecast of the 2014 Midterm Congressional Elections.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (4): 779–781.10.1017/S1049096514001255Search in Google Scholar

CNN. 2012. “Exit Polls.” Accessed December 10, 2014. http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president.Search in Google Scholar

Dionne, E. J. 2012. “Obama’s Victory Should Settle a Bitter Argument.” Real Clear Politics, November 8. Accessed November 16, 2014. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/11/08/obamas_victory_should_settle_a_bitter_argument_116105.html.Search in Google Scholar

Erikson, Robert S. 2014. “Forecasting the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election: Should We Have Known All Along That Obama Would Win?” In The 2012 Presidential Election: Forecasts, Outcomes, and Consequences, edited by Amnon Cavari, Richard J. Powell and Kenneth R. Mayer, 1–21. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar

Gallup News Service. 2014. “Midterm Election Fall Benchmark.” Accessed December 9, 2014. http://www.gallup.com/poll/178133/economy-government-top-election-issues-parties.aspx.Search in Google Scholar

Gallup Poll. 2014a. “Presidential Approval Ratings (various presidents).” Accessed December 1, 2014. http://www.gallup.com/poll/trends.aspx.Search in Google Scholar

Gallup Poll. 2014b. “Gallup Daily: U.S. Economic Conditions.” Accessed, November 4, 2014. http://www.gallup.com/poll/110821/Gallup-Daily-US-Economic-Conditions.aspx.Search in Google Scholar

Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies. 2014. “Study =14643, NBC News/Wall Street Journal Survey.” http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/14643%20AUGUST%20NBC-WSJ%20POLL.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Jamieson, Kathleen Hall. 2013. Electing the President 2012: The Insiders’ View. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9780812209273Search in Google Scholar

Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Charles Tien. 2012. “Election Forecasting for Turbulent Times.” PS: Political Science & Politics 43 (4): 625–629.10.1017/S1049096512000893Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, Kenneth R. 2014. “Lessons of Defeat: Republican Party Responses to the 2012 Presidential Election,” In The 2012 Presidential Election: Forecasts, Outcomes, and Consequences, edited by Amnon Cavari, Richard J. Powell and Kenneth R. Mayer, 103–124. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar

Oppenheimer, Bruce I., James A. Stimson and Richard W. Waterman. 1986. “Interpreting U.S. Congressional Elections: The Exposure Thesis.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 11 (2): 227–247.10.2307/439877Search in Google Scholar

Polling Report. 2014a. “Problems and Priorities.” CBS News Poll of October 23-27, 2014 and CNN/ORC Poll of September 5-7, 2014. Accessed December 9, 2014. http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm.Search in Google Scholar

Polling Report. 2014b. “President Obama and the Obama Administration.” Accessed December 2, 2014. http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm.Search in Google Scholar

Schrager, Allison. 2014. “Nearly Half of Americans Think the Recession Is Not Over.” Bloomberg Businessweek. August 19. Accessed December 9, 2014. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-08-19/the-psychological-damage-of-the-recession-is-not-going-away.Search in Google Scholar

Sides, John, and Lynn Vavrek. 2013. The Gamble: Choice and Chance in the 2012 Presidential Election. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.2307/j.ctt7ztpn1Search in Google Scholar

Teixeira, Ruy, and John Halpin. 2012. “The Return of the Obama Coalition.” Center for American Progress, Accessed November 16, 2014. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/progressive-movement/news/2012/11/08/44348/the-return-of-the-obama-coalition/.Search in Google Scholar

Tufte, Edward R. 1975. “Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 69 (3): 812–826.10.2307/1958391Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-1-28
Published in Print: 2014-12-1

©2014 by De Gruyter

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Introduction
  3. The 2014 Midterm in the Longest Run: The Puzzle of a Modern Era
  4. The Republican Wave of 2014: The Continuity of the 2012 and 2014 Elections
  5. Was it a Wave? What does it Mean?
  6. The 2014 House Elections: Political Analysis and The Enduring Importance of Demographics
  7. Constitutional Design and 2014 Senate Election Outcomes
  8. Political Advertising in 2014: The Year of the Outside Group
  9. Interest Group Issue Appeals: Evidence of Issue Convergence in Senate and Presidential Elections, 2008–2014
  10. Money in the 2014 Congressional Elections: Institutionalizing a Broken Regulatory System
  11. Preference Dynamics in the 2014 Congressional Midterm Elections
  12. Still Crazy after All These Years: The Polarized Politics of the Roberts Court Continue
  13. Book reviews
  14. Resilient America
  15. The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of Reagan
https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2014-5026

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Introduction
  3. The 2014 Midterm in the Longest Run: The Puzzle of a Modern Era
  4. The Republican Wave of 2014: The Continuity of the 2012 and 2014 Elections
  5. Was it a Wave? What does it Mean?
  6. The 2014 House Elections: Political Analysis and The Enduring Importance of Demographics
  7. Constitutional Design and 2014 Senate Election Outcomes
  8. Political Advertising in 2014: The Year of the Outside Group
  9. Interest Group Issue Appeals: Evidence of Issue Convergence in Senate and Presidential Elections, 2008–2014
  10. Money in the 2014 Congressional Elections: Institutionalizing a Broken Regulatory System
  11. Preference Dynamics in the 2014 Congressional Midterm Elections
  12. Still Crazy after All These Years: The Polarized Politics of the Roberts Court Continue
  13. Book reviews
  14. Resilient America
  15. The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of Reagan
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2026 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 11.1.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/for-2014-5026/html
Scroll to top button